Has anyone compared Tambaqui to T+A SDV 3100 HV

Thank you, @mgrif104.  That is helpful.

A point of clarification regarding the T+A streaming client vs the Tambaqui. 

It’s my understanding that the majority of Tambaqui’s are fed via an outboard streamer because the onboard one is not particularly good. Many were fed by Auralic Aries units as Bill at GTT was distributor for Auralic and Mola Mola. Apparently the Auralic units sounded better than the internal streaming function of the Tambaqui.

I used to own an Auralic Aries G2 streamer (and Sirius processor). The T+A streaming client was vastly better than the Auralic unit. I compared this directly. I deduce from this that the T+A streaming client is vastly better than in the Tambaqui.

I mention this only as I might have given the impression that using the built in streamer was a sonic compromise. It is not. Can it be bettered? Yes. It’ll cost you a healthy five digits to do so. 

Best,

Thank you again @mgrif104.  That is very helpful.

I agree with mgrif104 on the software capabilities and streamer's absolute performance inside the SD 3100 HV. I had the SD 3100 HV in my system for about two weeks. Not sure how it compares to the Tambaqui although I have heard good things about the Tambaqui. I personally do not prefer all-in-one streamer/dacs because performance compromises are usually made in exchange for convenience. If anyone will do it well it would be T+A. What works best for me is to keep the heavy data processing at a remote computer/server (roon, HQ player), then a galvanic isolation scheme to isolate the Streamer from the LAN (fibre optic or wifi), and finally use the DAC exclusively for conversion to analogue. The less digital/data processes on any CPU inside the DAC/Streamer the better. 

Thank you, @ejh369 for adding even more weight to @mgrif104's insights.  The Tambaqui has sounded so good to me that I wasn't sure the SQ could be bettered - but I assumed it could.