The Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC

[yyz]

I am interested to hear how the new Luxman D-10x SACD player/DAC or the expected new Luxman DACs will sound compared to the Mola Mola price range DACS. 

[992Sam]

1 hour ago, PYP said:

 

Very interesting.  I thoroughly enjoy instrumental with the Tambaqui, but especially vocal music.  I thought it was the result of my speakers, since I find they excel in the midrange frequencies.  Haven't heard the Bartok.  Enjoy your new gear!  

 

All of this is purely subjective as I am convinced that just like with food taste buds, our ears sometimes favor certain audio patterns and frequencies that others favor less so.... in other words, I think when you get to this level of DAC, it's nuance and quite subjective..   that said, the Tambaqui sounded amazing, even on instrumentals...  but my ears favored the Bartok just a bit more... $5000 worth more?  Even I am trying to justify that to myself. 😂

[992Sam]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Some preamps can't handle the 6V input, but you'll want to test it in your system.

 

I called McIntosh and they told me the C53 should be able to handle up to 8v via balanced XLR input before there is any distortion ... seems like a high figure, but either way, I will test both and see how they sound respectively. 

[992Sam]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The balanced output voltage can be set to 2 volts and 6 volts. I usually prefer 6V.

 

so just asked my dealer how he had it setup, and he said 6v...  so yeah, I think I will be turning on that switch as soon as it's out of the box!

 

btw... did you find that it needs a burn in time?  Did you have the chance to use it for more than day or two?

 

PS.. does your forum allow for a darkmode in your settings?  I seem to recall I've been on a forum with the same UI and it allowed a dark mode under account preferences, couldn't find it here. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, 992Sam said:

 

so just asked my dealer how he had it setup, and he said 6v...  so yeah, I think I will be turning on that switch as soon as it's out of the box!

 

btw... did you find that it needs a burn in time?  Did you have the chance to use it for more than day or two?

I haven’t had the Bartok. I usually have a Rossini here. 

[fas42]

17 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

How do you know that? 

 

What I'm personally interested in, is hearing what's on the recording itself, rather than the rig's interpretation of that - my understanding of the word transparent is that you "see through" the method of accessing the content of a track, that is, the playback chain. So every component of the chain should be 'transparent' - you don't use a really clear pane of glass to see how good another pane of glass behind it is; the chain of panes of glass are a means of seeing the landscape beyond - if they really do the job well, you can fool people into thinking that there is nothing but a hole in the wall, 🙂.

 

If one gets a system working really well, that is, "transparent", then you discover that essentially all recordings are "organic/natural, bright, muscular" - I started getting this over 30 years ago, and nothing in between has made me think otherwise.

[Matias]

FYI there is a new version for the DSP with DSD and upsampling bug fixes available to update via the PC software.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

What I'm personally interested in... 

 

My question related specifically to your opinion about the Tambaqi's transparency, and how you established that. 

[PYP]

47 minutes ago, Matias said:

FYI there is a new version for the DSP with DSD and upsampling bug fixes available to update via the PC software.

 

There was an update for the Tambaqui at the end of July (firmware and DAC version 2.0).  That one?  Or do you mean an update specifically for the Makua (assuming that is different from the Tambaqui)?

[Matias]

1 minute ago, PYP said:

 

There was an update for the Tambaqui at the end of July (firmware and DAC version 2.0).  That one?  Or do you mean an update specifically for the Makua (assuming that is different from the Tambaqui)?

I forgot to take screenshots. Maybe try opening your Remote app, go to the upper right gear, and then check for updates, see it appears for you too? Then don't make my mistake and post a screenshot here please. :)

[PYP]

[PYP]

19 minutes ago, Matias said:

I forgot to take screenshots. Maybe try opening your Remote app, go to the upper right gear, and then check for updates, see it appears for you too? Then don't make my mistake and post a screenshot here please. :)

 

screenshot above.  When I press "check for updates" it tells me everything is updated.  

[Matias]

Maybe Makua is different, I don't know.

 

[fas42]

1 hour ago, hopkins said:

 

My question related specifically to your opinion about the Tambaqi's transparency, and how you established that. 

 

From the description of the sound - if part of an audio chain is not "transparent" then it becomes a weak link, most likely the weakest - if every part of the chain is '100% transparent', except the DAC, which is '50% transparent' - then no matter what you throw at the rest of the chain, it's doomed to always be only at the 50% mark ... so then, ignore everything else, and 'fix the DAC', 😉

 

IME, the D to A conversion area is the most important, the most subject to loss of the critical subjective SQ - get that part right, and losses elsewhere are nowhere near as important as far as long term listening satisfaction is concerned.

 

Edit: Just noted in a recent review, https://www.lbtechreviews.com/test/hi-fi/mola-mola-tambaqui

 

Quote

The differences are that while Hegelen sounds both colorless and detailed, it is as if the starry sky opens up behind the musicians when we switch over to Tambaqui. Cymbals shine more, there is better separation between the instruments, and even with metal with noisy cymbals, you hear the space between the cymbals much clearer when Tambaqui is allowed to conduct

 

That's a giveaway - you just, "hear more" ...

[Davidny]

No argument on the transparency point.  Alternatively, Harry Pearson defined the Absolute Sound as “the sound of actual instruments playing in real space.”  But your system is limited by the weakest link in the chain.  All of this could be debated endlessly, but these are objectives to be aim for in our audio systems.

The fact that the Tambaqui has gotten so many positive reviews, from reviewers using a wide array of different equipment both upstream and downstream of the DAC, speaks to the versatility of the Tambaqui and its ability to deliver a consistently enjoyable listening experience.  

I’ve also listened several times to the Tambaqui used in this room at GTT Audio in NJ.  As impressive as this room looks, the music sounds even better.  I’m always impressed that a $13,400 DAC is being used to drive $X00K of audio equipment.   And the Tabaqui is not the weakest link in the chain.
 

 

I’ve owned a Tambaqui for almost two years.  And as I’ve tweaked my system, I’ve never felt that the Tambaqui has been a constraint in what my system can deliver.  In fact it has delivered more as I’ve improved my system upstream and downstream of the DAC.

I hope that helps.  Ultimately there’s no substitute for listening to one in your system.  

[Stereophilus]

10 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

From the description of the sound - if part of an audio chain is not "transparent" then it becomes a weak link, most likely the weakest - if every part of the chain is '100% transparent', except the DAC, which is '50% transparent' - then no matter what you throw at the rest of the chain, it's doomed to always be only at the 50% mark ... so then, ignore everything else, and 'fix the DAC', 😉

 

IME, the D to A conversion area is the most important, the most subject to loss of the critical subjective SQ - get that part right, and losses elsewhere are nowhere near as important as far as long term listening satisfaction is concerned.

I think most of us have thrown around audiophile terms such as “transparency” and “accuracy” when we are searching for a way to describe what we are hearing.  And in general, most readers here know what you mean when you use those terms.

 

The problem with the terms “transparency” and “accuracy” is that they are relative to some arbitrary ideal (eg the studio performance, or a live performance). The person using those terms was almost certainly NOT present in the studio or at the live performance, and even if they were, can they remember the performance in perfect detail?  So how can we truly know if DAC A is 50% more “transparent” than DAC B? We cannot, because we cannot know the ideal to which we are comparing.

[PYP]

3 hours ago, Stereophilus said:

I think most of us have thrown around audiophile terms such as “transparency” and “accuracy” when we are searching for a way to describe what we are hearing.  And in general, most readers here know what you mean when you use those terms.

 

The problem with the terms “transparency” and “accuracy” is that they are relative to some arbitrary ideal (eg the studio performance, or a live performance). The person using those terms was almost certainly NOT present in the studio or at the live performance, and even if they were, can they remember the performance in perfect detail?  So how can we truly know if DAC A is 50% more “transparent” than DAC B? We cannot, because we cannot know the ideal to which we are comparing.

 

For me, "transparency" = more real sounding/sounding more like a live event.  And while having seen performers in various live settings does not provide a perfect comparison to a recording, it does provide a good basis for what a voice or instrument of that artist typically sounds like.  Having seen a few (a dozen or so?) performers live, and now listening to their recordings, the tone and timbre I hear via the Tambaqui (and the rest of my system) is a very good match.  Of course, live sound can itself be less than optimal, depending on venue and the person at the console, but one hears through much of that.  With the Tambaqui, I also think folks who review it are reacting to what seems to me to be a very low noise floor.   Without the noise (jitter?), the ear/brain reacts positively to a natural, flowing sound.  

 

Lately, I've been thinking in terms of a lack of compression, not only to the macro but also the micro elements of music.  If one listens to a certain vintage of classical digital recordings, the lack of dynamic range is obvious.  In a much smaller sense, some DACs do the same thing with all music.  With the Tambaqui, you get to hear the whole note, so to speak, as it fades out into space.  That is very much like real music and can be thrilling with one's favorite (and newly discovered) music.  

[fas42]

5 hours ago, PYP said:

 

For me, "transparency" = more real sounding/sounding more like a live event.  And while having seen performers in various live settings does not provide a perfect comparison to a recording, it does provide a good basis for what a voice or instrument of that artist typically sounds like.  Having seen a few (a dozen or so?) performers live, and now listening to their recordings, the tone and timbre I hear via the Tambaqui (and the rest of my system) is a very good match.  Of course, live sound can itself be less than optimal, depending on venue and the person at the console, but one hears through much of that.  With the Tambaqui, I also think folks who review it are reacting to what seems to me to be a very low noise floor.   Without the noise (jitter?), the ear/brain reacts positively to a natural, flowing sound.  

 

Yes, more real sounding is the key - as a good example, take vocals. The better the playback, the more voices on any genre of music, and energy level of a track always sound like the real thing. This means one can listen to a piece of opera, or a driving heavy metal frenzy - and the voices within always sound like they belong to a living, breathing person; who is just, there! The fact that they may be backed up by, say, heavily distorted guitars is irrelevant; a marker for good playback is that bizarrely contrasting sound elements within the mix retain their own personality, completely - exactly the same as how it works when listening to sounds in the real world, 😉.

 

5 hours ago, PYP said:

 

Lately, I've been thinking in terms of a lack of compression, not only to the macro but also the micro elements of music.  If one listens to a certain vintage of classical digital recordings, the lack of dynamic range is obvious.  In a much smaller sense, some DACs do the same thing with all music.  With the Tambaqui, you get to hear the whole note, so to speak, as it fades out into space.  That is very much like real music and can be thrilling with one's favorite (and newly discovered) music.  

 

The thrilling factor is very much evident with competent replay - the most unlikely recordings suddenly become immensely interesting, because everything happening in it now makes sense. This can be a great revelation - and one now understands that the musicians got a kick out of creating all the "little bits" within the whole.

[992Sam]

On 10/1/2020 at 2:24 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I haven’t had the Bartok. I usually have a Rossini here. 

 

I went back and heard them side by side for over an hour... didn't take long before I realized I wanted to uncharge and get the Rossini... it's noticeably better, which is saying a lot since I found the Bartok to be much better than my PS Audio DirectStream by a good margin. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

32 minutes ago, 992Sam said:

 

I went back and heard them side by side for over an hour... didn't take long before I realized I wanted to uncharge and get the Rossini... it's noticeably better, which is saying a lot since I found the Bartok to be much better than my PS Audio DirectStream by a good margin. 

dCS is in an absolutely different league than PS Audio. I know it may make some people upset to read that, but I have to speak the truth as I’ve experienced it and researched it. 
 

With respect to Bartok and Rossini, it’s good you spent so much time and heard them through a great system. The Rossini has much better mappers that make a world of difference, among other things. 

[992Sam]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

dCS is in an absolutely different league than PS Audio. I know it may make some people upset to read that, but I have to speak the truth as I’ve experienced it and researched it. 
 

With respect to Bartok and Rossini, it’s good you spent so much time and heard them through a great system. The Rossini has much better mappers that make a world of difference, among other things. 

 

yeah, I gave the PS Audio 3+ Weeks of trial and I wanted to like it as the price was great... but as you said, who another league.  I just hope with it being a 2015 release product that dCS keeps supporting it for a while... I can't see replacing this anytime soon at the $24K plus tax price tag.. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, 992Sam said:

 

yeah, I gave the PS Audio 3+ Weeks of trial and I wanted to like it as the price was great... but as you said, who another league.  I just hope with it being a 2015 release product that dCS keeps supporting it for a while... I can't see replacing this anytime soon at the $24K plus tax price tag.. 

I don't know of a digital company with longer runs for current products. Consider the Vivaldi. it was introduced in 2012 and it still current. think about that. In digital audio many things we talk about now, weren't on many peoples' radars back in 2012, but the Vivaldi is still current, still updated, and supports new features all the time. The Rossini will be no different. 

 

I've been to dCS several times and talked to everyone in the company from the top to the bottom, on and off the record. It's an incredible company with incredible products. I have to give credit where credit is due. 

[dsyzling]

I don't want to derail a Tambaqui thread but the other aspect of dCS that I really appreciate is their software platform and the streaming services they've supported. Although I'm not a great believer in MQA - their implementation is supposed to be one of the best and doesn't compromise the rest of the design or affect any of their other filters. They also support Spotify connect and the other major streaming services in addition to Roon. If Amazon were to become popular then I would expect dCS to support the platform - and if this were impossible from a Roon perspective this gives me some piece of mind buying a component in this price bracket.  Their tablet/mobile software is one of the better ones on the market as well I wouldn't have any issue using this if I didn't want to pay for Roon or if there were issues with Roon further down the line.

 

In this price range it does become difficult when you also have products such as the T+A SDV 3100HV on the market in similar price ranges to the Rossini/Clock. The 3100 may be popular if you're into DSD given it can stream DSD up to 1024. My very brief comparison between the Rossini/Clock and the T+A, I would say I could discern a slightly warmer presentation from the 3100 and I think the dCS exposed more detail, slightly more lit up - but I would need to spend a lot more time with both components. Equally I was unable to test the DSD qualities of the 3100. The 3100 also has options such as theatre by-pass so if you are integrating with a home theatre that may be important to you. Really tough choice, but certainly dCS have proved over the years to continue to support and invest in their customers and provide real improvements to their platforms. It's quite rare in any industry to find companies that have that commitment. 

 

I also briefly heard a comparison between a Tambaqui and PS Audio. The elements that immediately jumped out to me when we switched to the Tambaqui were:

- Transients became quicker, leading edges were more noticeable but not overdone. 

- Bass deepened - just more present. 

- noise floor dropped, I heard more atmospherics from recordings. 

 

 

 

 

[R1200CL]

10 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I don't know of a digital company with longer runs for current products

Well, many Theta is the record holder there with the Generation VIII DAC and the always upgraded Casablanca. 😀

[ehoz]

How much does a preamp make a difference to Tambaqui. Are folks listening to the Tambaqui connected to a pre or an amp directly ?