Innuos Statement Review

I first heard the Innuos Statement music server at AXPONA 2019. I listened to a demonstration directly comparing the Statement to the Innuos' Zen MkII. After the demonstration, it was clear to me that the Statement was a large step forward in the Innuos product line. I recently purchased the Innuos Statement and took delivery (after a six week wait). I immediately plugged it in, set it up, (super easy) and downloaded .5 TB of WAV files overnight. After burning in the Statement for approximately 100 hours, I compared the Statement's performance to the Antipodes DX3 music server. In order to have as close a comparison as possible (in relative real time) I connected both servers to my Jeff Rowland (JR)  Aeris DAC+PSU using the same brand of cables (Stealth). However, because the Aeris DAC has only one USB input and both the Statement and the Antipodes DX 3 only have USB output, I first ran the Statement through a Berkeley USB Alpha converter and connected the Alpha converter to the Aeris DAC using Stealth's Vardig Sextet V16-T BNC/BNC cable. The Stealth USB Select-T cable connected the Statement to the Aeris DAC. The rest of the system consisted of a JR Corus Preamp (connected to the aforementioned PSU), JR M925 mono amplifiers, Joseph Audio Pearl 3 speakers and a three REL subwoofer "swarm" configuration. Cardas Clear Beyond power cords, balanced ICs, and speaker cables were used throughout the system. Both servers were used as Roon Cores for the comparison/review. I own all the equipment; I don't work for any audio company. (I also don't pump my stuff to dump it later.)
I focused on music selections I know well across the genres of rock/pop, jazz, classical, soul/R&B, and classical. I used a "non-blind" method playing a 1 minute 30 second to 2 minute section of a recording before switching from one server to the other and then repeating the same recording for an immediate comparison. I did the comparison over a two hour period, taking periodic listening breaks. Before providing my overall impressions of the Antipodes Statement, I note that I immediately compared the Statement to the Antipodes DX3 without burning the Statement in. The Antipodes DX3 had been thoroughly burned in before the comparison (more than 500 hours of use). Without burn in, the Statement and the Antipodes DX 3 sounded very similar to one another. I'm confident that I would have been guessing which was which if I was blindfolded and had to name the server I was hearing on any given recording. I repeated this exercise after the Statement had burned in for one hour. At this point it seemed the Statement's soundstage had gotten a little wider and only slightly deeper. It also seemed the vocals on the Statement had become slightly clearer than on the Antipodes DX3. I did no further comparisons until now. The following are my subjective impressions of the Statement after four days of burn in compared to the Antipodes DX 3 server in my system.
The Statement threw a slightly wider soundstage than the Antipodes DX3.
The Statement had a significantly deeper soundstage than the Antipodes DX3. 
The Statement and the Antipodes DX3 had the same soundstage height.
The Statement resolved moderately more than the Antipodes DX3. By this I mean it provided more recording details than the Antipodes DX 3. It was not a night and day difference. It was apparent on most, but not all, recordings I considered.
Vocals presented clearer/crisper (better "enunciation" if you will) via the Statement than the Antipodes DX3.
The Statement provided superior bass differentiation in the lowest and mid bass regions. With the Statement, the bass drum performance did not cloud either a stand up bass or electric bass performance--provided the recording/mastering engineers sufficiently separated the performances on the recording. The Antipodes DX3 is a very good bass performer. But it slightly trailed the Statement.
The Statement placed more air between the instruments and performers than the Antipodes DX3.
The Statement excelled at acoustical instrument presentation. A reeded instrument sounded convincingly "real." The Antipodes DX3 does this well too...just not as well. Percussion instruments also benefit from this attribute. The Statement allowed me to hear more definition in the wood block, the guiro, shakers, all cymbals I heard, chimes, a gong. Again, the Antipodes DX3 was very good at percussive instrument representation. The Statement was simply better.
Both the Statement and the Antipodes DX3 provided high quality believable piano reproduction in all genres. The only significant difference I heard between the two servers on piano performance was found in Alfredo Rodriguez's rendition of "Chan Chan." There, the Statement seemed to handle the quick staccato notes and the unique decay issues of this piece more believably than the Antipodes DX3. But the difference was not night and day.
My overall impression of the Statement is that it provided superior high quality, believable digital music reproduction regardless of genre. I consider it an across the board upgrade in musical reproduction in my system over the Antipodes DX3. My impression of the Antipodes DX3 is that it is a high value product that held up very well in comparison to the Statement. The Statement retails for twice as much as the DX3's retail price when it was in production. If the Statement's performance after four days of burn in was rated as a 100 I would rate the Antipodes DX3 completely burned in as a 75. I will be keeping both these music servers. Hopefully this review helps those in the market for a music server.     
Ag insider logo xs@2xastewart8944
Mr Stewart look we totally agree, the issue with this poster is like Mike Powell he bashes a product that he has only seen in pictures, without ever testing ,or listening to the product, or makes ridiculous claims about costs and pricing.

Look we all have opinions but most people will have the good taste to only talk negatively about a product if they have direct personal experience directly with said product, that is the point we are trying to make.

The other thing is this exact same bit has been done before, and it sickens us that a product that we sell, we own, and know to be excellent is besmirched by such foolish comments by the DIY crowd who haven’t had one of these to listen to.

This is our last word on the subject in regards to in shore.

We are delighted with the performance of the Statement and are really happy that you are enjoying yours. We just did a shootout against a mythic $20k server with some very unique digital processing software, and the Statement was totally different sounding, the fascinating thing is how different digital can sound through different servers.

To quote Stan Lee, nuff said.

Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ

I would like to apologize to the OP Astewart and especially to AudioTroy for being so ignorant and rude , I am sorry .

We can all be wrong and pig headed at times and here I certainly was a glowing example of that .

The Innous Zenith MK3 is nothing how I described it and if anything should be praised how it performs.

Thanks for the interesting review and discussion. I have a Zenith Mk 2, all that was available when I bought it. I agree there is a clear improvement in performance to the Zenith SE and then to the Statement, when I compared at a show. I won't be changing, being very pleased with the Zenith and I can't afford the Statement, now I'm retired, anyway.

 To emphasise the ease of use, that's partly why I bought it. A child of 5 could rip CDs with a few minutes of instruction.

 I will mention again, the soon to be available plug in Re Clocker from the Statement, which can be used with the Zenith, to bring it nearer to the former's performance. It has been promised for over two years by the company and I have been nagging them about it. I understand it is ready, when it will be for sale, should be later this year. It won't be cheap, about £2000, only a little less than the Zenith Mk 2 purchase price, but I will be giving it a home audition.

@david12 Thanks for the post. If you end up with the Re-Clocker please post your impressions of it here. I agree with you that the Statement is super simple to use. The ripper works great, and quiet mode is actually quiet. 
Guys, was there any comparisons made with a fairly high end transport, i guess it should be at least in the 5 figure bracket if compared with a $10k to 20k server?

A comparision if the Innous Statement or any any other server and how does it fair against a cd.

How different does the USB fair compared to tranditional spdif or Aes spinning a cd?

Does it or not, trump cd's before stating how great a server setup sounds, ultimately.

A reference might be good as a baseline between the different brand servers and connections before we say say which is best or great.

Can the Innous play cd's or just rip them?