Antipodes DX Gen3 vs Innuos Zenith MkII SE

[FredM]

2 hours ago, Kritpoon said:

Reporting back. Got my UltraRendu direct connection with the DX thru the excellent support of Antipodes support teams. Thumbs up to them. The result is very pleasing! Better dynamics, clarity, airiness and such good imaging. Wow. The problem was early shipment of the DX Gen3 LAN port was not factory configured as bridged. So the supporting team remotely access my DX3 and bridged the port. Perhaps this can be a poor man CX+EX solution. CX in this case is the DX3 and EX is the UltraRrendu.

 

Hi Kritpoon, good to see you got the UltraRendu working. You've had an interesting set changes, if my interpretation is right:

 

You started with: Source + Mutec + Mutec 10Mhz clock

Added the UltraRendu: Source + UltraRendu + Mutec + Mutec 10Mhz

Replaced the Source/UR: DX3 (USB out) + Mutec + Mutec 10Mhz

Added the UltraRendu: DX3 (LAN out) + UltraRendu + Mutec + Mutec 10Mhz

 

That is quite an impressive result! How would you describe the difference between 2 and 4? (adding the DX3 as 'a poor mans CX' to the UltraRendu).

[FredM]

Great that you guys can meet, really looking forward to your finding.

Have lots of fun tomorrow!!

[FredM]

Thanks that you’ll share your finding, looking forward to it!

 

Secretly hope that the Antipodes performance is on an equal/similar level as ‘stable’ set ups, so a serious reduction in boxes / spagetti is on the horizon.

[FredM]

1 hour ago, rickca said:

What are you going to do if the best sound includes both the Antipodes and the SOtM trifecta?  

 

Haha, luckily there is a box AND budget cap in place 

 

Given the already excellent individual performances I can only image the Antipodes + SOtM sable + mutec will be absolutely mind blowing (counting 6 boxes before the DAC )

 

ps Dear flkin, when writing your findings, please be careful with your enthusiasm, it can set a new holy hifi grail in this madhouse place..

 

Looking forward to see your findings..

[FredM]

Many thanks for this great write up, really appreciated. Thanks for the effort you put in it.

 

To avoid biased reading from my side, a check: it seems that (after the cable swap) the Antipodes DX gen3 performs equal to the MacBook + full SOtM stable, right? (Where in both cases the MC3+ was connected)

 

6 hours ago, flkin said:

as the (3) comparison was with the Antipodes with the MC3+ alone. And here the Macbook/Stable/MC3+ matched it.

 

IF this is true, the following is interesting:

 

1) Where was the test track stored?

Did you listen via ie Tidal, or was it stored on the Antipodes and MacBook, or perhaps on a NAS?The Antipodes seem to give the best result when stored internally on a SSD. So when the test is done by streaming over the network/internet an extra notch can be achieved.

 

2) Next month the Antipodes CX hits the market:

This is a €4000 server/renderder (exclusive the internal SSD storage), with usb and RJ45 outputs. With the RJ45 output a separate render der/NAA can be connected (such as the sMS-200 etc). From the Antipodes site: “The CX delivers stunning sound quality, exceeding the audio performance of even the excellent DX”. This looks very promising... The CX could well be THE one killer box front end:

a) a true one box solution, the CX has an internal psu

b) the total cost is lower (or at least similar) then the SOtM ‘stable’, which includes a modded switch, SOtM cables, psu’s, MacBook, etc (as mentioned in the description)

c) it is better then the Antipodes DX gen3 (so a possible extra notch compared with the full SOtM ‘stable’)

d) an obvious future upgrade path is available with the RJ45 output by connecting a separate (clocked) endpoint /NAA.

e) also important, Antipodes offers long term upgrade programs to excisting customers. 

 

If I don’t got things wrong/mixed up, I think my search for an one box killer front end is FINALY at the horizon. Or have I been reading all this with a tendentious hat on? I would appreciate to hear any sane thoughts..!!

 

Again, many thanks for your great write up!

[FredM]

1 hour ago, flkin said:

the Antipodes/MC3+ sounded similar to the Macbook/Stable. But like my above comment, I failed to mention that the former set was via Coax and latter via USB to the DAC. This would likely play a part in any differences heard. 

 

Thanks for this. It will have some effect then (positive or negative), nevertheless a very very good outcome for the one box lovers..!!

 

Playing via the internal SSD will even bring things up a notch.

 

Many thanks, looking forward to the CX launch, which works as a server and renderer in one box (adding an EX or other NAA/Endpoint seems to bring further improvements)

 

 

 

[FredM]

1 hour ago, flkin said:

Oops, correction:

 

Thanks, I interpreted it like that based on the full description 

Only the final connection to the DAC was different, happy camper ?

[FredM]

7 minutes ago, Kritpoon said:

I also wonder, if I were to add CX as a Server and uses my DX as a renderer, what would be SQ benefit of adding the CX. Better route many DX+Sotm Stable+REF Clock. As I found out from this experiment with @flkin, clock is at the heart of digital audio chain. And with SOTM Stable, I believed the REF clock takes the whole Stable up from great to extraordinary pieces of audio equipment.

 

I also believe the DX + clocked NAA is the preferable route.

 

Both the CX and EX lack a clock input, so based on an Antipodes server (CX/DX/EX) a clockable NAA is the most logic upgrade path (so non Antipodes).

[FredM]

31 minutes ago, magnuska said:

I received the new Antipodes EX yesterday. I can confirm that it works fine the  Vinnie Rossi LIO DAC 2.0.

 

 

Good to see the first EX's in actual use! Have you had the chance to compare it as a server and/or renderer with your Roonserver / SOtM front end?

[FredM]

Great to hear, congratulations! Based on your signature, the EX replaces both the SMS-200 Ultra and tX-USB Ultra?? Then "amajor step up" from a cold start sound very promising, and a nice simplification as well.

[FredM]

2 hours ago, nbpf said:

The CX bare costs 4000 EUR, the EX bare costs 3000 EUR. Both have dedicated USB outputs and 2 RJ45 outputs. The EX comes with a basic internal DAC and with a less powerful CPU than the CX. Which one will perform better as a one-box server + renderer when no Roon, upsampling or transcoding are needed?

 

Perhaps you'll find your answers here:

http://www.antipodesaudio.com/music-server-models.html

[FredM]

38 minutes ago, Bazinga said:

I just orderd my upgrade DX 2  to DX 3 

 

Congratulations!!