Some history: I was the OP on a four year old thread about the Chinese LKS MH-DA004 DAC. It achieved an underground buzz. The open architecture of its predecessor MH-DA003 made it the object of a lot of user mods, usually to its analog section, rolling op amps or replacing with discrete. The MH-DA004 with its new ESS chips and JFET analog section was called better then the modified older units. It has two ES9038pro DAC chips deliberately run warm, massive power supply, powered Amanero USB board, JFET section, 3 Crystek femtosecond clocks, Mundorf caps, Cardas connectors, etc., for about $1500. For this vinyl guy any reservation about ESS chips was resolved by the LKS implimentaion, but their revelation of detail was preserved, something that a listener to classic music especially appreciated. I made a list of DACs (many far more expensive) it was compared favorably to in forums. Modifications continued, now to clocks and caps. Components built to a price can be improved by costlier parts and the modifiers wrote glowingly of the SQ they achieved.
Meanwhile, during the 4 years after release of the MH-DA004, LKS (now Musetec) worked on the new MH-DA005 design, also with a pair of ES9038pro chips. This time he used more of the best components available. One torroidal transformer has silver plated copper. Also banks of super capacitors that act like batteries, solid silver hookup wire, 4 femtoclocks each costing multiples of the Crysteks, a revised Amanero board, more of the best European caps and a new partitioned case. I can't say cost NO object, but costs well beyond. A higher price, of course. Details at http://www.mu-sound.com/DA005-detail.html
The question, surely, is: How does it sound? I'm only going to answer indirectly for the moment. I thought that the MH-DA004 was to be my last DAC, or at least for a very long time. I was persuaded to part with my $$ by research, and by satisfaction with the MH-DA004. Frankly, I have been overwhelmed by the improvement; just didn't think it was possible. Fluidity, clarity, bass extension. A post to another board summed it up better than I can after listening to piano trios: "I have probably attended hundreds of classical concerts (both orchestral and chamber) in my life. I know what live sounds like in a good and bad seat and in a good and mediocre hall. All I can say is HOLY CRAP, this sounds like the real thing from a good seat in a good hall. Not an approximation of reality, but reality."
Happy that you are liking the Musetec. It's always been surprisingly good out of the box, but will get better with time,
Interesting that you are getting good results with USB > LKS USB-100 > I2S > 005. This has ben a topic of discussion before, that is whether the USB conversion to I2S is better done in the LKS USB-100 or on the Amanero board in the 005. Logic suggests it should be better in the 005, but you can't deny your own ears and you are not the first to suggest a preference for the LKS USB-100.
It was suggested you try the USB straight into the 005 and report back your comparison. If it remains better with the LKS USB-100 I might inquire with the factory why that might be so.
Also, theoretically and logically, to use the I2S input, it might be best to avoid the USB entirely with a streamer going directly from ethernet to I2S. I have been changing my system a lot lately and also experimenting with Iancanada circuits and will soon add an I2S output to see what that yields.
Glad the 005 and the USB-100 is working out for you. It was a great little I2S converter when I had it. I'm wishing I had kept it to run I2S-E to another component for experimenting.
I've since replaced the SMSL I2S converter with an Audio GD DI-24HE and I'm using it's I2S output. I heard an improvement. Then I added an Aune SC1 external clock to the DI-24HE and then converted the clock to use a very low noise DC input. I also added a filter to the clock cable. With each change I made related to the clock, I heard a difference for the better. In my experience, digital improvements seem limitless with the 005.
the inclusion of the LKS USB-100 in the chain is redundant and pejorative, the AMANERO card present in the 005 is already an upgrade compared to the USB-100
Today I received a new 005. Before I used f.i. Lampizator, Pegasus, Terminator, Holo Spring 3 L2, Audio-GD, Teac UD-701N, Leaf Audio CMD27 (with Staccato opamps) and ECdesigns PowerDAC-SX. The latter I plan to keep as a parallel all-in-one system). I use a Rose RS130 streamer.
I am surprised that it already sounds so good out of the box. Great detail, natural, coherent and smooth. I expect it to be volatile though in the next few weeks.
Best sound so far with
RS130 > USB > USB-fiber-USB isolator > USB > LKS USB-100 > I2S > 005.
Both I2S-H (with 50 cm Ricard I2S/hdmi cable) and I2S-E (with 50 cm Ali knockoff Nordost Odin Gold ethernet cable) sound great. Slight preference for the latter. I can imagine I could improve on that with another (shorter) ethernet cable.
Dear friends, very reluctantly I am forced to sell my audio system, and therefore also my beloved MUSETEC MH-DA005.
The room dedicated to listening has been usurped by the new baby.
If anyone is interested in purchasing we can agree on a reasonable price.
The color of the DAC is black and the condition is like new
In the past I experimented with I2S using an LKS Audio USB-100 DDC and a Wireworld Platinum Starlight 48K HDMI I2S cable. It sounded great. This second time around with this 005, I started my I2S experimentation with an SMSL PO100 Pro DDC, Monoprice 48K HDMI cable, and an off brand flexible 5.5 inch USB A to USB C cable. The PO100 Pro takes USB C only. For less than $100 total price, this combination sounded really good to me. It had a good fun factor. For anyone wanting to try I2S, I would recommend this combo to start. You may find this to be an upgrade. The streamer was a Lumin U1 Mini with LPS mod.
With this said, I kept the PO100 Pro and upgraded the I2S cable to Tubulus Concentus I2S V2 and this was a very nice improvement. I heard more into the music. Today I replaced the off brand USB cable with a short Ghent Audio USB C to USB A cable. I will reserve jugement on this cable but right now the current I2S solution is very enjoyable.
@jc4659the pre I am using is the Supratek Cabernet, it has two outputs, 300B and 6SN7. Supratek has cheaper models and also more expensive ones to choose from.
@sirnui I had the Lumin X1 after the Musetc 005. The Leedh volume control is almost as good as the LA4’s. The Serene’s volume is not as fancy as the LA4’s but great nevertheless. The only deficiency in the Leedh is at extremely low volume when the volume does not increase in a linear fashion as in theLA4. Splitting hairs and not a concern for 999 out of a 1000 people.
@jc4659The reason I have the Serene and the LA4 is that I can interchange them in my 2 systems without a concern. There is a review on the web comparing the 2 preamps. The Serene was preferred by the reviewer. I am more inclined to choose the LA4 but love both.
@yyzsantabarbaraIf the LA4 was a good match for the DA-005 then I would think the Serene would be as well. As long as the gain in transparency doesn’t sacrifice natural, meat on the bones imaging then I’d be happy. I don’t want my soundstage to look like an x-ray no matter how it may sound. I’m still torn between the Serene KTE and a really good tubed preamp. For now it would be paired downstream with a Pass labs amp and Verity Audio speakers.
@sirnuiThat you would try the Serene again says a lot.
The best sounding headphone system I've built some time ago included the Ferrum Oor headphone amp with hypsos power supply, Holo Serene L1 preamp, and Musetec 005. The Oor was configured to bypass its volume control and the volume was set to 0.0 on the 005. The Serene was used to control volume. I can say in my experience, the Serene is the best sounding preamp I've tried and it mated very well in the system I described above. Other pieces of gear played their roles in that system but I want to say the Serene and 005 played their parts very well.
I sold off most of that system but I've recently repurchased the 005 (black this time) and the Ferrum Oor. I now use a Lumin streamer for digital volume control which in some systems can obviate the need of a dedicated preamp. I would love to try the Serene again with the Oor and 005 but the Lumin LEEDH digital volume control is keeping me satisfied for now.
@jc4659I used to own 2 Musetec 005’s and I currently own the Holo Serene preamp. I never put the 005 and Serene together. I used the Benchmark LA4 preamp and the CODA 07x with the Musetec. The 005 worked great with the straight wire with gain LA4. The Serene is almost identical to the LA4 except for a miniscule bit of warmth. I think the 005 and Serene would work great together.
With my 07x preamp, which is the warmest preamp of the 3, I think I found it too warm for my more neutral tastes. I sold the 07x some time ago to get the Serene and LA4. Both are exactly what I want in a preamp,
I wish I had the 005 today during a test I was doing with the Benchmark AHB2 amp + Holo Serene + Yamaha NS5000 speakers. I think the 005 would have been a better match over the Schitt Yggi+ LIM DAC.
@gryphongryphThe Holo Serene KTE version sells for about $3200 and the Musetec preamp about $5500 I believe. I've not heard either. May I ask which tube pre you are using?
I used to think a pre was all about purity of the signal, but now being in this game for nearly forty years I feel the most important is the tone and decay of instruments and voices, not sure a solid state pre can achieve that actually, I am using a tube pre and the tone is just beautiful, also the space around instruments is extremely nice.
Do you guys know the price of this pre ?
I confirm that it was the enthusiastic reviews of the innuos and the technical detail of the UIP-1 PRO (24.000 Mhz OCXO) that made me try the Singxer
I had already had the opportunity to describe my system: upstream of the Singxer there is a ROON ROCK (NUC12WSHi7).
both the NUC and the UIP-1 PRO are LPS powered
the connection between NUC and UIP is via 20cm long usb cable which includes the +5v PIN, the UIP is connected to the DAC with a Premium USB cable modified by me (without +5v PIN)
I recommend the following album to verify the improvements made to the sound: Coldplay - Live In Buenos Aires (2018) [Hi-Res 24Bit], wonderfully recorded, only feels good with high-level systems
Congratulations on your purchase and thanks for your post. Whether the $280 Singxer or the $3500 Innuos USB reclocker, each has at its core a 24.000Mhz OCXO that is placed near its USB converter circuit. The Singxer also provides galvanic isolation just before the DAC. Potential buyers of the Singxer, by the way, should be careful to specify the "PRO" version. No "PRO," no OCXO.
As this reclocker worked so well for you some of us may want to try it. It would be helpful if you would describe your set-up, especially what comes in front of the DAC showing where the Singxer fit in. Could you do that please?
Also, are you running it off the power supply it came with, or do you have an LPS for it?
Many of us might suppose that placing a reclocker after a streamer may provide only a marginal improvement. But marginal may be very worthwhile given the quite marginal expense. Comments anyone?
Device arrived, installed and tested for 48 hours. Impressions: Holographic image enhancement, greater channel separation, increased dynamic range.
I think I can't ask for more from MUSETEC, I'm having continuous sensory orgasms and I find it hard to write.
P.S.: I've read reviews that put our beloved DAC in third place (after a Gustard R26 and a DENAFRIPS VENUS), I've had the opportunity to compare them to the MH-DA005 and I've had completely reversed impressions.
Is it too much to ask for photographic evidence of the seutp?
Singxer is a Chinese company with a sterling reputation. Their most popular product over the years has been a USB to I2S converter that is competitive with a similar one from LKS.
The Singxer UIP-1 PRO ($280) and also the Innuos Phoenix ($3750) are USB in and USB out reclocker devices that we used to call decrapifiers or USB pipe cleaners. Long ago I used such a device made by Intona and there are many makers of these at present. The two mentioned here seem far more sophisticated as each has a 24MHz OCXO for a reclock of the USB data lines. Each, no doubt, also regulates the 5V line, though that has no impact on the Musetec as it generates its own 5V and doesn't use USB line 1. The Innuos is made in Europe and is in a large case that is filled mostly with an LPS. There is a small circuit board, similar in size to the circuit board in the Singxer, that does the actual USB cleaning. The board in the much smaller Singxer seems to have the advantage of galvanic isolation as there are definitely two distinct parts to the circuit board separating the USB in and out. To make these devices comparable one would have to substitute a good 7.5 V LPS for the Singxer's wall wart at an additional cost..
As many have written here, the Musetec seems to be optimized for USB with custom clocks in the USB input circuit as well as at the D to A stage. Also, many of us use streamers that include reclocking. Whether stand-alone reclockers like these can make a meaningful difference in your system can only be known with a trial. Given the pricing, the reputation of Singxer and the descriptions of both, the Singxer looks like the better option of the two, by far. If you try one, please pass along your impressions.
the Singxer UIP-1 PRO has just been released and should do the same job as the INNUOS PHOENIX at a tenth of the price. has anyone had the opportunity to insert one of the two devices between the usb straeamer and the dac?
The poster obviously doesn't know that R2R (used in the Giscard) is the oldest of the digital to analog technologies. it was used in Philips CD players more than 40 years ago at the outset of the digital age. So talk of a dated design is just kind of ignorant. And obviously there is nothing wrong with a "dated" design if it offers high sound quality.
@melmKudos again melm your post cut right to the chase - why come here to bash Musetec?
A professional reviewer normally has a piece of gear in his system for at least a month before he starts the reviewing process and that could take another month.
Well I guess it's easier to have a few mates around order a pizza and some Bud Light and go from there.
The Musetec is the only DAC in your list that is made from mostly European parts, not cheap Chinese caps etc.
It never shocks, surprises, or disturbs me when someone, or some group, finds a less expensive DAC to sound better to them than a more expensive one. Indeed, within this long thread there have been many testimonies of the Musetec bringing greater pleasure than more expensive competitors. Personal taste, set-up, selection of tracks, kind of music, short-term vs. long term listening, comparisons to components rather than to live music, etc., may all contribute to a result that may vary from our own. I wrote about this before, about a year ago, "No one here has ever said that the Musetec is the best of all DACs. Like any DAC it may not be for everyone. . . . . If someone says he likes another, perhaps even less expensive, DAC better than the Musetec let's just accept that and move on."
Nonetheless, what was written here has a very unsavory ring to it. The writing, and particularly its placement, virtually self-denies it the credibility the poster was looking for. I say that for two reasons. First, I find it absolutely suspicious that the post was made to this thread. A more reasonable thing to do, I would think, would have been to start a new thread with a comparison of four well though of DACs rather than aim it at a thread dealing with one of the so-called losers. Others on Audiogon have done similar things. A second more reasonable place for it might be the existing Giscard r26 DAC thread here. Seems to me if I had a comparison to share and the Musetec came out on top, I would post it here rather than to the discussion of the DAC that came in second place. That is, unless I had a malicious motive.
The second reason I think the post to this thread is unsavory is that the poster took great pains to single out the Musetec for gratuitous extraneous criticisms. He did not criticize any of the other DACs in a similar way. What he wrote was (1) "Seems like a dated design," (2) a throwback design in not just aesthetics but also sonics" and (3) "the least aesthetically appealing of all 4 DACs."
About the Musetc being a dated design. The poster obviously doesn't know that R2R (used in the Giscard) is the oldest of the digital to analog technologies. it was used in Philips CD players more than 40 years ago at the outset of the digital age. So talk of a dated design is just kind of ignorant. And obviously there is nothing wrong with a "dated" design if it offers high sound quality. The Musetec used the newest sigma-delta chip available at its birth, a fine analog section (that doesn't date at all), and a newly developed super-capacitor power supply for its digital section. It also uses a relatively newly developed O-Ring silver plated transformer as well as newly refined clock-crystals. Much of its architecture is fairly standard and used in some of the finest DACs of the day.
Because he has obviously has a limited understanding of what goes on inside a DAC, the poster next chooses to demean the Musetec's aesthetics. The fellow simply doesn't like how the Musetec looks. Well, I think it looks fine. Being a design meant for relatively limited distribution it is a simple, even elegant, design compared to some mass produced components. It has functional buttons and a window giving all the information needed and it comes with a full-functioned remote. It's entirely of extruded aluminum with no sheet metal at all. It's as solid as a brick.
So he came HERE specifically to trash the Musetec. I do not know why. But no one controls these threads and he may do on Audiogon as he pleases. However for the reasons given here, the post in question should be accorded a very low credibility rating.
@jjss49 Correct on the Gustard r26. One takeaway from today"s audio meet up was the discussion we had on the shockingly good QPR with the r26. Credit goes where it is due in that respect. Currently, now with Chifi (as you call it) confidence at its highest, we may be seeing Chinese designed and made audio products to genuinely rival their Western counterparts. Easily seen in the lower to mid price tiers , although not as of yet, if ever, who really knows, in the high end and ultra high end brackets.
In terms of the audio setup used in the test :
Magico A5 speakers , Innous Zen mk3 server, Pass labs xp 22 pre amp , Classe Delta monos , AQ Robin Hood speaker cable and Earth interconnects (balanced)
interesting result you are reporting... please tell more about how the digital feed was managed, what the rest of the system was etc etc... with dac testing and comparisons, how the streamed music input is handled matters alot
fwiw, i bought a nice used r26 just to try it, see what the fuss is about, and i would agree that for the $ it is absurdly good... particularly from the lan input (i am a roon user) - i have confidently poo-pooed the chifi brands since i started my dac journey at the start of covid, especially those from the guangzhou/shenzhen factory alley (smsl, gustard, topping, singxer, matrix and so on...) but this r26 is pretty amazing... with an effective built in streamer too...
Just this morning in our Saturday audio club meet we demoed 4 dacs (all Chinese designed and manufactured), the Denafrips Venus, Musetec mh005, Gustard r26 and the Martix aAudio X Sabre. There were a total of 8 people in attendance , all assigning scores from 1-4 to each dac after a 3 minute sampler of various music styles including female vocals, electronica, rock , classical and r&b. The scroes were tabulated and the winner was more of a surprise to me given that 6 out of the 8, me included , all selected the same dac ast the top performer. Before we get to the final breakdown , it must be noted in attendance were some very seasoned audiophiles. owning reference dacs from the likes of DCS, MSB, Vermeer , TotalDac and Esoteric to make but a few.
Onto the final results
1. Gustard r26, again 6 out the 8 voted it the winner. Legitimately, sounds to me more like a $5k dac and even beyond. Fast and resolving , accurate and transparent sound .......a r2r dac performing more like a delta sigma all for $1600 .....boggles the mind how they got this dac just so right in all the ways that matter.
2. Denafrips Venus, the other 2 people both voted number one for this dac. It was my choice for second best dac on the day. Trademark Denafrips sound , while more daring and forward focused in presentation. Midrange is where this dac really shines.
3. Musetec mh005, just one point in all separated the Musetec from the last place Matrix X Sabre. While perfectly adequate in most every aspect, nothing really stands out as exceptional with this dac. Seems like a dated design. One other attendee stated "a throwback design in not just aesthetics but also sonics. Fair to say the least aesthetically appealing of all 4 dacs.
4. Matrix X Sabre, the guys at Matrix need to refine this D/S dac further. Most in attendance agreed to tiring faster of the most digital sounding dac of the bunch.
It is important to add nobody in attendance has/had an affiliation or shared any financial interests or vested interests of any manner with any of the dac manufacturers whose products were featured in this shootout.
Well just in case anyone is interested, I have SR Purple fuses in all my gear and recently put a SR Masterfuse in my power conditioner.
The sound in unbelievable, like a huge component upgrade, like I upgraded everything.
A single fuse upgrade isn't going to be earth shattering, very noticeable nevertheless, but multiple Purples increase the effect. The Masterfuse multiplies everything exponentially.
You have a 30 day money back guarantee so I don't know why anyone should be hesitant about trying these fuses.
The topic of premium fuses has been discussed countless times across many audio forums. There are some manufacturers who are very receptive to their use and contribution. Here's one example of a manufacturer (Netherlands) who's well regarded in the European market. They are proponents of the Synergistic Research purple fuse.
Thanks Melm. I like the Lumin also due to its recent release. Streamers seem to be improving drastically very quickly. The guy from Vinshine said that a DDC wasn’t needed for Lumin/Venus 2 combo due to the very low jitter produced by the Lumin and he sells the DDC’s. A good endorsement. I’m also looking at the Auralic Aries g1.1. A little more reading and I will pick one of these two. Not looking for features just sound quality. So, if anyone can provide any imput regarding these 2 units it would be greatly appreciated.
Don’t listen to the cloth eared old bat, he’s been on the turps again, the Purple makes a great improvement.
haha - this is what is referred to as ’the pot calling the kettle black’ -- don’t want to get into a pissing match on expensive boutique fuses here so let me just say this...
use your brain, think about it, if it were so easy and effective, wouldn’t the manufacturers do this for the ’huge improvement’ gained? -- a company like musetec or sonnet cares much more about the sound of their product than a user does...
advice - buy on fully refundable basis, set up a true blind a/b with the help of a partner/friend (yes you need TWO of the same component to do this, or a clever/diy circuit switcher), and be honest on what you hear
@earthbound
If you’re satisfied with the Lumin u2 mini I would not worry about not using the I2S input of the Musetec. The DAC has exceptional USB to I2S conversion within it with a very special power supply and specially fine tuned crystal clocks. If you have the patience to read this long thread and see what streamers are being used with the Musetec you will see those that output USB in some very sophisticated systems. The market for streamers with I2S output is pretty limited and so some of the very best do not have that. Outputting I2S may not be all that it’s cracked up to be. Hans Beekhuyzen reviewed a streamer with I2S output a while back that did not outperform an entry level SOtM streamer with USB output.
@mboldda1
Take what I say with a grain of salt as I have lived with the Musetec and am no doubt biased towards it. First, the Musetec 005 sounds nothing like the LKS 004 which I have also lived with. They do share similar architectures in their analog output stages, but the analog parts in the Musetec have been upgraded substantially in quality (and in price). They also share robust power supplies, but on the analog side they have again been upgraded substantially in parts for the Musetec and on the digital side the power supply has been totally redesigned using battery-like super capacitors and the USB to I2S conversion uses proprietary clocks.
jjss49 has probably given a pretty good comparison of the Sonnet Morpheus and the Musetec. It comports somewhat with how Stereophile described the Morpheus saying it had limited dynamics and bass and attributed that to limitations of its power supply. I go to classical concerts a good deal and so my standard is fidelity to real instruments. Like jjss49 I am sensitive to excess treble (which IMO pervades digital components), though it can sometimes provide pleasant hi fi spatial effects. Made in Holland and offered at about the same price as the Musetec, the Morpheus it is very different inside. It is a discrete R2R DAC that is expensive to manufacture. It compensates, it would seem, in its power supply and in the use of chip op amps for its analog output stages. There are those who think that the D to A conversion is paramount. Others, me included, think it is secondary to things like power supply and analog sections. jjss49, by the way, has gone on to the $10,000 Weiss that uses the same D to A chip as the Musetec..
I installed a Synergistic Research Purple fuse in my Musetec Da 005 and can report that it made a very positive improvement. The soundstage expanded in all directions. There is greater seperation of images and there is more layering in the soundstage. The frequency extremes are extended and the bass is tighter and more textured. This has been one of the better tweaks that I have tried and takes the already competent Dac up a level in my system.
i have had both the sonnet morpheus as well as the 005 (both now sold) but not at the same time, so audio memory is suspect at best when there is a span of time between a and b ... but with this caveat, i would say based on my recollection, the musetec is a slightly richer smoother but more closed in sounding unit, whereas the sonnet is more open better imaging but a touch grainier in the upper regions and lighter weight down below - as such, i think of the 005 as more bottom-up, and the morpheus more as a top-down sounding one... all in all i would say i preferred the 005 over the sonnet in my system (i am very sensitive to any treble or upper mid grain)
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
