• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Musetec Audio (LKS Audio) MH-DA005 Review (DAC)

Rate this DAC:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 202 82.8%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 26 10.7%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

    Votes: 4 1.6%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 12 4.9%

  • Total voters
    244

nyxnyxnyx

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
506
Likes
474
I want to understand you folks better, to you what is/are the deal breaker(s) here? Because I've seen a lot of circular arguments around burn-in and "manufacturer assurance" here:

- Is the price too high, regardless of performance (if this scored like 2dB higher than D90SE it is still not good p/p wise)?
- Is it the fact that its measurement stays in the "average" group, despite all the good subjective remarks elsewhere? (listeners experience did not reflect objective performance)
- Is it about the false measurement provided by the company? (if their measurement is misleading on purpose, then it can be understood as a fraud)
- Or is it about all the inconveniences and mumbo jumbos that go along with the product? (inconvenient way to setup firmware, have to wait on startup, "audiophile-grade" components, etc...)
- Or is it something else entirely? (Please point it out)

To me, it's obvious that the incorrect measurement from the company is very unforgiving. Assuming if nobody bought an unit and sent it to Amir or some other reputable figure of objective audio community, nobody would have known any better. Customers would have bought this and get tricked by a false painting of a great objective marvel.
If I use the established fact here that all DACs should sound and audibly behave the same after a certain threshold, then this DAC should be near or within the "fine" category for practical, daily performance (unless I got it wrong and some of its flaws are very audible?). Using the same argument again though, there's no good reason to buy this DAC if performance is all one cares about.

I conclude that even if there is something that cannot be measured about this DAC's audio performance, there is still mostly a boutique factor in this product. It's like a rarity, a prestige item to be collected more than an outstanding product.
 

RHO

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Messages
1,182
Likes
1,087
Location
Belgium
In my day that was accelerated lifetime testing. Burn in was a process step to achieve a stable result. Totally agree burn in for audio equipment doesn't happen.
Yes, it is accelerated lifetime testing. But for the sake of this conversation I called it burn-in. Since it is the same process as assumed (by subjectivist audiophiles) happens during burn-in during the first hours/days of the lifetime of the audio device. The boards used are actually called burn-in boards by the people using them (where I work).
I do not think we use burn-in in the way you describe, but that could be a thing in the discrete sensor department and/or packaging (as in putting a die on a leadframe, bonding it and molding plastic around it). I'm not sure about that.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
I wonder if this with so-called burn in in electronics is confused with burn in by, for example, car engines? But it's about mechanics and moving parts, which is another matter.:)

"The right way to break in a new car
Many drivers wonder whether breaking in a new car is still necessary or if this practice has been superseded with the advances in technology. The answer? Yes and no...

Doing an engine break-in used to be a standard procedure with new cars. And it’s still the case that you should avoid running the engine at high RPM for the first 1,300 miles."


Note, just a thought, speculation on my part.:)
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2022-05-19_114923.jpg
    Screenshot_2022-05-19_114923.jpg
    277.3 KB · Views: 57

RHO

Major Contributor
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Messages
1,182
Likes
1,087
Location
Belgium
I wonder if this with so-called burn in in electronics is confused with burn in by, for example, car engines? But it's about mechanics and moving parts, which is another matter.:)
Maybe they do confuse it with mechanical brake-in. But you would expect that by now they would have discovered their mistake. ...well... about a few decades ago.
 

wwenze

Major Contributor
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
1,284
Likes
1,827
The difference is that car can burn out and we do need to perform maintenance to delay that. When was the last time you saw somebody send a power conditioner for RMA because it "burnt out" and stopped doing what it was supposed to? With a car it is easy to see when that happens.

See also:
 

AudioSceptic

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
2,692
Likes
2,535
Location
Northampton, UK
I can’t imagine how that could be the case—that would essentially render all efforts to achieve digital resolutions above 44.1/16 pointless. I recognize that there are some extremists who make such claims, just as there are vinyl extremists on some other side of the spectrum who claim that a phono cartridge can provide more “detail” than a DAC.

And although I do believe that there is a threshold of resolution beyond which the human ear can discern (especially the ones beyond the fifth decade), I believe that there are plenty of folks who can hear the difference between a standard CD and a 96khz/24 bit file, if anything based on dynamic range alone. I can’t claim that I can personally without risking the hypocrisy of the anecdote, but I’m fairly sure there is some robust data supporting this—and now you made me go seek it out!
I think we need to pursue this elsewhere as it's OT. Is there a thread for CD vs hi-res?
 

AudioSceptic

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
2,692
Likes
2,535
Location
Northampton, UK
Ye gods, so far 12 pages of arguments about a device that elsewhere for $150 will give you a mostly solved problem and for $300 will give you a complete solved problem with no need of “burn-in”.

Thanks for the review amirm. But as a glass half full take. This unit did out perform the PS Audio Stellar DAC which probably puts this unit at the top of the list of the over $3k DAC class.
And it's far, far better than the Totaldac d1-six <https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...and-measurements-of-totaldac-d1-six-dac.8192/>, a mere €13,500.
 

AudioSceptic

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
2,692
Likes
2,535
Location
Northampton, UK
I think if this DAC performed, there would be a market for large form factor/fancier looking units. I am still sad that I replaced my Mark Levinson DAC with topping in that regard. :)
Yes, this thing looks really good, and there's room in there for a streamer too.
 

SaltyCDogg

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2021
Messages
99
Likes
273
I want to understand you folks better, to you what is/are the deal breaker(s) here? Because I've seen a lot of circular arguments around burn-in and "manufacturer assurance" here:

- Is the price too high, regardless of performance (if this scored like 2dB higher than D90SE it is still not good p/p wise)?
- Is it the fact that its measurement stays in the "average" group, despite all the good subjective remarks elsewhere? (listeners experience did not reflect objective performance)
- Is it about the false measurement provided by the company? (if their measurement is misleading on purpose, then it can be understood as a fraud)
- Or is it about all the inconveniences and mumbo jumbos that go along with the product? (inconvenient way to setup firmware, have to wait on startup, "audiophile-grade" components, etc...)
- Or is it something else entirely? (Please point it out)

To me, it's obvious that the incorrect measurement from the company is very unforgiving. Assuming if nobody bought an unit and sent it to Amir or some other reputable figure of objective audio community, nobody would have known any better. Customers would have bought this and get tricked by a false painting of a great objective marvel.
If I use the established fact here that all DACs should sound and audibly behave the same after a certain threshold, then this DAC should be near or within the "fine" category for practical, daily performance (unless I got it wrong and some of its flaws are very audible?). Using the same argument again though, there's no good reason to buy this DAC if performance is all one cares about.

I conclude that even if there is something that cannot be measured about this DAC's audio performance, there is still mostly a boutique factor in this product. It's like a rarity, a prestige item to be collected more than an outstanding product.

I like 'nice things' like most people and own a number of large expensive items, but I feel that most of them can justify their existence. If they were smaller/lighter/cheaper they would not perform as well.

I personally object to this as it feels like a waste of time, money, natural resources, human endeavour. However you want to slice it. It doesn't need to exist. In a more rational marketplace it would not.

Imagine if it was a video signal processor that you could plug in to bypass your TV's signal processing. You would quickly switch back and forth between the two and discover that the box was adding noise/grain etc and absolutely nobody would buy it!
 

Todd k

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 22, 2020
Messages
158
Likes
458
Location
Hilton Head
I'd be happy to chip in for your loss if you setup a gofundme page and I would imagine many other members will too... considering the distributor won't accept a return (poor form there). It's appreciated that you took the risk on this device and sent it to Amir for testing, cheers.

Oh man, that was such a dodgy event... literally a BDP-83 in a different case that cost 5 times the price. I'm honestly surprised Lexicon still exists.


JSmith
I was fully aware that when I sent the unit it to Amir that there was a chance that the measurements could tell us that this is a highly polished turd. Being an owner of the previous iteration, the lks 004 which I liked more than my holo audio spring, I was not expecting this outcome. I’m still waiting to hear back from the distributor on return. The manufacturer is aware of the current situation regarding review. Hopefully they will do the correct thing here and honor a return since the unit obviously does not meet there published specs. If not i will keep the unit an move on. Your offer is very kind and again I really appreciate this forum and all the knowledge that is imparted from the members. I feel good to have submitted the dac for review to make a small contribution for the knowledge of the forum, even though the outcome is not very ideal for me. I have taken some beating over at audiogon for submitting the dac for review, especially from some of the peeps who already own this dac, go figure.
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
I feel good to have submitted the dac for review to make a small contribution for the knowledge of the forum, even though the outcome is not very ideal for me.

It's members like you that 'fearlessly' send in gear for review that helps make this site what it is. I had a Devialet blow up (Not literally) during Amir's testing, and while it worked out in the and, and likely took more of a toll on Amir than it did me, I know that sinking feeling of a less than stellar review.

Sincere appreciation for braving the gauntlet.
 

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
If I use the established fact here that all DACs should sound and audibly behave the same after a certain threshold, then this DAC should be near or within the "fine" category for practical, daily performance (unless I got it wrong and some of its flaws are very audible?). Using the same argument again though, there's no good reason to buy this DAC if performance is all one cares about.

I conclude that even if there is something that cannot be measured about this DAC's audio performance, there is still mostly a boutique factor in this product. It's like a rarity, a prestige item to be collected more than an outstanding product.
Yes, it is within the "fine" range of performance. Just a bit absurd it is only just that. When other brands like Denafrips or Holo audio can achieve "good"/"great" (if boutique/rarity is what one is going for).
 

JayGilb

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Messages
1,371
Likes
2,308
Location
West-Central Wisconsin
I’ll try to state my view as clearly as I can now to avoid endless repetitive back and forth. I am not looking to be a troll or be trolled. I have only occasionally read this forum, but the impression I’ve gotten on this Musetec “review” is that not one comment was from anyone who has listened to it. How much time did Amir spend listening to it? I have owned this dac for over a year and spent many hours listening to it and also comparing it to the Holo May.

My thesis then is the tail is wagging the dog here. Why do we even care about audio equipment if not to listen to music? Please read that sentence twice.

The interesting and important question is: why do measurements of audio equipment sometimes differ sharply from what is subjectively heard by the listener? Even John Atckinson the measurement guru of Stereophile magazine has commented on occasion that his listening impression differs from what he has heard.

So, since musical enjoyment is primary, the significant question to examine scientifically is: why do measurements of audio equipment sometimes differ sharply from what is subjectively heard by the listener?

This is a scientific question, though not one confined to physics and electronic date exclusively. As far as I know at this time we do not know the answer. It is not easy to explore, but it seems to me we should look to the fields of psychology and neuropsychology. For now, again, it seems we don’t know. Clearly enjoyment of music is a mental phenomenon.

To emphasis my point, when we go to a concert, do we bring a microphone, computer, and oscilloscope? No, of course we go to listen and enjoy the music. Again, the tail is wagging the dog in this forum.

What’s going on here appears to be neither science nor a review, but a measurement report. My conclusion is that this forum might best be called not Audio Science Review Forum, but Audio Equipment Measurement Report. The data measured is of interest but ultimately only a footnote since the most significant question is: how does it sound?
One of the basic tenants of science is repeatability. Measurements are repeatable. The "how does it sound" test is nothing but a waste of time, because it will not only sound different to every person who listens to it, but sound different depending on the mental state of the listener.
Should we implement categories like "sober listening", "1 shot of whiskey listening", "I paid $5000, it has to sound good listening" or how about "stressed out at work listening", because each of those will produce different results and none of those will be repeatable.
 

HarmonicTHD

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 18, 2022
Messages
3,326
Likes
4,829
Lo
One of the basic tenants of science is repeatability. Measurements are repeatable. The "how does it sound" test is nothing but a waste of time, because it will not only sound different to every person who listens to it, but sound different depending on the mental state of the listener.
Should we implement categories like "sober listening", "1 shot of whiskey listening", "I paid $5000, it has to sound good listening" or how about "stressed out at work listening", because each of those will produce different results and none of those will be repeatable.
LOL

:):):):D:D:D

Can we add „Having s… while listening“ too?

Most likely others will further ideas.
 

wemist01

Active Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
110
Likes
86
Location
Chicagoland
Well, I'm happy owner of 005 for a bit over two years now. I had in house Okto Dac8, LKS 004, Auralic Vega and 005 all within weeks of each other, 005 superior based solely on listening. Okto, Vega and 005 directly compared. I know at least the Okto measures far superior. So, at this point one must assume 005 under test malfunctioning, 005 functioning correctly, or subjective listening and measurements undertaken here have little correlation in perceived sound quality. I"m not here to argue the latter. I'd only suggest procuring another 005 to confirm measurements, otherwise component may be unfairly judged.

Again, I'm not here to argue subjective vs objective. I find it concerning unit measured so poorly while I find sound quality to be fine, assume I'd hear some sins of commission with these measurements. Versus Okto dac8, superior measured unit, I also heard no sins of commission, only sin of omission for Okto, less resolving than 005.

I think it is entirely possible that standard listening of most DACs here, whether hig-performin
My point is that the measurement findings are secondary to the subjective sound quality. The minions here deprecated this dac solely on measurements. Measurements are the tail, sound quality is the dog.

Politics knows that science is helpless against the power of a good metaphor. Fortunately, that is not how things work around here.
 

AudioSceptic

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
2,692
Likes
2,535
Location
Northampton, UK

srkbear

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,029
Likes
1,445
Location
Dallas, TX
Oh man, that was such a dodgy event... literally a BDP-83 in a different case that cost 5 times the price. I'm honestly surprised Lexicon still exists.


JSmith
As you are probably aware, Lexicon is a big, long-standing player in the pro audio industry, responsible for making a slew of rack mount recording gear—reverbs, effects, compressors/limiters, etc. i suspect that they mark up everything under the “auspices” of their eminence with pro studios. Doesn’t excuse the con though.
 

Labjr

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
1,051
Likes
949
Products like this are not only a waste of money but the ridiculous amount of parts used is adding to current supply chain issues.
 

Garrincha

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 11, 2022
Messages
659
Likes
816
One of the basic tenants of science is repeatability. Measurements are repeatable. The "how does it sound" test is nothing but a waste of time, because it will not only sound different to every person who listens to it, but sound different depending on the mental state of the listener.
Should we implement categories like "sober listening", "1 shot of whiskey listening", "I paid $5000, it has to sound good listening" or how about "stressed out at work listening", because each of those will produce different results and none of those will be repeatable.
Absolutely. And even being in the same mental state. If you want to perform a test by unplugging and plugging again, it is already spurious, because the memory of the sound experience faints already in microseconds. It is all the more funny that many subjectivist (BS) reviewers make comparsions with gear they owned and listened to years ago. And state this very seriously.
 
Top Bottom