@zprr I believe @mikelavigne has the Taiko Extreme. I suggest reaching out to him.
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
email conversation I had with Antipodes...... one reason I feel its superior to the Statement (CX, EX combo unit) Yes, but Mark Jenkins comments '....The clock is a lot less relevant than people assume. The 3 things that matter with digital audio are the clock used to generate the signal, noise levels and bandwidth. The clock is less important than the other two. To my knowledge Antipodes is the only firm that addresses bandwidth. The others sacrifice bandwidth through use of noise filtering. We use no filtering at all, leaving full bandwidth intact and achieve low noise by designing it out from the ground up.'. Regards, Tony Hi Tony. Do your units have clocks? Reason I'm asking is I have the Sotm stack.. eg usbultra and work clock @ 10Mhz I've tried your EX unit with the Sotm stack and it sounds better without it. Which is for the most part ridiculous... This should not be... the Sotm stack definitely helps the Innuos unit sound better... but yours sounds better without it. Whatever you guys are doing there is awesome.. |
We have right now in the shop three of the top computer music servers: 1: The Innuous Statement 2: The Baetis Reference 3: The Laufer Technik Memory Player The Baetis isn't the current version as Baetis has made some improvements, the Laufer is nearly current with a bit of software upgrades would be completely current. In our findings the three or four best are in no particular order Innuous Statement, Taiko, Laufer Memory Player Antipodes In terms of the Antipodes vs the Statement, aside from Hewhaw, we have a lot of difficulty understanding what Antiopdes is doing via hardware, ( the open shots of the chassis shows a nicely designed and built product but where are the normal parts of the super server secret sauce which are massive custom power supplies with extensive regulation, hardware reclocking and noise reduction assemblies, and we don't see an advantage of seperating the renderer from the Roon core, which should acutally genearte more noise as you are transmitting from the Core over ethernet to the renderer even if the two boxes are in the same rack that is one more external connection versus a much shorter internal connection. If you design your product carefully there should be no noise added by putting both pieces into one chasis. The claim that Antipodes is doing something really unique in software is a dubious claim, as Laufer's piece has a patent on data manipulation to clean up the stored packets before transmission, and Innuous has built their own processing engine as well. Which of these units sounds better to you will depend on the sonics that you prefer. As per the Taiko it does seem extremely well built and well designed is it worth that much over the Antipodes, and the Innuous pieces that to me is a hard call. We continue to explore these products as it is our belief that a good dac or a good dac/streamer with a server represents both the present and future of musical reproduction. We have found that with the right dac, cabling and servers, high end digital can easily compete with the best of analog. Dave and Troy Audio Doctor NJ Computer Audio Specialists |
There is a very helpful discussion on servers on What's Best Forum. I highly recommend it to those who want some different perspectives on various servers. There you will find the Taiko SGM Extreme is discussed extensively and compared in listening tests to different servers, including the Innuos Statement. There is not much of a discussion there about the Antipodes EX+CX combination. Don't take that as a knock on Antipodes products; they simply aren't part of the conversation on WBF. |
@audiotroy you have not done your research... and you should before you make statements. I would not comment on the other products you have listed except the statement because I understand what Innuos has done ; but the others I could not comment on I eluded to what Antipodes does to eliminate noise before but if your honest its just easier for you to sell the other products you have. In regards to the combination CX/EX that is easily resolved via cat7 sotm cables as I've discussed before but seems you "missed" it for convenience. Since you are "not" a music server designer its obvious you are not.. why would you understand what Antipodes does... Go to the roon boards and they also recommend you separate the server and renderer. The Statement has weaknesses in running two external power lines outside into the main box above? ... they perhaps should consult Mark Jenkins on how to build a noise free power supply.... Also running both server and renderer together is also another weakness. To make it clear to the rest... I think the statement sounds very nice... and am familiar with the "basic" tech Nuno and team use for noise reduction. The Antipodes way of reducing nose in my opinion is better and way more fascinating to me. I told you previously they offset various frequencies on their boards to eliminate noise ; and you said that you didn't think it was anything out of the ordinary. Which tells me you do not know this product at all. Here's a small piece and I suggest you do your research for the other pieces unless you feel you need to be spoon fed. Below is the education you need to sell Antipodes servers which in my opinion are better than what you have listed. If i was your boss I'd tell you to be more learned on products you refer to. The below is just for their power supplies; this is also for their older generation power supply their new ones are even better. The key thing is that all regulated power supplies generate switch noise, and that with digital it is really important to not only reduce that noise, but through design, put the residual noise in a frequency range that does not interfere with the digital signal. This not only involves the regulation used, but also how the transformer is wound and how it is screened – for example our transformer is completely copper screened. Mark Jenkins: Antipodes also places a lot of emphasis on the quality of the power supply, which they manufacture entirely in-house. Mark Jenkins: 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. |
- 158 posts total