Review: Holo May (L2) DAC and the Musetec Audio (LKS Audio) MH-DA005 DAC Compaired

@cindyment 

ASIO was used on both May and 005 for testing. The slight difference between the two dacs in volume via single ended outputs is probably explained by differences in output voltage. The May's output voltage is slightly higher than the 005's.

I don't understand you comment on "volume drop".

I'd like to see 005 reviewed on ASR, suspect it will be top notch if not best ever tested. I owned Okto Dac8 stereo concurrently with 005  At the time I owned Okto, it topped measurement hierarchy at ASR, so quite confident 005 would measure at least as good as Okto.

Okto has also received many positive subjective reviews as well, to the point can no longer keep up with orders. Atkinson comparison reviewed against Weiss dac, something like ten times price, did pretty damn well against that dac, 005 better than Okto by fair margin, how it would do directly against Weiss?

My take on measurements is good measurements illustrate good engineering, now as to whether those measurements insure engaging sound quality, who knows? I presume there is much we need to learn, don't have measurement regime that replicates human brain/mind/perceptions. And what about dacs that measure relatively poorly, such as AudioGD?  Many seem to love their dacs. Does this negate validity of ASR measurements?

@yyzsantabarbara

D90SE showed to me to have more bass compared to SMSL. It seems more precise but I am not interested much in bass, since I have enormous right now, kicking the couch, so I don’t need more.

I don’t know if my system is neutral, my amps are (designed and measured by me) my room sure isn’t but I do have 140W real pure class A, so bass and detail is tremendous.

But I will for sure I will look at 005 (only thing I don’t see it easily available in Europe)

That is interesting about the volume drop. Some DACs will insert a processing drop in the volume 3-6db. This is to prevent what are called inter-sample overs. It comes from flawed creation of the digital material. Even though no sample value is beyond the maximum, it can represent a waveform that exceeds the maximum value. This will normally occur in the upsampling filters. A value > maximum is calculated. Reducing the digital values before processing stops this from happening. There is a small reduction in THD+N/SNR, but it is worth the loss.

What I wonder is why it does it from the iFi and not the other source. There could be some handshaking going on with USB.

Please don't be insulted if I ask a dumb question, but was WASAPI selected as the output device on both computers?

@cindyment

"I am slightly worried about the use of two sources, and Windows sources. My first concern is noise from the PCB over USB, and this could be why you noticed a difference changing away from USB on the 005, but not on the May which appears to be a very competent product. " Possibly, but fIn any case this would give the May an advantage when fed by a computer if it is superior at removing noise.

Both computers were running JRiver. Equal burdens on each. I don’t have the resources to maximize each dac separately with a different setup.

The volume was adjusted manually on the preamp as needed.

The Topping D90SE sounds very good on my ultra-neutral system, Topping pre90 | Topping D90SE | Benchmark AHB2 x 2 | KEF LS50s. This is in my boy's playroom / livingroom where it is used for background music. I have not found this DAC having very strong bass as mentioned above. For the price I paid it does the job I need.

The Musetec 005 is at another level. I have written previously how much I like this DAC. It has gotten even better as it has played more hours. The bass seems stronger and "juicy" now, for a lack of better description. I seem to like my music even more with the 005. I listened to Jethro Tull's Aqualung last night, and normally I just like the few famous songs on it. However, last night on the 005 each song sounded as good as the others. I was in another room and I heard a WHO song via ROON and I could hear John Entwistle's bass that I never knew was that pronounced on the recording.

I did some apples-to-apples comparisons 2 days agio with my Benchmark DAC3B and the 005 and it was a big win for the 005. I have decided to remove my DAC3B from my office system and move it to my bedroom because there will be no cases where I will listen to the DAC3B over the 005 in my office system. This is the same thing I did when I bought the RAAL SR1a headphones. I sold the Meze Empy headphones afterwards along with a preamp for the headphones (Benchmark HPA4) because I knew given the 2 choices the Empy would never get played again.

@cindyment  I can compare 2 DACs by matching the gain on 2 XLR source inputs on my CODA 07x preamp. I then go to ROON and GROUP the stream for the 2 DACs. I have 2 identical streamers (Sonore OpticalRendu) that is connected to the 2 SFP (Fibre) outputs on my Ubiquiti network switch. So ROON is able to stream 1 song to each DAC at the same time. I can easily switch preamp inputs to instantaneously hear the differences between the 2 DACs. I should really do this with my Benchmark LA4 preamp because it is more revealing but the 07x was able to show me what I wanted to know.

@dbb 

Appreciate all the hard word. As others have noted, way more effort, detail, and process then what we see in professional reviews.

I am slightly worried about the use of two sources, and Windows sources. My first concern is noise from the PCB over USB, and this could be why you noticed a difference changing away from USB on the 005, but not on the May which appears to be a very competent product. The second issue is ensuring the setting were exactly the same on both computer to ensure bit-perfect playback. I missed what you used for S/W, but from experience, it is not hard, but there are some steps to ensuring you are cutting Windows processing out of the audio.

Last question, how did you ensure the two DACs played at the same volume level. Volume plays a big part in tonal balance.

Very good points by melm and cindyment with one consideration. If it doesn't measure very good but it sounds good (at least to many people) it might be because the other things we don't measure are the ones which matter, maybe on the specific setup. 

I bought the topping because I had to start somewhere and unfortunately in my country, no possibility for tests.... I had the SMSL so it was "reasonable" assumption that D90SE would sound better (and to be honest SMSL sounds extremely good for the price in my system). Anyway, I don't want to persuade any Amir or ASR, I don't care. I only want to make improvements in my system when possible and enjoy the journey I do for 30 years.   

When something measures "well" and sounds bad, it doesn’t "really" measure well, it’s just that the wrong thing is being measured. The audio literature is full of measurements that do not translate into sound quality. It’s been going on for generations. Old timers will remember Julian Hirsch in High Fidelity magazine. He submitted meaningless measurements for years, in part because advertisers would not tolerate listening appraisals. They could not argue against measurements. The latest manifestation is represented by Amir’s tests in Audioscience.com. To him all cables, for example, are the same because he measures them to be the same. Amir either doesn’t listen, or he doesn’t hear very well. Such people sell themselves and others on measurement.

I think audiophiles are stuck in the 1970’s. They cling to an incident in the history of audio, namely very low THD at a single low frequency that sounded bad, and have used that tired argument for almost 50 years. The issue was understood and most amplifiers today would address this. Those amplifiers had a good measurement at 1 test point, however, if you tested across the full frequency range, if you tested IMD, if you tested at various power levels they did not measure well at all. Check the calendar, it is not 1975 any more. Today whether Stereophile or Amir or whoever, test amplifiers, etc. at 20-20KHz, they test single tone, IMD with a few tones, IMD with many tones (good music simulator), and across frequency and power, and usually at a few different loads.

However, the statement, "If it sounds good, but measures bad, you are measuring the wrong thing", was also from pre-1975. It was wrong then. It is wrong now. Many things that measure bad, are bad. Some things that measure bad, sound good to some people, even a lot of people. These are preference things, and while they have group characteristics, they are also different individual to individual. You can only estimate whether a group of people will prefer them. There is a significant aspect of conditioning in that, but conditioning can be broken.

What measurements are good at is indicating if two things are highly likely to sound exactly the same when the listener does not know what they are listening to. If one is upset by what Amir claims, prove him wrong. I don’t agree with everything Amir does. Some of his tests ignore system issues, and the AP tester is far better designed than most of the audio equipment it tests so it is more immune to system issues. But that is more about system noise, not any number of other claims. I have shown his results to be incorrect at a system level. If you disagree with him, then I suggest doing the same. Prove him wrong.

@alexopth1512

When something measures "well" and sounds bad, it doesn’t "really" measure well, it’s just that the wrong thing is being measured. The audio literature is full of measurements that do not translate into sound quality. It’s been going on for generations. Old timers will remember Julian Hirsch in High Fidelity magazine. He submitted meaningless measurements for years, in part because advertisers would not tolerate listening appraisals. They could not argue against measurements. The latest manifestation is represented by Amir’s tests in Audioscience.com. To him all cables, for example, are the same because he measures them to be the same. Amir either doesn’t listen, or he doesn’t hear very well. Such people sell themselves and others on measurement.

Not to say that the Musetec does not measure well; it does.

As for ethnic music and the like, I play a lot of Balkan ethnic music and a lot of pre-Baroque music with much percussion. Also organ music, and the low frequency response of the Musetec is thrilling if your speakers are up to the task. But if you want to know how it will respond to your precise library, you’ll have to try it for yourself. @dbb used classical music, the most difficult to reproduce properly. Harry Pearson, the dean of audio reviewers, did the same thing. He wrote that if it gets classical music right, it will get everything right.

As for better than the Topping? It has been shown to be better than several others that are better than the Topping. And better than the Topping: read what @yyzsantabarbara has written in the other Musetec thread.

Very interesting thread and a great review, thank you for that.

1) I would like to show us impressions with some ethnic music, especially with African and Eastern musical organs. Dynamics of Natascha Atlas too. Also with male voices like John Campbell. Also recording from Mayo Nakano trio, which are DSD

2) To my opinion DSD has darker background, very quiet but has problem at high frequencies. PCM is better at high frequencies but lacks the dark background. When I first listened to DSD, I was impressed by the low distortion but as time goes by I finally prefer PCM, even if PCM seems more "blurry". Simple CD has the worst distortion of all but if the recording is really good, in the end I prefer better than all the other formats... :(( And I have bought A LOT of music in HD format.... What do you think?

3) I have a topping D90SE because it measured so well.... Total disappointment although I would like very much not to invest to higher price, "neutral" to death, lifeless, dull, no dynamics and yes it lacks detail and I don't know how the hell measurement is that good.... Only good thing it is that it has really good bass with excellent control. Anyway I am in search of new DAC since I hate topping (imagine i now play my old SMSL500). Do you think the 005 will be much better than topping?

. 

@jc4659 Thanks got an immediate reply with 10% off!

@lordmelton 

fyi, I was having difficulty contacting Shenzhen Audio when I used their website but was able to get through when I emailed directly at support@shenzhenaudio.com

They were responsive very quickly when I emailed them this way.  The live "chat" was not working either.

@melm Waiting for Shenzen Audio to get back to me.

@lordmelton 

Did you order one?  Have you heard anything about delivery yet?

@genjamon , I went with the L2 May as well.It seemed to be the best bang for the buck. The same Goldensound review helped with my decision. I don't regret a thing.

@dbb  Well its got to be the 005. It makes the most sense for me anyway I don't want a two box unit.

I'll post some reviews once I get it.

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge and time.

@lordmelton

I have a few dozen native DSD (dsf) files. I feel that the Musetec does a beautiful job with them. I believed from the beginning that DSD sounded better than PCM but given the advances in dacs over the last 5 to 10 years, I’m no longer sure I still believe that. I don’t know if I could tell the difference between the PCM layer and the DSD layer of a hybrid recording in a blind test with the Musetec. I didn’t think I could make useful comments on the DSD sound.

I can say the May, as I recall, did sound a little different when playing DSD compared to it’s PCM playback. Again, not so to my ear with the 005. My recollection was that the difference was discernable but not particularly better or noteworthy with the May. I can’t describe it now and I’m not sure I could when I heard it. I just didn’t spend enough time trying to figure it out.

I had the most trouble distinguishing the difference with the rock tracks I compared in PCM (Musetec versus May) 0so if your hearing is similar it probably won’t be an issue with DSD either. All bets are off if you can hear a significant difference with DSD on the 005.

I hope this helps.

@dbb Thanks again for such fabulous reviews of the May and 005. My main playlist comprises of 60s and 70s rock so I was glad you included Cream and The Doors in your review.

The 005 strongly pulls me because I don't want a two box system so I was considering the Spring 3 KTE with pre-amp, but after re-reading your reviews many times I guess it's got to be the 005.

However there's just one thing before I pull the trigger and that's the DSD capabilities of the 005. I've gone through the DSD specs as published online but they  don't seem very complete. The May and Spring 3 both have separate DSD DACs.

Your reply is highly appreciated.

Thanks for clarifying!  I guess I must have skipped that part when I skimmed his video.

@genjamon 

I purchased the L2 version instead of the KTE because Goldensound in his YouTube review compared them and, in substance, said there was not a significant difference.  

If he said there was a big difference, I would have bought the KTE version for comparison purposes.

Thanks so much for the wonderful review.  I've been reading this thread and others about the Musetec extensively in recent days.  All of the excitement from the owners is enticing.  But I wonder if you or anyone could comment on whether the difference between the L2 and KTE versions of the May might play some role in this comparison.  Didn't the Goldensound reviewer have the KTE version?  Has anyone directly compared L2 to KTE to know whether KTE is more refined/detailed, and by how much? 

DBB, can you comment on your reasoning for going with the L2 vs the KTE?  I thought I read somewhere that you based it on some Youtube reviews, but you didn't explain what in those reviews led you to choose the L2.  Is there something suspect about the KTE version in your eyes?  Or was it just price/value?  

Nice to hear you are happy with the 005. From what I have heard, the Spring sounds like the May. Odds are since you prefer the 005 to the Spring, you would prefer it to the May too. The 005 at around 3k, is beginning to look like a giant killer, especially for the price.

The 005 now has 150 hours on it and has a SR purple fuse inserted.  I won’t go into a long review but will happily say that I don’t  regret my decision to buy this DAC.  Soundstage, detail, and a palpable presence to the music make this a big winner.  

 I am coming from the Holo Spring 2 KTE which is also a wonderful DAC.  In comparison, the  005 has more meat on the bones and presents a fuller sonic picture.  I would love to hear both the 005 and the May but at a difference of $2k, I am more than content to stick with the 005.

Interesting nice review.

My 005 was scheduled for delivery today, then last week they said Dec 1st. However, I received it today as originally scheduled. This is the second time this type of shipping happened. The first was with the Gustard X26 Pro from the same seller.

Unit seems rather substantial, with the heavy weight and startup sequence. Sounds good on first listen and the unit is still chilly cold from shipping.

I was wondering if anyone can tell me exactly what the 15 DPLL Modes do?

Great review!  I still love my May KTE but am always interested in reading what others think about the May and comparable gear.  To me it feels like we are in a golden age of DAC development.  

@jimmy2615

Goldensound in his YouTube review of the May commented that the input/receiver hardware was of such high quality that it didn’t matter what source was used, even a gaming computer. He aparently did not formally test this.

I found the Musetec improved with my Ifi Zen streamer/network bridge, but couldn’t tell with the May. I’ve since sold the May so I can’t explore it further.

Epilogue 

I mention in my original review that I would report back after listening to music from the May for a few days. This time the listening was in a normal manner without labored A/B comparisons. My original conclusions did not change. 

Since, in my case, the sound of a live concert is a priority, I preferred the realistic detail of the Mustec. The May still had a more natural texture with a black background which is a huge achievement. Nevertheless, I couldn’t help feeling I was missing some of the life of the music when I was listening to the May.

I also felt that the May was manipulating the sound in a generally pleasant way, but not in a way that enhanced the illusion of live music. 

I will explain. One of observations I made in my original review was that, on some tracks, the May was providing more separation between instruments and voices in chamber and small ensembles, but yet gave the illusion that the seat was further back because it captured less detail. This is the opposite of reality where moving closer to the performers increases detail and separation. Also the May seemed to create a 3-d effect to some degree, by putting black silence between the instruments and thus blotting out some detail, much as an artist would use charcoal to create depth in a drawing.

It would be interesting to do the comparison with a quality level streamer.  I would think differences between the two units would become even more apparent.

@sanvara

You quoted my post.  The company is Musheng Audio ( 沐声音频 ).

Just as Holo makes the Spring DAC and the May DAC, they make the LKS DACs and the Musetec DAC. The Musetec is their current statement DAC.

I sometimes call the company Musetec as it is close to their actual name.

They also make other related products.

"That being said, the Musetec does a much finer job than the LKS on all the digital configurations so any sonic improvement may be more subtle than on the LKS."

I thought Mustec and LKS were the same company?

I will definitely report back after letting it break in for a while. 

Seems like we're getting a lot of comparisons to Holo dacs, interesting that R2R users want to try 005 and/or Sabre chip dac, reportedly very different sound qualities, at least up to now. Could it be different dac topologies are converging? Reportedly, latest R2R dacs increasingly resolving, ESS dacs more organic, natural, at least in case of 005.

In any case, all new users please report back on your impressions, a quality dac should perform well in a wide variety of systems.  

@sruffle   I look forward to hearing your impressions.

Thanks for the note. That seems like a high amperage fuse for a DAC but I am not going to go down to a lower number.   I am looking forward to hearing this.  After listening to the Holo Spring for  two years, it will be interesting to go back to a Sabre DAC and compare.

I believe that's correct amperage. I've been running with 5a Synergistic Orange that I had as spare. I'd replace with stock, although keep in mind this dac uses supercapcitors in power supply, may have enough inrush current to blow  equivalent amp boutique fuse.

Well documented over the years boutique tubes blow in certain equipment due to inrush current. Current thread on Acme fuse hits on this a bit. Having said that, the only blown boutique fuse failures I've experienced are with 2 845 SET amps, these are extremely high current, high voltage amps. Over many years, much equipment, boutique fuses never a problem.

My new Musetec 005 arrived last night and is up and running.   After getting 100 to 200 hours on it I will report back on my impressions.

i am planning to replace the fuse.  Based on the head-fi thread, I understand that it has a short 3.15 amp slow blow fuse.  For those owners on this thread, is that correct and would you recommend using the same amperage for a new fuse?

@wharfy. I agree with sns as he stated in the 005 thread.. I find the 005 to have no glare or high frequency irritation. You will hear the truth. No sugar coated gloss.

That being said, listening is highly personal. Sometimes a violin, for example, can sound harsh in real life to some. I think the answer could be high quality tone controls, but the dilemma is that you might lose resolution.

@wharfy  My response in other 005 thread.

Can anyone weigh about the presence or absence of higher frequency digital glare in the 005, in a tube-based system?

I am following this thread, and others about this DAC. I’m considering an upgrade from a Holo Spring 1 KTE Dac. It’s paired with Audio Research Ref75 amp and an LS 28 pre; feeding ProAc 30 DR speakers. I like the combo a lot because of its black background, sound stage and holographic quality. Nonetheless, I am considering upgrading.

I’ve owned Delta-Sigma and ES chipset DACs and while I liked the higher resolution, the digital glare killed my ears because I’ve developed sensitivities to higher frequencies as I have aged.

Thoughts? It will be much appreciated.