2. digital
  3. 166933-4269

Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

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."

melm
lordmelton's avatar
lordmelton
877 posts
 

@car123  Hi, I'm glad you had a positive experience with the Sonore. If you are looking to take it to the next level (I2s) may I suggest you try out the L.K.S. USB to I2s DDC. Reason being it has a RJ45 I2s output which I have found to be superior to HDMI. This could be for various reasons, cable model used etc.

However there is no doubt in my mind at the moment that RJ45 is best in my system.

Hot Rodding the L.K.S. with a top flight DC LPS such as Plixir, Farad, Ediscreation to name a few and a quality AC cable will really surprise you with the results.

Please do not be dismissive of the L.k.S. because it's low priced. It's quality.

Your next option could be the Matrix X which has a big following over on the PS Audio Forum for converting USB to I2s to feed into PS Audio's Direct Stream DAC. Custom cable required.

Negative is no RJ45 I2s.

https://shenzhenaudio.com/products/matrix-x-spdif-2-32bit-768khz-dsd512-hifi-audio-usb-interface

Last is the Audio GD, again no RJ45 I2s and very heavily engineered and will require a custom cable to the 005.

http://www.audio-gd.com/R2R/DI20HE/DI20HEEN.htm

Since most I2s is HDMI it's good to have more than one input and/or RJ45.

Happy Listening

lordmelton's avatar
lordmelton
877 posts
 

@sirnui Hi, I see that you have used the Innous USB DDC. What is your evaluation of it?

It has a very good LPS and a custom clock for the USB DDC.

fl_guy
33 posts
 

Has anyone tried a Matrix X-SPDIF2 with the DA005 via the HDMI interface? If so, impressions regarding the sound?

melm OP
1,057 posts
 

@car123 

I'd like to understand what you are doing, but I haven't quite made it.  Perhaps you can help.  

As I understand it the Sonore is a DDC and has a USB in and an I2S out.  The Aurender is a combination server and DAC with analog outs, a USB out and ethernet and optical in.  

Are you comparing [ethernet into the Aurender with its USB out to the Musetec] on one hand to [ethernet into the Aurender with its USB out to the Sonore and its I2S into the Musetec] on the other?

If not, perhaps you can describe it for us from the beginning to the end of each try.

Thanks.

sirnui
81 posts
 

@debjit_g I would like to clarify and reword my last post.  

When I wrote that post, I had in mind what melm said: "I believe what I am reading about here IIUC is not a comparison of the USB input with the I2S input. It seem to me rather a comparison of 2 USB inputs, one using the internals of the Musetec USB system and the other using the separate LKS system, both feeding I2S into the internals of the DAC."

Viewing the comparison in that way is interesting and it made me think what in my experience would explain why the L.K.S Audio USB-100 DDC could sound better than the Amanero board built inside the 005. 

Some potential advantages I see are:

  1. As viewed from the DAC chip, the electrical noise from the DDC will be less than the electrical noise from the built-in Amanero board because the DDC is farther away from the DAC chip.  
  2. The DDC has its own power supply and this has a number of benefits including...
    1. The DAC's power supply is freed from the task of powering the USB to I2S function, which should allow it to better supply power to other parts of the DAC.
    2. The electrical noise generated from the DDC should have a smaller impact to the DAC's power supply compared to the Amanero board because the Amanero board is connected to the DAC's power supply and the DDC is not.
  3. The DDC has a singular task to convert one digital signal to another and if its fed by a very good power supply, it alone will take full advantage of that power supply.  Usually, the better the power supply, the better the performance of the DDC.  In this way, the performance of the DDC is scalable and its theoretical performance ceiling may be higher than a static built-in solution like the 005's Amanero board.
  4. The addition of a DDC means adding a reclocker and if the DDC has a well built clock, this can have benefits downstream to the DAC.  Signal integrity may be better.

I can list the drawbacks of the DDC as well but in my experience, choosing the right Digital-In to Digital-Out type devices can create wonderful sonic improvements.

For these types of devices I look for a great clock usually of the OCXO variety and a special built power supply that is built inside the device itself to eliminate external DC cables.  It's a winning combination and the sonic improvements have not been subtle for me.

More to discover