Jump to content
IGNORED

The Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC


Recommended Posts

On 12/29/2019 at 5:26 AM, Davidny said:

Thanks for that link for the review. I am thinking of pairing the Makua or Tambaqui with a Luxman m900u and this review mentioned how good the Luxman and Mola Mola combo was.

 

I was reading some of the comments earlier on this thread wondering about the volume control of the Tambaqui direct to amp vs Makua w/DAC. It seemed like the posters were saying the Tambaqui was better. The dealer I contacted for Mola Mola seemed to feel the Makua was the easy winner. The review posted above also indicated the Makua was better for volume.

Link to comment
  • 6 months later...
2 hours ago, Matias said:

I always wonder why the Tambaqui got more of the reviewers' attention and owners than the Makua. Is it the price difference? Smaller size maybe? Owners wanting to keep their preamps or integrated? Additional digital inputs? Headphone output is not a very mentioned feature.

What do you think?

 

 I think there is a little negative connotation with having a DAC internal to a preamp or integrated. A separate external DAC seems preferred by folks with a lot of time or money invested in their systems. At least that is the sentiment I picked up on from A'gon posts. Maybe the reviewers feel the same.

 

Eliminating 1 extra box is my preference, though that is not what I ended up doing. I went with the Benchmark HPA4 preamp (same as Benchmark LA4) instead of the Makua. Maybe ignorance is bliss but I think the HPA4 is one of the finest components I have ever heard.

 

I still need a second DAC for my office system and the Tambaqui or the Denafrips T+ are what am considering to pair with the HPA4. So the flexibility afforded by an external DAC is what I will end up relying on.

Link to comment
  • 4 weeks later...

What a great review by Darko. Answered all the questions that I value in system setup. He is also using gear at a price level that matches what I use. I need a second DAC for my house and I was looking at the Terminator Plus with GAIA, the new Luxman D-10X, and a few R2R DACs. However, the Mola Mola Tambaqui always seems to check of the all things I like and do them at the highest level. 

 

I should have bought the used Tambaqui unit that came up locally. I will add the Tambaqui to the following system:

 

Benchmark HPA4 preamp + headphone amp

Benchmark AHB2 x 2 (mono blocks)

Benchmark DAC3B (move this DAC to my Bryston BHA-1 headphone system to be replaced by the Tambaqui)

Benchmark StarQuad interconnects for all the Benchmark gear and Audience AU24SE for the other sources

Yamaha NS5000 (ordering this next currently using KEF LS50s)

 

This system will be uber detailed but also not fatiguing for me. When I listen to a more "musical" system I keep wanting to come back and listen to the same music in the Benchmark gear above. Like the Aretha Franklin disc I listened to last night.

 

BTW - Darko was using the Meze Empyrean headphones in that video. I have that headphone and it is incredible. I have no 2 channel amps at the moment (get delivery next week) and this past month, while waiting for my amps,  I have been listening to the Meze for hours a day, even sleep in bed with them on. Just an incredible headphone and I used to hate headphones.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, thyname said:


This one does not have a streamer built in. It’s also $16,750

I know the cost of the D-10x. It may do streaming via a unique batch mode digital data delivery mechanism, like a printer or other computer file transfer mechanisms. This batch mode is only for USB and I am not sure how that works yet. The reason the $16K Luxman is even in the radar was because the $15K Luxman m900u amp was one I loved after a few demos and expected to get. However, after I demoed the Benchmark HPA4 I had a change of plans and decided to build my entire office system around it. It may have been on this thread where I was debating the Makua, Benchmark HPA4/LA4, and Luxman c900u as preamps. I never listened to the Makua but have demoed the c900u, the HPA4 was one where I said that even if the others were better, I do not care, the HPA4 was astonishingly good to my ears.

 

Rory Rail, the sales guy at Benchmark, convinced me to buy the DAC3B over the Tambaqui. I am glad I did since it is very good. However, I was always thinking that it would eventually end up being the second DAC for my bedroom headphone system. I have been looking for the 'big" DAC since then.

 

I was investigating "musical" R2R DACs, AudioByte, Rockna Wavelight, and the D-10x, since I love the Luxman SS sound. I also was thinking a DAC sounding different from the DA3B would be interesting. The more I listen and learn about gear, the warm or "musical" sound that people lavish praise on is not exactly the sound I seem to gravitate towards. I also get fatigued very quickly but not so with the gear I have now, except a little bit of fatigue with my Class A Bryston BHA-1.

 

After I do my speaker upgrade, I am going to give Bill Parish at GTT Audio a call to get a home demo unit of the Tambaqui. I was actually talking with a family friend of Mr. Parish, via Audiogon PM, and he had home demoed the Tambaqui and did not like it, but he is a fan of warm sounding gear. He was actually the first person I heard or read with a nay word on the Tambaqui.

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, thyname said:


I have no idea what you just said in here. As long as you know you would need a streamer for the Luxman D-10x, it’s all good. The Tambaqui has a streamer built in, which is Roon Ready certified. That was all my point. Sorry if I sounded confused.

 

The DAC in Luxman D-10x is brand new. No other Luxman has it. Even the chip is made from a company that I had never heard it before. So, if you are looking for opinions on that, you have to wait until people you know and trust  try it. Or better yet, try it for yourself. Any comparison/ opinion from other Luxman models is irrelevant.

 

This is the quote on the Darko site on the Luxman D-10x, do not have the link now.

 

"But wait! The USB input has another trick up its sleeve: as well as accommodating USB audio’s usual isochronous data transfer mode, LUXMAN has specified their BulkPET technology that allows USB audio data to be transferred from host to DAC with USB’s Bulk mode (as used by a hard drive or a printer), thus bringing with it error-correction that doesn’t show up in isochronous mode."

 

So there is something interesting here to be looking into. I have been streaming since around 2003 and I know streaming very well. Not really confused with the fact that the Luxman connected directly to a computer with the proper driver may do streaming in a high quality manner.  Normally this is not how analog noise is eliminated in digital streaming. I want to find out more about this BulkPET before I render any conclusions. I currently use a Sonore microRendu at the moment and was thinking upgrading to the SystemOptique from Sonare, but if the Tambaqui RJ45 Ethernet is good enough, why bother.

 

Here is a link to some interesting conversations on the D-10x by people who actually have heard at a store or have it at home. There is also some comments on a demo done in Singapore using the D-10x and likely my Benchmark components (not specified exact BM models).

 

https://www.audioshark.org/luxman-211/new-luxman-d-10x-sacd-cd-player-17317.html

 

The new D-10x does sound like the older Luxman DACs except for more detail, that is the feedback from the AudioShark.com folks. There is a Japanese HTML page link on that thread above that details the sound characteristics on the new chip from the chip manufacturer themselves.

 

I live close to Los Angeles, so I have access to the some of the very best audio stores in the USA. My Luxman store is Excel Audio in Newport Beach. I am not sure if Mike Rose at Excel has the Luxman D-10x yet but I may have a listen if the Tambaqui home demo does not result in a buy decision. I heard the older Luxman D-8u DAC in a m900u/c900u stack and it was pretty amazing.

 

I also had some interesting email conversations with Bill Parish, who was a former Luxman dealer, and now a Mola Mola dealer. He knew what I was going after and gave me some useful info on both brands. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, R1200CL said:

 So why use a preamp ?

 

I use a preamp because I never heard a digital preamp on a DAC that I liked and also because I have a few analog sources than I want into an analog preamp. The preamp I use now gives me the impression that I am not using a preamp since it is so quiet, even quieter than the Makua, but we are splitting hairs now.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, barrows said:

There is another possible reason why Mola Mola chose to only include Roon RAAT support for their Network interface: perhaps they found that the Roon RAAT format was technically superior to other Networking formats for audio purposes.  After all, there is a reason the Roon folks decided to develop their own Networking protocol rather than just implement existing standards (DLNA, etc).

 

It also should be considered, that the built in Ethernet input in many DACs does not perform as well as the best external Renderers.  By no means am I suggesting that this IS the case with the Tambaqui (as I have no direct experience with it here), but I have heard reports from some users that the Tambaqui performs better via a top level external Renderer via its USB input than by using its onboard Ethernet interface.  This is no criticism of the Tambaqui, indeed I would own one if I could!  Point being we are in the early days of network interface DACs, and making a really good Network interface is not a trivial endeavor.  In the rush to add Networking capabilities to their DACs, many manufacturers are taking short cuts right now: this is no different than what we saw during the early days of USB interfaces.

 

I do know that the USA distributor of the Tambaqui, GTT Audio, told me the input he uses to demo the Tambaqui is the USB since he feels can hear a difference between that and the RJ45. However, he said the RJ45 is very good but the USB is the best. You can see examples on the YouTube videos GTT Audio has for the Tambaqui. All of them use the Aurelic G2 Streamer.

 

Here is one example (@3:30 in the video direct comparison with USB and RJ45)

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=mola+mola+tambaqui+dac+review&docid=608041174495333470&mid=36D019BDAB504D0DAB3636D019BDAB504D0DAB36&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

 

 

Link to comment

I was also thinking that the eR would be something to consider for any RJ45 streaming DAC. There was some bad press about it on the ASR site and I forgot about the eR. I try to read that site with a grain of salt.

 

I forgot if the Tambaqui has a I2S input but if it did the new Denafrips GAIA D-2-D convertor maybe something that would sound good. The GAIA can connect directly to a computer like I have in my office or other USB streaming sources like a Sonore Rendu. It has that re-clocking stuff that was mentioned in the GTT video for the Aurelic.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Rune said:

If you have no legacy sources and use Roon then a eR make most sense not a Gaia. Why should I2S as an external interface be better than Ethernet or USB?

I have not investigated if it would on the Tambaqui but on the Denafrips Terminator (and Plus) the I2S by-passes a conversion that all other inputs go through to get the signal to the DAC engine.

 

This results in a different sound on the I2S that most folks seem to think is better.

Link to comment
20 hours ago, barrows said:

Yeah, not really...

 

I2S is the native, internal data path to a DAC conversion stage (chip or discrete).  But the I2S between box connection is not that same I2S.

The I2S between box connection (carried on an HDMI cable) is actually a balanced version ( AKA LVDS) of the normal I2S signal as is used by the DAC conversion stage.

 

So, for example, if one uses the I2S input on say, the Denafrips, this would be the path with conversions (I will keep this example to a USB source for simplicity, but one could use any source):

 

USB receiver-single ended I2S-LVDS chip (converts single ended I2S to balanced)-I2S on HDMI cable-LVDS chip (inside DAC, converts balanced I2S back to single ended)-DAC conversion stage (chip or discrete).

 

Note that in the above example, we have a D-D converter which creates the original I2S signal from the USB input.

 

Now, let's consider the path when we use the USB input inside the DAC:

 

USB cable to DAC-USB receiver (converts USB audio to single ended I2S)-DAC conversion stage.

 

As one can see, there are LESS conversions by using the USB input inside the DAC, because the signal has no need to be converted to and from a balanced format to a single ended one.  Also note that the LVDS chip conversions add jitter, typically in the three digits of pS range.

 

 

 

 

My statement on the I2S on the Denafrips is based on comments by Alvin the Denafrips distributor in Singapore.Alvin also has some posts on this forum stating the benefits of using I2S. Not going to get into a discussion on the technical side of the DT since I did not design it. I could email Alvin and ask him but I have already bothered him a little too much on the DT+.

Link to comment

The $2.5K  GAIA is not really needed for the TP+. The TP+ has the same internal clocks as the GAIA so buying the GAIA with the TP+ makes the GAIA clocks redundant. The $450 D2D Iris is supposed to work well with the TP+ for I2S connectivity. It does not have the internal clocks like the GAIA, the TP+ clocks are used with the IRIS.

 

My source to my DAC is my computer. It is a crappy machine that is noisy and I want my D2D to isolate some of that computer, RJ45, and USB noise from my DAC. All the DACs that I have owned in the last 5 years all needed the Sonore microRendu to sound better than direct connectivity via USB. That cost me about $700 5 years ago. 

 

I was considering the GAIA because I would have 2 DACs and both would be able to connect to the singel GAIA.

Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Matias said:

Yes, as I have not tested both in the same system to know for sure. But I would (and did) spend more in the DAC and use a well known and we'll regarded filter from Uptone, rather than spending less on the DAC and more in an yet to be evaluated converter.

My quote could be interpreted incorrectly. I had wrote something else before and deleted it and then wrote the sentence you quoted. Doing multiple things and responding here and my slowing brain is getting confused. Appreciate your comments.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
20 minutes ago, barrows said:

Look at the measurements for the Tambaqui first:  It is one of the absolute best measuring DACs in the world with no noise on its output.  Then listen to the Tambaqui: it is one of the most effortless, detailed, natural sounding, dynamic, true to timbre DACs you will ever hear.

Your concern regarding the presence of a SMPS is unfounded.  While it is true, that poorly implemented, cheapo wall wart style power supplies can affect sonic performance of audio components negatively (of course so can poorly implemented linear power supplies), with good engineering there is no need to hold onto an irrational fear of SMPS.  When well implemented, SMPS can even offer some advantages over linear power supplies.  And remember the engineer here is Bruno Putzeys, who is a master and designing circuits which are unaffected by high frequency noise (hence his success with class D amplification circuits).

Two of the very best DACs I know of, the Tambaqui and EMM Labs DV2 both use SMPS, and neither suffers any "problems" because of such.  Good engineering solves any inherent SMPS issues in these products.

 @Barrows I have the impression you have heard a lot of DACs. Have you heard the Benchmark DAC3 too? If the Tambaqui is a 10/10 in an arbitrary scale where would the DAC3 fit in from your perspective or anyone else who has heard both. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, barrows said:

 

Thanks for the info.

 

You should add the non-chip based Rockna (sp?) and AudioByte from the same guys out in Romania.

 

I want to hear the new Luxman DACs (not release yet) that should sound like the new Luxman D-10x SACD player. It has a new chip that is supposed to measure like the Tambaqui and sound like an R2R.

 

The Tambaqui would be incredible in my system since my preamp (Benchmark HPA4)  is even quieter than the this DAC. Need to save some pennies for that. I do not like DAC direct to amp and I also have many sources.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, barrows said:

Right now I am really loving my Bricasti M3...  I use it only via its discrete single bit DSD conversion path, using the M3's onboard analog volume control, and with DSD 256 input only.  I would love to hear a Holo Audio May sometime, but it has no volume control, and does not really have enough output level to use in my system via its DSD path, without a preamp.  I have thoroughly tested the preamp/no preamp situation, and am fully committed to the advantages of going amp direct.  If the May had at least 4 V output with DSD I would give it a shot here with software volume control, but the low output with DSD is just not enough in my system.

 

If you get the chance, try the Benchmark LA4 or HPA4 preamp into your chain. They have a 30 day home trial for those people who are curious. I found it was a better sound than direct to amp. It is quiet as the Mola Mola Makua but cost$ 2500. I think it is an incredible component that will help most DACs. It will not make your DAC noisier and likely make you volume control sound better.

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, LawrenceT said:

If true, you get the bonus balanced headphone amp.  Maybe a consideration for the dCS Rossini.  🤔

The specs are listed here.

https://benchmarkmedia.com/collections/all-products/products/hpa4

 

This unit does not have a sonic signature that you will hear. You won't hear this unit which maybe a good thing or bad thing, no flavouring. My understanding is that the 30 day home trial is not available in Canada.

 

A few folks with $100K systems have replaced their $20K preamps with this one. That is not a great indicator to me that this unit is great because I think audio is way overpriced. However, I think a lot of people will find that type of switch something to pique their interest.

 

That incredible noise floor makes me comfortable adding any unit to my system, such as maybe a future Tambaqui, without the preamp hiding the DACs performance.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...