@jonaiken Thanks for the kind words. After you receive your Statement please post what you hear. Because you know and like the DX3 sound, I'm fairly confident you are going to be very pleased with your purchase.
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.
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.
- ...
- 158 posts total
I own and innuos mk2 server and antipodes ex. If you are comparing the innuos statement to an EX there is a huge price difference. You might as well get the cx ex combo which will sound better than the innuos statement. I'm not knocking innuos but the work and technology Antipodes puts into their servers is just better. Do the research and see for yourselves. In fact Antipodes older gen products sound better than the innous mk2. I don't have an mk3 and would not spend the money on innuos products anymore. I just find Antipodes signature smooth, articulate, accurate, detailed without any harshness and the noise tech they use is superior to what innuos does. |
Hehhaw, we have to comment on your statement as some of what you posted needs clarification. First the Innuous Zenith MK II is a vastly inferior product to the current MK III version, sonically the MK III is much more liquid and sounds way better in every way. In what way is Antipodes work and technology better? Over the last five years Innuous has continued to grow with products which use all bespoke parts, the Statement uses a custom designed USB reclocker, as well as an Ethernet reclocker, all units use custom motherboards, custom cases, sophisticated power supplies, vibration reduction, incoming Ethernet noise filters, and outgoing Ethernet filters. Add to that a great custom built setup software that makes the entire out of the box to a fully running product a five min chore. Innuous is even working on their own Roon like operating software. For all of these reasons we see Innuous continuing to grow. In looking at verifying that claim Antipodes own website is very mum on what they actually put in their boxes, there is no mention of custom motherboards, power supply design, how the USB and Ethernet outputs are derived, clocking is accomplished,or how noise is eliminated. Even the pictures of the current Ex in Positive Feedback doesn't show much other than a copper heat pipe on the processor. and an Rcore transformer with a few smoothing filtering caps. VS Innuous Zenith which you can see an incoming ethernet filter, a large sophisticated mutli rail power supply with Mundorf caps and a huge amount of voltage regulators https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/antipodes-cx/https: compare this to the entry level Zen model https://hifi-ifas.de/test-innuos-zen-mk-iii-high-end-musikserver-highlight-sylvesterknaller The higher end Zenith ups the anti with a three rail power supply, adds Mundorf capacitors, an SSD drive. Then to the Statement http://www.the-ear.net/how-to/power-supply-design-innuos-statement Dave and TroyAudio Doctor NJ Innuous dealers |
Hi there Dave. The Mk3 is better but its not vastly superior to the MK2 as you state above. It is better but ho hum... Now to be honest I’m somewhat surprised your not aware of Antipodes technology you just can’t be so focused on one product. Eg.. bias because you sell innuos product etc.. I actually convinced my dealer to bring in the Antipodes product ; he’s currently carrying innuos products. I let him know Antipodes is better and it is..... Antipodes is well known for "high end" innuos is more mass market smart on their part. You know I bet I could take old Antipodes products and they would best the MK 3 that’s how confident I am about how much better there products are. In respect to their technology you could always contact support@antipodes.audio and they can explain it better than I can but I’ll give it a shot. oh before I get into that the parts they use are also not cheap off market products everything they do is custom. You can google Antipodes CX or EX and you’ll see reviews. Which will go indepth and the CEO himself explaining what they do. I won’t do the homework for you. Now my meager attempt for their tech. They use frequency offsetting so they have one part of the board which will use a certain frequency and another part of the board which uses another and these 2 frequencies offset each other so noise is eliminated. I think it genius and they have been doing that for a while. Innuos they do some custom work on the boards get rid of unnecessary chips to assist with noise etc.. but not like what Antipodes does. I’ve heard the statement and its nice... mk3 is nice.. but ... I throw down the gauntlet to you since your a dealer bring in a CX /EX combo set it up and the musicality will be better than the statement. oh to your comments about seeing inside the Antipodes boxes.. how about you google Antipodes EX, CX etc.. and you'll see in depth reviews and "inside the boxes" lots of picts... |
The picture with copper heat pipe in Positive Feedback is for CX, not EX. EX uses Celeron quad core with fanless heatsink. You can get the pictures of both CX + EX in 6moons: https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/antipodes/ I don’t own Antipodes but want to correct the obvious error by @audiotroy |
- 158 posts total