Mola Mola Pre/dac review compared to DAVE dac

[barrows]

I have heard the Mola Mola Makua pre-amp with DAC and the Kaluga amps with Vivid Audio speakers and it was one of the best 4 or 5 systems I have ever heard (I work in the Industry and have attended many CES and RMAF shows, as well as done many high end dealer visits across the country).

Personally, I think the Mola Mola DAC tech is something special.  Mola Mola has an interesting approach: they use three powerful DSP chips to ultimately oversample all incoming sample rates to a 100 MHz single bit signal (regular DSD is 2.8224 MHz single bit) and then use a discrete FIR filter to do the final conversion to analog, followed by a relatively unique "single ended differential" discrete output stage.  The discrete FIR filter conversion stage appears to be similar to Jussi Lasko's (HQPlayer Developer)  DSC-1/2 design, but of course it is running at a higher rate in the Mola Mola.  So while Mola Mola's approach might not be considered entirely unique, it is about as unique as it gets in commercial DACs.  Of course, the sound quality is what matters, and as I mentioned, I am very impressed.   

While it is true that there ares some DACs which do not work at their best direct into a power amp, this will not be the case with the Mola Mola Tambaqui, as the output stage it uses is the same as that in the Makua preamp, so there is no point in adding a preamp, unless you need a preamp to accommodate analog sources, etc.

I could live happily ever after with a Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC, direct into the Kaluga amps, to Vivid Audio Giya 2s or 3s (I have yet to hear the new Kayas).

[barrows]

I am not a multi channel/home theatre guy myself, but it sounds like you have it pretty well sorted out.  You mention the KEF speakers, and Vivid, and I have to agree that both of these are among the very best I have ever heard, so I think you are on the right track!

Bruno Putzeys is to me one of the most interesting designers in audio, with Hypex, Mola Mola, and Kii, he is doing wonderful things.

[barrows]

7 minutes ago, Marcel073 said:

Hi all,

 

Has anyone heard the Merging+NADAC (Network Attached DAC) with "normal" speakers?

 

A few weeks ago I visited the XFi event in Veldhoven, the Netherlands.

 

I heard it being used when teamed up with Daudio dipole speakers, a Dutch speaker brand.

 

Though it sounded fantastic, especially with live recordings of classical concerts, this type of speaker cannot be fitted easily into my 22m2 room.

 

Since most of the items in this particular thread are about Chord Dave and Mola-Mola Tambaqui DAC (or Makua pre-amp).

I'm curious if anyone has (or knows of) an A/B comparison of the M-M or Dave and the NADAC.

 

Merging (A Swiss company apparently well-known in the studio world (*)) also has a Roon-ready player known as Merging+Player that supposedly has the same hardware as the standalone NADAC.

(*) I guess that is also the reason why their products support the Ravenna (AES67) networking protocol.

 

That is even more advantageous as neither a Tambaqui nor a Makua can be used as such, at least to my understanding.

 

Thanks and cheers,

Marcel

 

 

The Tambaqui DAC has Ethernet input, and my understanding is that Mola Mola is working with ROON to get it "ROON certified" as a ROON RAAT endpoint.

[barrows]

1 hour ago, Marcel073 said:

Thanks for confirming.

 

I'm new to the streaming business ... so let me double check with you guys to see if I understand correctly.

 

The chain likely to be put in place is as I described before in this thread: M-M Tambaqui DAC into M-M Kaluga mono blocks into Vivid Kaya 45 speakers.

The pre-amp we skip for the moment as that will likely be some HT unit.

 

So, now we focus on the source that has to feed the Tambaqui.

I remember from very long time ago classes that there is something known as system theory which states "garbage in, garbage out". So, the source better be good (clean?) for otherwise the expensive gear further in the chain cannot get back what was not fed into it. Correct?

 

Having browsed the web the last days I read that tons of people are happy with streaming from a pimped Raspberry Pi 3 whereas others swear by dedicated streamers from a multitude of brands.

 

Given that I will be having a superb DAC I clearly need a streamer that does not have a DAC inside it and if it has it should be possible to bypass it. The most common reason I found for the dedicated equipment is mainly due to "secondary" but apparently extremely important parts such as the power supply, etc. So as to prevent "computer related noise" to enter the digital data stream that contains our music and should arrive clean into the DAC.

 

Most of the brands have systems that have a DAC and/or internal harddisk inside.

The following brands I found have systems excluding a DAC and are "reasonably priced":

 

- Aries G2 (from Chinese brand Auralic), sold in NL for roughly EURO 4.000

- The Bridge (from UK brand dCS), sold in NL for roughly EURO 4.000

- Moon MiND 2 (from Canada brand Simaudio), sold in NL for roughly EURO 2.000

 

I assume that I would store owned files on a NAS, so a built-in harddrive is not necessary. Even if it does not make noise due to fanless cooling.

 

Questions:

1) Is it really necessary to spend 2 to 4k for a dedicated system or can we stay well below 1k with using a pimped Raspberry Pi or Apple Mac Mini etc.?

2) If it should be dedicated, anyone have experience with the three systems mentioned or alternatives?

3) Or is all this not necessary because Mola-Mola will come up with something around the year end?

 

The latter question obviously in relation to your comments that M-M are working on something. Does that make a physical streaming device in my rack obsolete? (which I cannot believe as then my question is: what is the source?, straight from the NAS into the Tambaqui DAC?)

 

As always, your comments, thoughts, critics, are highly welcomed!!

 

Thanks and cheers,

Marcel

 

Marcel, the Tambaqui has an Ethernet input, so you do not "need" a separate Ethernet Renderer (I prefer to use the word Renderer, as "streaming" can mean many things).  Although, depending on the efficacy of the built in Ethernet renderer, you may find better performance using an external Renderer.  You have mentioned some brands above, but left out the Sonore products (disclaimer, I work with Sonore).  Sonore makes some of the absolute best performing Renderers, with no DAC inside and no hard disc inside, just a straight renderer (like the microRendu mentioned above).  Sonore offers three levels of price performances nd the products are not from an Asian based company (US company).

In any case, ethernet works very well to isolate noise from the storage device (whether it be NAS or computer, or both) as ethernet uses no ground connection, and transformer coupling at each end.  So you do not really have to worry about noise coming over Ethernet (or to be exact, you do not have to worry as much as you do for USB connections, Ethernet can still allow some noise to pass, but most of it cannot).

There are ways to to further maximize the isolation with Ethernet, but we are now talking about very small gains here (but perhaps worthwhile).  

[barrows]

13 minutes ago, toetapaudio said:

@Marcel073, the new Lumin U1 mini is £1,695.00. Great value I believe.

 

The Fidata is £6k, but is extremely good and we use it as our reference. The only others that might compare are the Netherlands brands Pink Faun, Evo 432 and SMG,  all of which cost more.

 

@jtwrace, are you in the U.K.? We can lend you one to try if you are.

When you suggest that "the only others that might compare" it suggests that you have auditioned all such products.  As you are a retailer, I think this statement is crossing the boundaries of good form on a public forum.  I doubt that you have compared all available Ethernet Renders in the same system context.  Have you auditioned the Sonore Signature Rendu SE, for example?

I do appreciate your posts here, but I would suggest that you refrain from commenting about products with which you have no experience.

[barrows]

5 hours ago, ThenewGearPPK said:

 

This has got me very interested!

 

 

This has got me not interested!

 

I got to question, just like the Dave, what's inside to be worth $13,000+ for such a small box.

 

Clearly they aren't using large high quality transformers, which is always one of the biggest & legitimate cost factors in any high end hifi equipment.

 

What you are paying for with the Tambaqui is a uniquely engineered product which does not use "normal" solutions for anything in comparisons with other DACs, as well as a quite beautifully produced chassis.

The development cost of using unique solutions is quite for products like this which are produced and sold in relatively small quantities.

I would love to hear some folks listening impressions, of course I understand if you are enjoying the Tambaqui so much that posting on forums is a waste of time compared to listening to music.

[barrows]

4 hours ago, matthias said:

 

Would you mind loaning one and posting a review?

 

Matt

What?  How would I do that?  Loaning one from where?  There are posters on this thread who have Tambaqui DACs in their possession, but I am not one.

[barrows]

2 hours ago, Music Enthusiast said:

Yes useless information unless it comes from someone who has absolutely nothing to lose by offering a completely honest, unbiased opinion. 

Less "useless" than anything you have on offer though...

[barrows]

10 hours ago, presmara said:

Ricka sorry to hear about this. I have found blogs like your intended purpose have been very useful to me in getting to understand how various components interface with one another.

 

I own a MakuaRemote/DAC and love it. My dealer has been burning in a Tambaqui and invited me to compare against the Makua and playback designs dream DAC. It is important for all of us to understand how various servers/cables/power amps/speakers etc interface with DACs and understand that a certain DAC may sound best in one system and not necessarily the best in another. 

 

Looking forward to constructive input as if we are one team all working towards a common goal - live beautiful engaging music in our living rooms. 

 

Cheers

mark

Mark, thanks for reporting in, I look forward to hearing of your comparisons!  More data points are always welcome as far as I am concerned.

[barrows]

@yyz, As you need a preamp, if I were you, I would not hesitate to go with the Makua with the DAC board.  The Mola Mola analog circuitry is about as close to transparent (no "sound" of its own) as one can get.  With your Luxman amp you already have the addition of the "Luxman" sound-but my preference is always for a simpler system when possible, and the Makua with DAC gets you one less box, one less interconnect and one less power cable...

If you are one who prefers more boxes and complexity, then go the separate DAC and preamp route...  

[barrows]

My understanding is that the output stage of the Tambaqui DAC is the SAME CIRCUIT as that of the Makua preamp.  If that is actually the case, (which would need to be confirmed by Mola Mola) then the sound from the Tambaqui direct to amp should be at least equal that of using the Makua Preamp.

Despite many claims to the contrary, most DACs these days have an active output stage which is much the same (or exactly the same) as the output stage used in a line preamp.