Mola Mola Tambaqui Measurements

[gags11]

Look at 2nd harmonics of the Tambaqui and compare to those of the D90. They are lower. 3rd and 5th are similar. PS noise both are null so tied too.
Full scale is the rated 6.15 Vrms I mentioned. I wonder how those harmonics would change at ASR's default 4 Vrms output but I would guess equal or better. The review shows -20 dB FS with almost no harmonics so that's a hint.

I am still trying to understand what these graphs represent, so sorry for my questions.

Please educate me. The graphs in the review, do they measure distortion alone or THD+N / SINAD?

Also, why would this unit test so different in another review, posted on the manufacturer’s website? different units or different testing equipment?

 

[Matias]

I am still trying to understand what these graphs represent, so sorry for my questions.

Please educate me. The graphs in the review, do they measure distortion alone or THD+N / SINAD?

Also, why would this unit test so different in another review, posted on the manufacturer’s website? different units or different testing equipment?

Those 2 graphs show the measured output of the DAC being tested, frequency in hertz on the X axis and level (intensity) in volts decibels on the Y axis.

On both graphs the big vertical bar is the input signal, one tone at 1kHz on the first graph and two tones at 18 and 19 kHz on the second graph. Ideally we would see only those tones on the output measurements.

Instead we see them plus a spray of smaller tones. These are unwanted distortions. Their levels are way below the main tones, and can be measured by looking where they cross the segments of the Y axis.

To the left of the main tones, especially on the 60 Hz frequency of the X axis, if there are vertical signals there, this would be noise from the power supply leaking into the DAC output, which is also undesirable.

And the whole horizontal line on those graphs is the noise floor. This is the permanent "hiss" on the output. Also lower is better.

An ideal measuring DAC (or preamp, or amplifier) should not add any other noise or distortion to its output, and have a very low noise floor. Excellent measuring examples are this Tambaqui, Benchmark DAC3, Topping D90 and the Matrix Audio DACs.

A bad measuring DAC you see a lot of high level subtones to the right of the main ones, high power supply "hum" noise at 60Hz, and a high noise floor. See AudioGd, PS Audio Directstream and totalDAC measurements here on ASR as examples of this.

THD+N and SINAD are single numbers calculated to measure all of this.

 

[gags11]

Those 2 graphs show the measured output of the DAC bring tested, frequency in hertz on the X axis and level (intensity) in volts decibels on the Y axis.

On both graphs the big vertical bar is the input signal, one tone at 1kHz on the first graph and two tones at 18 and 19 kHz on the second graph. Ideally we would see only those tones on the output measurements.

Instead we see them plus a spray of smaller tones. These are unwanted distortions. Their levels are way below the main tones, and can be measured by looking where they cross the segments of the Y axis.

To the left of the main tones, especially on to 60 Hz frequency on the X axis, if there are vertical signals there, this would be noise from the power supply leaking into the DAC output, which is also undesirable.

And the whole horizontal line on those graphs is the noise floor. This is the permanent "hiss" on the output. Also lower is better.

An ideal measuring DAC (or preamp, or amplifier) should not add any other noise or distortion to its output, and have a very low noise floor. Excellent measuring examples are this Tambaqui, Benchmark DAC3, Topping D90 and the Matrix Audio DACs.

A bad measuring DAC you see a lot of high level subtones to the right of the main ones, high power supply "hum" noise at 60Hz, and a high noise floor. See AudioGd, PS Audio Directstream and totalDAC measurements here on ASR as examples of this.

Thank you, very informative!

Another question, I read in one of Amir’s posts that these FFT graphs may not represent true noise floor, as they can be made to appear really low to show distortion products. Could this be the case here or am I way out of mark?

 

[Matias]

Thank you, very informative!

Another question, I read in one of Amir’s posts that these FFT graphs may not represent true noise floor, as they can be made to appear really low to show distortion products. Could this be the case here or am I way out of mark?

This I am not so sure. Apparently if they set the AudioPrecision to measure many samples and average them, since the noise floor is of random nature, it gets lowered.

 

[daftcombo]

If I had the money, I would purchase Dutch & Dutch 8C speakers and a random DAC rather than this.

 

[KSTR]

IMD levels

This! 1kHz THD (or SINAD) is pretty useless spec and easy to get good numbers. 19+20kHz IMD and other multitone (but not the crowded ones where the distortions spray all over the entire spectrum and can't be easily seperated from the noise) is where the meat is. It is not uncommon that devices that measure the same at 1kHz can be more than 30dB different with 19+20kHz IMD.

 

[vitalii427]

If I had the money, I would purchase Dutch & Dutch 8C speakers and a random DAC rather than this.

Why would you use DAC with 8C ???

 

[daftcombo]

Why would you use DAC with 8C ???

Its inside DAC was part of the Random group.

 

[KSTR]

Thank you, very informative!

Another question, I read in one of Amir’s posts that these FFT graphs may not represent true noise floor, as they can be made to appear really low to show distortion products. Could this be the case here or am I way out of mark?

Assume you have white noise of given RMS level X (using the same bandwidth as the FFT) then in an FFT of size N you will see the noise down by a factor of 10*log(N/2). For a 1Meg FFT this is a whopping 57dB. For a 16k FFT it's 39dB.

Therefore, to extrapolate RMS noise from an FFT plot, the exact FFT size must be known, as must be the absolute levels (Y-axis in eg. dBV).

 

[JJB70]

What does a S class do that a VW Passat doesn't ?

I don't think that is an apt comparison, in the UK the starting price of an S Class seems to be about 3x the start price of a Passat saloon. So maybe the Mercedes S Class of DACs would be more like the RME ADI-2, given that the RME is about 3x the price of many DACs which are a step above entry level and marketed as a more premium product (the Passat isn't an entry level super economy car, well not in Europe anyway). That comparison would show the RME having excellent build quality, great provenance from a respected company and certain functionality you probably don't get on the cheaper options as well as stellar performance.
The Mola Mola DAC would be comparable to hyper cars and super delux coach built cars. And there you may be getting a track toy which is pointless (and possibly not even legal) on public roads or a luxurious self indulgence but nevertheless something you won't get from a Passat. In the case of the Mola Mola you don't have to spend anything like that to get outstanding build quality and luxury materials and it doesn't do anything that alternatives won't do at a tiny fraction of the cost.
Clearly if people want this it's a free world, but even as someone who admires premium build quality and misses the glory days of Japanese audio when they produced some remarkable equipment I find the idea of such an expensive DAC rather odd given that the DAC is the part of the audio chain for which audible transparency is most easily and cheaply accessible. I'm with those that would say that if people want to spend $$$$$$$$'s on audio then sink the money into your dream speakers and room set up.

 

[Matias]

This level of equipment is for people who are already spending big money everywhere. Room, acoustics, speakers, electronics. When every link in the chain is high one needs to spend big money on the best of each. Decreasing returns for sure, but for deep wallets aficionados this is the only way.
One cannot deny that Lamborghinis are excellent racing cars even if expensive and decreasing returns.

 

[daftcombo]

This level of equipment is for people who are already spending big money everywhere. Room, acoustics, speakers, electronics. When every link in the chain is high one needs to spend big money on the best of each. Decreasing returns for sure, but for deep wallets aficionados this is the only way.
One cannot deny that Lamborghinis are excellent racing cars even if expensive and decreasing returns.

I still hope those people gave some money to the poor & to associations beforehands.

 

[Frank Dernie]

One cannot deny that Lamborghinis are excellent racing cars

Yes I can. They have never made a successful racing car in their history

 

[Matias]

Yes I can. They have never made a successful racing car in their history

Hahaha ok that is arguable. But as far as 1 lap time in Nürburgring they are quite good still.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.ph...iew_desktop#Production,_street-legal_vehicles

[/Off-topic]

 

[Frank Dernie]

Hahaha ok that is arguable. But as far as 1 lap time in Nürburgring they are quite good still.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Nürburgring_Nordschleife_lap_times&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop#Production,_street-legal_vehicles

[/Off-topic]

That isn't a racing car. It is a sporty road car.
None of the cars on that list are racing cars.

 

[NTomokawa]

I did my research, for other reasons than looking smart on a forum.
As usual, things are not black and white. If some European companies prefer selling products without CE mark, it could be that risks are lower than selling a non compliant product with the mark.

Eats more fuel, more difficult to find a suitable parking spot in a non North American country, cost more to insure and maintain... These are also measurable parameters. But that's not even the point. An s-class and a passat belong to different market segments, comparing them doesn't really make sense. Comparing the Tambaqui to a D90 doesn't make sense either.

You're right.

 

[boXem]

You're right.

Would you mind me showing your quote to my wife?

 

[bidn]

Ping @graz_lag @Veri @bidn
Expensive but no snake oil

Hi Fred,

thank you for attending me to this (because you mentioned me I received an alert).

Having been deceiving by "reviewer" several internet sites and wasted money while I was naive in the past, I personally have been very suspicious of the review-based audio advertisment industry (e.g. re. sites and reviewers which companies pay a lot of money for getting praises).

Congratulations for these good-looking graphs with a proper amplitude for the test signal!
(but, why no indication of the FFT sampling size, as others have pointed out?)
But, I am suspicious that this site is not reliable:

1. re. the internet page linked.
It show more graphs, one where the test signal is set at -20 dBFS,
and above all two where it is set at - 60 dBFS! = the same trick used on the TotalDAC site to make bad measurements look good!
While there doesn't seem to be any need for cheating and make the Tambaqui look good (unlike the TotalDAC),
these other graphs are red indicators preventing me from seeing the site as honest.

2. re. other reviews.
The site has e.g. a test ("banc d'essai") of a TotalDAC set costing about € 20 000 ( !!!!!!), incl. D1 DACs,
here some excerpts from the last page,
http://www.audiophile-magazine.com/bancs-d-essais/totaldac/totaldac4/

"These d1-server + d1 dual or d1-tubes configurations reach a level of high-fidelity, in PCM or DSD, which I have never heard before, in spite of my Lumin and my Ayon S5, and of course of my listening of the gear of various TOTL manufacturers."
("Ces configurations d1-server + d1 dual ou d1-tubes atteignent un niveau de restitution, en PCM et en DSD, que je n'avais jamais entendu auparavant, malgré mon Lumin et mon Ayon S5, et naturellement des écoutes des matériels de divers fabricants HDG. ")

"The Totaldac DACs are at the level of the best on the market, the latter having much higher price tags, yet with a natural presentation which seems to me to have been very rarely (or never?) met so far."
("Les DAC Totaldac sont au niveau des meilleurs du marché, à des prix souvent bien plus élevés, mais avec un naturel qui me semble très rarement (jamais?) atteint.")
etc.

I will pass on all the other super-expensive gear they test.
This is already too much than I can take, having becoming allergic to this kind of stuff,
but more than enough for me to know that, while the Tambaqui may not be snake oil,
that audiophile-magazine.com site is unfortunately snake oil for me,
and quite probably part of audio paid-review industry.

So seeing the Tambaqui tested on such a site gives me actually a negative image of this device.

Why don't they send one for testing to ASR?
It has become the biggest in terms of number of devices tested, internet ranking, visitors and of course rigour and honesty,
and the test is free!

All the best for the new year,
bidn

 

[Veri]

Thank you for echoing my thoughts, @bidn

 

[Matias]

Congratulations for these good-looking graphs with a proper amplitude for the test signal!
(but, why no indication of the FFT sampling size, as others have pointed out?)
But, I am suspicious that this site is not reliable:

1. re. the internet page linked.
It show more graphs, one where the test signal is set at -20 dBFS,
and above all two where it is set at - 60 dBFS! = the same trick used on the TotalDAC site to make bad measurements look good!
While there doesn't seem to be any need for cheating and make the Tambaqui look good

these other graphs are red indicators preventing
So seeing the Tambaqui tested on such a site gives me actually a negative image of this device.

Why don't they send one for testing to ASR?
It has become the biggest in terms of number of devices tested, internet ranking, visitors and of course rigour and honesty,
and the test is free!

All the best for the new year,
bidn

That is why I posted only the full scale graph here. The others are nice but can be used to mislead, I agree. Yet full scale on APx555 is real data, no cheating here. And even bandwidth and sample size would not change the distortion artifacts shown.

But I agree, sure, if someone at Mola Mola (or @Bruno Putzeys ) is reading this, please coordinate with @amirm and the US distributor to send review samples of all products (Kaluga, Makua, Tambaqui) for independent testing at ASR. And possibly becoming the ASR benchmarks against other products will be measured against. We would appreciate it!