Antipodes CX + EX Music Server and Renderer
Review sample supplied by Antipodes Audio
Retail prices in the Netherlands incl 21% VAT:
EX: 4.650 euro
CX 6.895 euro
I’ve lived with the Antipodes EX for half a year now and as can be read in the review, it is the best Roon Server and Renderer that I have heard. When the EX was released, however, plans were already in the making to create a matching component called the CX and after having anticipated it with my usual impatience, now it’s here!
While the use cases for the EX and CX might seem to overlap and this might lead to confusion, it’s really quite clear, once you understand the different tasks at hand. When thinking of Roon or any other streaming audio solution, there are two main functions: the Server and the Renderer. The former holds the music and creates an index of the library that you can browse via a tablet or computer and the latter receives the music stream via the network, plays it back and outputs it, in this case via USB. In most cases, the best results are obtained by performing both tasks by the same machine (the Antipodes DX is a good example) but extra efforts have been made to provide even better results using the independent EX + CX devices, specialized for each task.
All Antipodes servers are available in a Black or Silver finish.
The Difference between EX and CX
The EX is intentionally low-powered to obtain the best possible sound quality as a Renderer but its low power makes it less ideal for server purposes. It can perform both functions just fine but you can indeed notice that browsing Roon is not as snappy as it is when I use my main Windows computer as the Roon Core. However, the sound is much better when the EX is used as a server and that’s precisely what makes the case for the CX: to provide the best possible platform for a server while being designed such that its high power does not affect the sound quality. The CX has very powerful processing to enable snappy browsing as well as complex filtering and real-time DSD upsampling. While the EX’s modest internal heat sink is easily sufficient to keep it cool, the CX uses a heat pipe system without any fans that effectively uses the entire housing as a heat sink. During my use of regular music replay without any filtering or upsampling the CX barely got any warmer than the EX.
Above: the main Audio App Switcher screen.
Above: Apps screen.
Above: Settings screen.
Functionality
These components are extremely versatile and can do so much that I can easily fill several pages describing what they do. In short, Antipodes servers can be set to function in various capacities, such as Roon Server, RoonReady renderer, Squeezebox (including UPnP server), MPD renderer and HQPlayer NAA. For a full description of all the technicalities and possibilities and a wealth of screenshots, please refer to the earlier DX, DS and EX reviews. For this review, I’ll focus on the sound and only using Roon.
Like the EX, the CX has a new ODAPS2 power supply that reduces high-frequency noise without resorting to filtering that would impede the speed of current delivery. Also, like the EX, there are two Ethernet ports and no integrated CD ripper. Any USB ripper can be used or one can transfer files via the network share, and Antipodes also has a separate external CD ripper in their portfolio, the P1, which has the same footprint as the EX and CX. The user can very easily install up to 4TB of HDD or up to 8TB of SSD storage, without having to open the enclosure. The drives simply click into place via rear panel slots.
What’s so special about Antipodes servers?
Even now that I am writing my fourth Antipodes review it remains difficult to describe what makes Antipodes servers so very special. Any computer can be a server and digital is digital, right? Well, as far as the data stream is concerned, perhaps yes. But in all matters digital it is important to think outside of the box. Slowly, we are collectively discovering the importance of influences that were previously thought to be unimportant such as jitter, clock quality, and bit accuracy. But there’s another factor that seems to be often overlooked: noise. Mark Jenkins of Antipodes Audio is convinced that one of digital’s biggest enemies is noise. It’s the stuff that travels along with the data stream over cables and into digital devices where it is often aggravated by the internal circuitry. And any filtering used to counteract this usually has detrimental side effects that lower the audio quality. This is where Antipodes makes the difference: by tuning the motherboards and using no standard filtering techniques but clever methods that shift noise to frequencies where they do no harm. The precise tuning is a little hard to describe so I will leave that for Mark.
Mark Jenkins:
“The motherboards are sourced from the world’s best supplier and they cost around 6 times what some of the competitors are using. We tune the motherboards to shift the frequency peaks of the noise generated by each component in order to eliminate noise nodes, so the mainboards start as an off-the-shelf board and then are customized for our use.”
Antipodes also places a lot of emphasis on the quality of the power supply, which they manufacture entirely in-house.
Mark Jenkins:
“What we did with the new power supply was to test the injection of noise into the motherboard at various frequencies to see which frequencies did the least damage to the sound quality, and then we designed the power supply board in such a way that the noise component was in the benign frequencies. This has a similar effect as a zero noise power supply.”
As mentioned, the EX and CX have two Ethernet ports. One can be used to connect to the network and the second to provide a low-noise dedicated feed to an Ethernet DAC. According to the info in the manual, “Ethernet can introduce high levels of noise into the receiving device. The Direct Ethernet solution in Antipodes servers minimizes network ‘chatter’ on the link and creates a high bandwidth, phase accurate, low-noise direct link between the server and renderer. This provides a dramatic improvement over connecting your server and renderer devices through a noisy switch or over a long length of network cable”.
I’ve put this to the test and indeed, the direct connection sounds considerably cleaner as well as freer than a connection via the existing network. BTW I also conducted a similar test using multiple network switches and network cables in a range of lengths with surprising results, using Meridian Sooloos components, the predecessors or Roon, so to speak.
USB or Ethernet
In the world of DACs/Renderers, there are basically two camps: Ethernet (streaming) and USB. Having compared all the big names of both camps in the industry I have gained a lot of experiences in this field and I came to the conclusion that Ethernet sounds fundamentally different from USB. When reviewing the Melco N1ZH, I was much impressed with its combination of transparency and resolution on the one hand and its fluid, free-flowing presentation on the other hand. The thing is: it reached this sound only via Ethernet, not via USB.
Around the same time as I reviewed the EX, I also reviewed the Melco N1ZH UPnP server and this had me in a pickle because I liked aspects of both. Functionally, I prefer Roon over any UPnP solution but I was torn between the Melco’s super-free-flowing sound and the EX’s tonally fuller and more solid sound. Ultimately, I preferred the Melco’s presentation, mostly because its soundstage was deeper and the sounds more layered within it. The EX via USB was comparatively flatter and I attributed this to the USB connection. Due to a lack of results that prove otherwise, I felt that Ethernet was just a better solution than USB and currently, you can find many people chiming in with this belief. But, of course, there are just as many people who swear by USB or by SP/DIF. Either way, for now, I was in the Ethernet camp but then along came the CX and EX to turn my beliefs upside down. Read on to find out just how so!
Christiaan, what about just the CX and C1? Bearing in mind the CX/EX combo is twice the price of the Melco, and it is two separate boxes essentially doing what the single Melco does, was it hardly surprising you got these results? What would be more impressive is if either the EX or CX matched the Melco (which they don’t) or if Antipodes offered the CX/EX as a combo at a competitive price or simlar to the Melco. Another £5,000 on top of a Melco seems excessive and the sound difference would have to be night and day to justify this, which I’m very doubtful it is! Notwithstanding one has to buy a quality USB cable as well, pushing the total spend at over 10k! Hmmm…
Ok, three things: 1. The EX and CX (with USB) individually are both more or less at the same level as the Melco N1ZH (with USB) but with a different presentation. 2. The Melco is more fluid and free-flowing via UPnP and Ethernet but I haven’t tested how the Antipodes servers would perform with UPnP. 3. The CH C1 is a pricey machine but also the best DAC that I know of and so it makes sense to allow it the best source. The best server+renderer for me, currently, is the CX + EX. Combined, they truly are in a different realm. Addendum: while I place special importance on a full tonality and being enveloped in a 3D soundstage, your requirements may be different. For example, if transparency and detailing is more important for you and your room modes are sympathetic rather than counterproductive, then the CX by itself will probably be perfect.
CH recommend the Melco, that is their reference server. I will have to speak to EliteAudio.co.uk and get a CX and EX for a demo and see (hear) for myself. The reason I follow you, other than your excellent reviews is that you have a C1 as well (not many have one of these or can afford one) so it is nice being able to gauge what a potential component will sound like in my system. Thanks for replying to my questions but also potentially relinquishing me of even more money! 😉
Hahaha, indeed, that’s how I discovered Melco, too, and indeed the N1ZH combines incredibly well with the C1. Between the Melco and the EX, I really couldn’t quite make up my mind, as they have such deviating assets. With the CX addition, however, I no longer have doubts. Yes, it’s a lot of money for what is on the surface a “computer”, spread over two boxes. But as I’ve found out, there’s a lot more to this than most people think and a Mac Mini or regular NAS just won’t get you the same results. Getting a home demo is definitely your best option. I’m not sure if you have the USB board in the C1 but FWIW: Mark Jenkins recommends USB over Ethernet. And once you get hooked on Roon, it’s difficult to return to standard streaming apps…
Yes, I have the USB board, went whole hog! But mainly because I wasn’t sure which route (server) I was going to take, ethernet or USB. Yes, I have read what Mark has been saying. Only one way to find out…..
Same here and glad that I did:-) Feel free to check back in when you’ve experimented more.
IMHO, it would be interesting to compare using the CX as server for the EX vs using another server solution for the EX, such as the sonictransporter i7, that also has dual LAN ports. I’m not fully convinced yet the server matters as much for the SQ as the endpoint does. OTOH, there might be certain synergy effects when using two Antipodes products.
Actually, the server really matters, much more than most people assume! This was already clear for me from using the EX as server and renderer (Both Roon) and then adding the CX as Roon Core server and prior to that, using a regular Windows PC as the Roon Core server. The latter sounds great, but by comparison to the CX, significantly more lumpy and blurry and much less refined. Server quality really is a thing, I’m afraid. Just how good the sonictransporter i7 will be, I cannot say, as I haven’t heard it. But I’ll keep comparing to any new products that come in for review.
Cristiaan’s review states his findings very well, but I wish to add some clarifying comments that I think will help to understand how the CX and EX relate to each other, and how they work together in the CX+EX solution to really lift the bar.
All Music Server playback requires three steps: a Server app, a Renderer app, and a DAC stage. The optimum solution is to have three independent devices with each performing one of the tasks. But below a certain price level, it can be better to include the Renderer in the same device as the Server (as we do with both the CX and the EX), or to include the Renderer in the same device as the DAC (as is done when the DAC has an Ethernet input).
The optimum hardware for the Server app is quite different from the optimum hardware for the Renderer app, and this is why the EX and CX are different, and why they are both our best devices. The lower-priced EX is an excellent Renderer with a very good but low-powered Server capability. The EX excels in musicality. The higher-priced CX is an excellent Server with a very good Renderer capability. The CX excels at transparent detail resolution.
The CX+EX Solution is to run the Server app on the CX and the Renderer app on the EX and connect the two with a short, high-quality Ethernet cable. The CX+EX Solution not only combines the transparency of the CX with the musicality of the EX, the synergy further improves both of these qualities. There are no easy shortcuts without trade-offs. To get the best audio quality, both the Server and the Renderer need to be of very high quality.
Antipodes does not make a lower-priced two-box solution for the simple reason that the one-box EX or CX provide better sound for the price, plus provide you with an simple upgrade path of adding the other model later to reach the CX+EX Solution.
Mark Jenkins – Antipodes Audio Limited – antipodes.audio
Hi Cristiaan,
great review!
It would be nice to compare this combo to a Pink Faun 2.16 alone.
There is a review at the CA forum on this page (scroll down):
https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/43629-pink-faun-216/?page=5&tab=comments#comment-886404
The Pink Faun 2.16 was superior.
Matt
As the reviewer himself noted, the comparison between the 2.16x and the CX/EX combo wasn’t totally fair, as the circustances were not fully similar. So I think your conclusion should be a bit more nuanced.
Therefore my suggestion to repeat a review of Antipodes CX/EX vs. Pink Faun 2.16 by Christiaan Punter.
I concur with Matthias, a direct comparison between a Pink Faun 2.16x and Anipodes CX/EX combo is needed. I am reading very good reviews as well on the Habst USB ultra III cable, perhaps try this cable out against the CAD with the above
The Pink Faun 2.16x is an interesting server. I’d seen it some time ago at Xfi in Veldhoven and was intrigued, then for no reason at all just forgot about it. I’ll see if I can get a review sample in.
@Soundsgood / Matthijs: no worries: I am always nuanced;-)
+1 with Habst
Matt
Some other suggestion for USB cable:
Final Touch Audio Callisto USB
Best would be group test:
Antipodes CX/EX
Innuos Zenith Statement
Pink Faun 2.16X
Matt
The Final Touch USB Callisto cable is in and will be reviewed shortly, also as part of the Pink Faun 2.16x review. I’ve not yet received a response from Habst.
The Pink Faun 2.16X has been delivered and a review is forthcoming. Can’t make any promises for the Final Touch and Habst USB cables just yet, though.
When can we expect the review of the PF 2.16X?
Im looking forward to this!
I am currently reviewing it – should be less than a month now.
I have the antipodes EX and want to know can you use the Ethernet direct link from another server besides the CX? I have a win 10 media server with a very good ethernet connection – JCAT net femto ordered by a very good linear PSU.
Indeed the EX works perfectly as an endpoint only. I’ve used it that way extensively. If it is in RoonReady mode and you’re running Roon on the server then it should be working just fine. Have you enabled the EX in the networked section the Roon settings of the core on your server?
Hi Christiaan. I have played around quite a bit trying to get the good JCAT clock on the NET femto to reclock the signal and send it to the EX. No luck for the past few weeks. Your post gave me some hope but still not able to get it with Roon. Just so we’re on the same page, you mean to setup like this?
Win 10 PC – Selected as Roon Core
One ethernet cable from router with internet connection going to one port of the JCAT Net femto card.
Second ethernet cable going from 2nd ethernet port on JCAT Net femto out to the Antipodes EX ethernet port #2.
Correct?
I just realized I’ve been trying the whole time with ethernet port #1 on the EX and just tried #2 port on EX but still no luck 🙁
Hi Yuri, sorry, I misinterpreted your initial question. While I used the EX as an endpoint, that was always via a switch. If you want to make it work with a direct link then you’ll have to bridge the ethernet ports on the server.
Hi Christiaan,
I ended up using the switch. It doesn’t work with direct link from the JCAT net femto card no matter what I tried… Internet connection sharing, bridging, DHCP etc.
It’s as good as I can get. Now I have the server sound signal reclocked by the JCAT net femto then going to the ocxo switch and finally sending it to the EX from the switch. Sounds quite good and no delays in playback .
Hi Yuri, perhaps you could ask Mark Jenkins from Antipodes? I’m sure he’d be willing to help you get the best from your setup.
Hi Christiaan,
Thanks for the reply once again. I have been in contact with Antipodes support over the last couple of months and they are very helpful. Unfortunately, the direct link from the NET Femto to the EX is not happening but the work around I did works quite good as I still am able to separate the server from the renderer (EX) and use the signal over the FEMTO clock networking to send the audio data to the EX so I’m happy.
Will be even happier when the P2 comes out 🙂
Powered by a linear PSU*
Have you any plans to review products from Innuous? If so, which models are you going to review and when might the reviews be published on your site?
No plans ATM, I’m afraid.
Hello Christiaan,
I enjoy the reviews very much and wondering if you would be able to provide some insight on a question of mine. I have limited budget and I am wondering how the Euphony PTS server may compare to the Antipodes EX. The latter is almost 3x more expensive and so I was wondering what you thought of their musical performance difference.
I’ve not yet heard Euphony’s latest product but I have reviewed the Buggy/Zotac. The latter’s overall character is similar to the Antipodes EX in terms of bass solidity, dynamic slam and the overall sonorous presentation but the Antipodes outperforms it in terms of treble fluidity and overall refinement. If these areas are less important to you and the new PTS is similar to the Buggy/Zotac, then it may be a cost-effective solution for you. PS I will see if I can get a PTS review sample in.
Further to my previous response, I’ve been informed that the Buggy/Zotac is the current reference server for Euphony, not the PTS. The latter is developed separately by the USA distributor. Alas, I have no definitive info pertaining to their relative performance.
Looking forward to the Pink Faun x review. I too have tried to contact Habst about their XLR cables, twice I have emailed them with no reply! Perhaps they are still celebrating NY!?
Hahaha, yes, perhaps:-)
Great review !
Question: I have a CH PRECISION C1 DAC: did you compare Antipodes EX+CX vs CH PRECISION UPnP board ?
If Antipodes is better, I Could save the UPnP board on my C1
Kind Regards
Patrick
Indeed I did: Antipodes via USB vs Melco via Ethernet (into the C1’s UPnP board). You can read about this in part 2 of this review in the section “A new reference”.
HI Christiaan,
Do you have any other method of contact other than the comments section in this review? I sold my femto cards and getting the P2 to connect to my EX.
Thanks,
Yuri
Hi Yuri, sorry but I get way too much mail. The comments section is the only place where I can comment on matters that apply to the articles on HFA.
Hello Christiaan,
In a comment to one of the readers of your previous EX review, you indicated that you would not recommend its use as a dedicated server, though you approved it in the server + renderer role. I wonder if there are any conditions that would prompt you to qualify that recommendation?
Although I like the CX + EX combination for my front end upgrade and understand the advantages of that pair vs. a solo EX acting as integrated server and endpoint, there is another option I am considering. I have just ordered a Totaldac d-1 DAC, which suggests the possibility of adding Totaldac’s d-1 streamer that includes a low-power server, a USB filter cable and a very effective reclocker, between the server and the DAC. So my alternate proposal would look like this: Antipodes EX (or CX) as a dedicated server, ethernet to the Totaldac d-1 streamer (low-power renderer / USB filter / signal reclocker), then AES/EBU or SPDIF to the DAC.
If we ignore the CX advantage of speedy browsing and consider only sound quality, could EX compete with the CX? The Totaldac is a non-oversampling DAC and is reputed to perform brilliantly at low sample rates, so I may rarely need the extra processing power of the CX for on-the-fly sample rate conversion. Under those conditions, would the lower power (and lower noise) Celeron CPU in the EX not regain some or all of the CX advantage?
I do not wish to denigrate in any way the excellent CX + EX combination, but the d-1 streamer is a very attractive proposition for anyone with a d-1 DAC. For a reasonable price, the buyer gets a very good reclocker with an external power supply, an excellent USB filter and a good renderer with the option of a second external PSU. I’m very tempted, but then will only need a single Antipodes for my server. Which one?
If I could assemble these three components at my home and just listen, the choice would surely be easier, but that will almost certainly not be possible before purchase. In your opinion, Christiaan, and with the focus solely on sound quality, is the choice clearcut or difficult?
Lee
Hi Lee, I used the EX on its own for quite some time and during that time it was my reference. So, it’s definitely not that I would not recommend it. Yes, the CX has more processing power which comes in handy for DSP matters and upsampling but this also makes browsing your library a lot snappier. Those matters aside and focusing only on sound quality, however, the difference between the two mainly boils down to a more solid and full-bodied, tonally warmer sound for the EX versus a cleaner, faster, and more accurate sound for the CX. This difference really comes into play most distinctively when using the units on their own or when adding the CX to the EX which yields the improvements as indicated in the review. In both cases, that means also using their USB renderer outputs.
However, you intend to use it as a server only and when streaming into another renderer, the difference between the CX and EX will be much smaller, perhaps even negligible. Without a side by side comparison, I think you would be happy with either.
Christiaan,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Isn’t it interesting to have these two components, so outwardly similar, but designed with a different balance for distinct roles? Despite that clear difference in character, you describe in this report and also in your reply how the impression made by the two Antipodes can vary according to the roles they are asked to play in the system, the connection protocols, the software chosen and so on. Though you didn’t write much about the EX as a dedicated server streaming to a separate endpoint, I began to theorize it wouldn’t suffer much of a disadvantage in certain circumstances and I am happy that you don’t discount that notion on the basis of your experience.
Hi Lee, the Antipodii are just much more explicit in character, and positively different from the norm, when used as renderer or server+renderer. That’s why I don’t spend too much time explaining how they sound purely as a server. In conclusion: I think you theorized correctly! Do share how you get on.
Hi Christian: Such a passionate review -nicely done.
Indeed, observing the build quality of the current Antipodes product (EX, CX, USB-to-spdif, i2S, Word Clock Converter, + …) it’s clear to see the expertise involved. Similarly, Antipodes past products have been/continue to be highly praised.
Additionally, the expertise/professionalism and sensibility of its designers is also clearly revealed by their passionate, mature (and wise) words -speaking to the art of hi-fi and product manufacture.
That the Antipodes product demonstrated world-class, State-of-the-Art performance /SQ is by no accident -talented, passionate guys researching, listening, evaluating, studying, comparing, changing, modifying (and repeat), over/over again is what is demanded when defining superior (genuine), high-resolution hi-fi.
It appears Antipodes has successfully mastered the requirements.
peter jasz
Thanks Peter, glad you like it. And indeed, Mark and the Antipodes team deserve all the praise they get.
Hi Christian: Sold review. I was please you discussed the Ethernet/USB quagmire ! lol
Indeed, there is much to learn of/about so-called ‘Computer Audio’ -specifically by those who design it !
It appears clear to me the Antipodes boys have learned a few things over the years; the newest/current CX/DX and separate (P1- Ripper and USB Converter /Platform clearly demonstrates this gained knowledge. This may be particularly observed by the short signal paths of the entire circuit, but specifically to the SSD/HDD (2.5″ no less) counting platform cleverly positioned on top (of the processing circuits).
Once again a fine review. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Oh, one other thing/correction: When you spoke of the differences in SQ between CX/EX and suggesting one was not superior to the other is simply not true. The Anntiopodes guys may offer up an explanation of provide insight. That you enjoyed the ‘EX’ reveals a couple things:
1) you appear to enjoy the subtle coloration’s of the EX, the CX’s superior processing/speed (sophistication in essence) may expose other “issues” (reveal weaknesses) within your set-up.
The finest hi-fi always employ fast circuits in a very low-noise platform; many listener’s consider such product as “transparent ‘revealing’, nuanced (all correct) but also stated (unflattering) as “cool” and without exception the belief of less/leaner bass . No doubt that is what is heard. But also no doubt that that’s how it SHOULD sound.
Many hi-fi’ers (for decades) have become very cozy/comfortable with such obvious/ubiquitous coloration’s that when we audition/hear something without it (such distortions), it seems “not right”. Yet, further investigation and listening (perhaps along with ancillary equipment changes) soon reveals what we’re hearing (i.e. CX vs. EX) is superiority; greater accuracy, resolution/nuance and ultimately musicality -the whole sh-bang.
peter jasz
Hi Peter, Glad you like the review! PS I wouldn’t say the EX is superior over the CX, just that in that situation I prefer it. I have spoken with Mark about this at length and know it’s relative and subjective:-) The main thing that attracts me to the EX over the CX is the greater perceived soundstage depth and I don’t think that this has anything to do with coloration, imprecision or something that the EX does wrong which happens to work synergistically in my system. I certainly do not prefer warmth over linearity and precision. Indidentally I heard something similar with the new DIG_IN HD board for the CH Precision C1 and, so far, have not found a satisfying explanation for it. Apparently lower precision / higher jitter can create a sense of depth? In any event, with the new Ethernet_IN HD board that is now Roon Ready, the C1 can be fed by the CX in its role of Roon Server directly and the result is superb. I’ve not gone back to the EX as a server yet but strongly suspect that, in this scenario, the CX will be better on all aspects.
PS: your resonse ended up in the spam folder, no idea why. Hence the delay.
I bought an Antipodes Core to use as Roon Server, it was so unstable that for my sanity I just ditch it into the deepest corner of my storage room… it was close to getting the hammer treatment …
That sounds like a circumstantial issue, certain hardwar combinations perhaps not working together very well. My experience with Antipodes servers is that they are as stable as any other servers that I have used or reviewed.
Borrowing the CX from my dealer and have it connected to my EX plus P2. Will update with impressions!
Dear Christiann,
I always enjoy your reviews and I have been using them to take decision on my system because your ideas of how an audio equipment should sound are very similar to mine. Base on that, I bought an Antipodes EX which I love. I tried different configuration (as you did) and found similar sound wise results. The best sound (for me) was achieved using the EX as Roon server and my Auralic Vega G2 as Roon end point (renderer) connected directly with ethernet connection (using Sotm cable). The second best is running both Roon server and renderer on the EX (core direct) and playing through USB. Knowing that you been using (before the CX) the EX with direct ethernet connection with the CH C1, you are the correct person to ask. How much better is the sound of the CX-EX combo connected by USB to the CH vs EX alone using ethernet direct connection to the CH? I have clear impression that you like the CX-EX combo (USB connected) than the EX alone (ethernet connection) much more. If I am correct, which improvements I can expect by adding the CX to the mix? I cannot afford the CH C1 but the sound I am getting with the EX-Vega G2 combo (direct ethernet connection) is amazing now (I don’t have any browsing speed issue with the EX running Roon) so I would like to understand if adding the CX will pay off! I will appreciate your opinion.
Thank for your time
Hi Carlos, indeed, I prefer using the CX to the EX and from there to the C1 but only with USB connections. When connecting via Network directly (using the C1’s Roon Ready input) I prefer to go straight from the CX to the C1. Running both Roon Server and Renderer apps works on the CX and on the EX but besides the CX feeling snappier in operations such as browsing, the resulting sound is also different. The EX as a whole, outputting via USB sounds full, organic, relaxed and free-flowing. The CX as a whole, outputting via USB sounds speedier, more articulate and more controlled but a large portion of the free-flowing soundstage is gone.
When focusing only on network playback then it depends on which aspects of performance you find most important. The CX majors on speed and transient snap but also sounds flatter in the depth plane. The EX majors on soundstage depth and overall free-flowing delivery but it sounds less precise than the CX. Now, which of the two are closer to reality I find hard to say and I guess that is also a personal matter.
Another thing to consider is that, since you are using the EX or CX only as a server, the eventual quality of the performance will also depend on the quality of the endpoint. Some are more finicky and/or more revealing than others and often, the renderer part is much more important than the server part.
Hi Carlos, something you might also want to consider is that Antipodes Audio is about to launch an entirely new range of products, based on the results of a 3 year project (OLADRA), focused on the impact of noise and bandwidth on digital audio. I’m told that the new products will appear on the official website very soon.
Will it be possible to upgrade CX to one of new S or K lines and if yes which one?
I’m not sure, best check with your distributor or the manufacturer. If anything, it might be possible to upgrade the internals of your CX to S status but I’d not expect to be able to go from CX to K.
Hello Christiann,
Thank you very much for you answer and for the last update. For now, I am happy with the EX connected directly to the Vega G2 by a Sotm ethernet cable and filter and using the G2 room ready. In my system this combination sound much better, in all parameters, than the EX alone via USB. Yes, the EX alone sound excellent by any mean but I prefer the more dynamic presentation of the EX-Vega G2. If the CX-EX via USB will sound better in my system? Hard to say! I will keep my money and wait a littler to see what Antipodes will launch now.
Thanks
Good to hear you’re happy with the EX-Vega G2 combo! As for the new Antipodes products, I can’t wait to get my hands on them! The top full-size K50 product will be a 3-in-1 server/renderer/reclocker unit with 3 separate computing parts that are isolated from one another. On the other end they will have several smaller separates similar to what we have now but improved according to new insights.
Hi Christiaan,
Looking forward to reading your review of the Antipodes K50. I imagine you will focus on the USB output, but hope you won’t neglect to look at the AES/EBU and SPDIF.
Hi Lee, actually, I am something of an AES/EBU and S/PDIF convert these days:-) I will make sure to compare all of its outputs.
Hello Christiaan,
100% agree with Lee.
No worries, I will listen to and compare all of its outputs.
Hi Christiaan,
Are you admitting to a forthcoming K50 review? In part I purchased my CX+EX combo based on your earlier review and am pretty happy with them. Currently am running them into my Lampi Pacific via USB, primarily off the SSD. This unit also has an Ethernet input, but I don’t use it.
I’ve been pondering where to go from here. Add a reclocker? Wait for the K50? Wait for an SGM Extreme at a much higher cost? Which input? I don’t upsample, so spdif is an option too.
BTW, The embedded HQ Player (purchased) has a bit better SQ compared to Roon Ready.
I eagerly await your forthcoming review.
Thanks,
Greg
Hi Greg, Good question! At this point, not having heard the K50, I can’t really advise you on that yet. Perhaps it’s best to wait for the K50 indeed. A review has not yet been agreed upon but I think it’s safe to say that this will happen. Indeed, HQ player sounds better to me too.
Hi Greg, I just got notified that the new Antipodes products are shipping. While still not definitive in terms of timing, I may now receive a K50 review sample fairly soon.
Hi Greg, it’s now confirmed: next week I will first lay hands on the new Antipodes K50 to start my assessments for an extensive review.
Hello Chris!
We have been waiting for your review!
I will get also to test Antipodes K50 within a few weeks ))
Hi Swatello, well, soon, the wait will be over:-)
Excellent. Thanks for informing us.
I’ll watch for it.
I am very happy with EX – CX combo,
My lan cable RAL, USB RAL two wires with separate power and signal and aes/ebu Black Cat Tron, i think on K50 i am able to use only aes/ebu so it should be much better compare to combo.
I am not entirely sure what you are illustrating here but, indeed, the K50 sounds fantastic using AES/EBU. I’ve not yet listened to its other outputs but so far with AES/EBU, it certainly outperforms the CX/EX combo using any connection method.
Yeah, i have already answered on the other topic. I am using aes/ebu via antipodes p2 reclocker platform. I am really waiting for your review of K50 )))
Hello Christian!
How is k50 going ? We have been waiting for the review ))
It’s going well and it’s coming:-)
Hi Swatello, the K50 review is ready!
Hi Christiaan!
I have a question on the cx/ex combo final output.
Did you ever try the single ended RCA analog outputs of the EX?
Thank you and stay safe!
Hi Kevin, indeed I did. It sounds surprisingly decent – colorful and non-edgy, but otherwise, nothing special. Any serious DAC will yield a more impressive sound.
Christian, please help me decide. Antipodes Oladra or Melco N10? My DAC is a Verity Audio Monsalvat Pre 2.
I haven’t heard or seen the Verity Audio Monsalvat Pre 2 yet but sure looks very nice. So, between Antipodes and Melco, in general, it is very much a matter of personal taste, as well as of playback software preference. After what I read, the Oladra will be smoother and even more free-flowing than the K50 which places it opposite of the Melco N10’s fluid but also tight and controlled sound. The K50 is musically and emotionally great but it is not the highest-res server I know. However, Antipodes servers can run a multitude of playback software, among which Roon. Melco may sound leaner and to some listeners and in some systems maybe relatively a little lean (or Antipodes is a little fulsome, you decide) but it offers a very high-res and very transparent rendition. The downside is that the Melco only runs its native UPnP server software and allows being used as Roon Endpoint only, ie you need an external Roon server.
Thank you very much!
hi Christiaan, I carefully read your reviewand enjoyed your enthusiasm on the EX (and combination with CX). I have the opportunity to buy an EX . then I would use it as a renderer with my DX3? Would that be useful, in the sense of an upgrade in SQ?
Hi Henk, I haven’t heard the DX3 but I did use the DX2 and I think the EX would provide very similar benefits for the DX3 as it did for me with the CX.
Thanks Christiaan, the seller is also prepared to sell me his CX I now hear. What would be your advice? stick to the DX3 or go for the CX (combined then with the EX)
Good question. Not having compared them, I can only deduce the following. The CX is the evolution of the DX2 and DX3, it contains the ODAPS power supply and V4H main board whereas the DX3 contains the ODAPS2 power supply and V4 main board. I can’t speak of the sonic differences but the CX is technologically more recent which, in my experience so far, has always meant a better sound quality.
thanks again Christiaan. Helpful!
Hi Christiaan,
I’ve read your reviews of the Antipodes EX and the combination of EX and CX with much interest. I have recently bought an EX and it sounds good (as Roon server and Squeezelite endpoint) in combination with a Chord 2Qute USB DAC. I also tried various Intel NUCs as Roon server, either with Wondows 10 (and Audiophile Optimizer and Fidelizer Pro) or Audiolinux, but that brought no real improvement. Sound was a bit more dynamic, but also lost some natural timbre of instruments It was more of a step sideways than a step forward.
Although an Antipodes CX is the natural partner of an EX, maybe there are less expensive alternatives. From experience, can you suggest a (Roon) server that matches well with an EX?
Hi John, I’m really not sure what to recommend as I have really only used either regular PCs or relatively costly server solutions. The CX made a solid improvement for the reasons stated in the review but there is a chance that most affordable server solutions would yield the same as you already found: a sideways move. The EX has a remarkably full sound, indeed with a very natural timbre. I’m not sure what other server solutions might be out there that would mimic this. I do hear good things about the Roon Nucleus. Never heard it myself, though.
Hi Christiaan,
I would like to add comment that perhaps will add value to John. If you EX doesn’t have the Oladra upgrade, consider to do it instead of adding a dedicated server. It costs around $2k usd but will elevate the EX performance without adding any additional box. Two years ago I almost sale my EX/S60/S40 combo because I feel that the dCS Rossini doings streaming sound better, even using very expensive cables with the combo. After upgrade, that changed. Bass, clarity, dynamics are as good or better than using the Rossini alone. However, the combo adds the analog ang organic sound than we love. I believe that this combo approach now the K50 territory. It is that good that I only can think on the new Oladra unit as upgrade.
But Yes, adding a server later will improve even more.