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

@americanspirit we must not be obtuse to think that only the measurements matter, nor to think that only the senses matter.
getting these two souls to agree seems an impossible undertaking!

poor people!!!

This has not been my observation at all. The vast majority of people I encounter who rely on subjective listening do in fact have a healthy respect for measurements. You need them as a baseline/reference point to determine audio component compatibility and matching.

There is no doubt in my mind that test bench analysis is quite useful and valued. The distinction I believe is that many have come to acknowledge that these measurements won't determine/confirm the sound quality of an audio component.

I really do not understand why this is even a point of contention. How would one have any clue that they'd enjoy their music played via a product if they have not listened to it? So yes, test measurements unquestionably play an important role. They just are no reasonable substitute for critical listening evaluations.

Charles 

@charles1dad 

my dear, my comments are not aimed at you.

these are general considerations that I find myself expressing motivated by the war in progress between this forum (which I find democratic as everyone expresses their opinion freely) and the ASR forum (completely undemocratic, as they eliminate uncomfortable posts and ban users who ask uncomfortable questions).

I mainly address the alleged witnesses of science and the "metaphysicians" of sound.

remove the blinders, be more open to knowledge, make peace not war

a little one hour video that directly addresses the question of why some measure and why some listen, and how some that measure (value measurement as king), will not, under any circumstances - listen.

Why those that measure only and place measurement above all else, either hate or do not understand. Literally do not understand. as in -incapable- of understanding. Permanent state of mind. From birth to death. I don’t like it at all (surely there must be some way?), but that is the way it is.

’fear of art’ might be a good descriptor. Fear of those who are beyond them. who see anything outside of some dogmatic rigor as a direct threat to their self and sense of the world. they don’t do theory, they don’t do exploration, they only ’do adventure’ by reading about ’new realities’. they can fill out fields doing all the gut and ditch digging work....yes...and do the equivalent of scientific crossword puzzles... but pure invention? Very much -NOT.

Understanding this might be a good idea. So one can step by such people, to circumvent their hairy and hoary perceptual bull in a china shop. As we move through the levels of intellect possible in such groups, as we spiral downward in those tiers or levels... we arrive, when we reach the bottom - at pure projected dogmatic safety of the self. the more imagination required... the less likely they’ll ever trust it, until it (the given imaginative thing) becomes a societal/cultural norm in their primary learning cycle as a child. Once the given prior imaginative thing has a formed rigid structure then they can navigate it. That big difference between spirituality and formalized rigid dogmatic religion. ’Free form(?) - nothing’, is their motto.

It does not mean they don’t live satisfying lives, but that they simply don’t understand,and cannot understand and never will understand imagination or creation.

If you find them here, on this forum (or any other forum), DO NOT ENGAGE WITH THEM. Other than ostracizing them entirely from your conversations. And, even in that they will still intrude and attempt to formalize the conversation around you being wrong as they don’t understand discovery or imagination, or pure scientific rigor in exploration. I mean this, literally. Literally.

There are degrees of agreeableness and understanding as we go through the various levels of intelligence and types but there is a facet or two of fundamental rigidity, in all of us, to some degree. You’ll now the difficult type when you encounter them on this forum. Their repeated lambasting and attacks will amply show their lack of imagination and inability to invent, in this world. It will be plain for all to see, in their projections in dogma in science.

You (if a creative type) are broken, you MUST be fixed, and you must not be allowed to continue as you represent a fundamental challenge to their mindset that they cannot wrap their minds around.

This set of paragraphs of mine, is not conjecture, it is not rabidly anti-human, it is not designed to cause grief it is meant to inform people of a fundamental in human psychological types. If you try to include them..and work with them, whole holding the reality you know to be more full and real, where all the work is done, the part that is inclusive of the unknowns... all you’ll do ...is get an act of a grinding down upon you that will be as relentless as their life force itself. You know what I’m talking about, you see it all day on on this forum.

Since audio is NOT a completely fleshed out dogmatic system where all is known in all it’s possibilities in connectivity...we, in audio, get into frictive and difficult states by allowing non-creative conservative types into our conversations in an attempt to help them understand the art of exploring in audio.

Again, they will NEVER understand... they are simply not wired for it.... and no amount of work in this area will improve this situation. How can they not see? we say to ourselves.. well..the reality is that we are not them and these two (fundamental mental types) cannot and will not ever meet.

for the longest time, ie the past 40 years of my life I’ve tired to do the opposite and thought the opposite, but no amount of work on a conservative mind type will ever take it there, as their life force and mental constitution will simply not allow for it.

Changing that which you hold dear as your breath itself, in yourself, regarding openness and creativity.... means you’ll die if you don’t create, if you don’t imagine, if you don’t ponder.

In their mind the near opposite is the life force, their force of being. The strength and intensity of your desire to help them understand... is only exceeded by their life force’s need and fundamental state or requiring that you be ground down,as you appear to be a fitful broken anomaly of zany craziness and infidelity to reality. A falsifier of reality, a broker of lies and fantastical imagination of things that are not real.

Well, I’m done trying to help that type, I’m done trying to be the good guy, in that way, which I’ve done for over 40 years. Clarity has it’s own values, even if it took so long to arrive. (as an open statement, that is)

I know that I’ll have to fight myself when they trigger a jaw drop from me with their zany and utterly bizarre connection to measurement a the arbiter of truth... in a science who’s parameters are not fully known, as they think they know it all, already. Just one of their authoritative inanities that they project upon all others as laws that must be followed. All as they run around and kill the source of the ground they walk on. Insanity and blindness at it’s finest.

Back in the 70’s, I studied to be an electrical engineer, specializing in radio and television, but for the life of me I have no idea what silver coating copper wire has anything to do with transformers. So @melm , I’ve been lost since the beginning of this thread. I was hoping it would have come up by now so I wouldn’t have to embarrass myself by asking.☹️

@americanspirit

I did not take your comments as personally aimed at me. All is well. My response was intended to be applied in the broader sense of this dialogue. BTW agree with you that the manner of discussion hear is clearly open to both sides and points of view.

Charles