Antipodes CX+EXCX+EX - The Ultimate Solution    

Dedicate the CX to the Server function and the EX to the Renderer function
for the best possible audio quality and functionality

Antipodes DXDX - The Ultimate One-Box    

Full-Width Stereophile Class A+ Recommended Music Server with internal ripper
for the best possible simple and complete one-box solution

Antipodes CXCX - High Power    

Half-Width Music Server with exceptional server app performance
plus high quality renderer app performance

Antipodes EXEX - High Value    

Half-Width Music Server with exceptional renderer app performance
plus high quality server app perfomance and a stereo analog output option

Antipodes P1P1 - Ripping Solution

Solid Alloy Block Platform with exceptional CD ripping performance for EX or CX
Designed for placement under the server for additional isolation

Music Server Specifications

Select The Models To Display
Color Silver or Black Silver or Black Silver or Black Silver or Black Black
Sound Quality Ranking (1=Best) (See Note A Below) 1 2 3 4
Price Level (1=Highest) 1 3 2 4 5
USB Output
- 5v On/Off Options
- PCM to 32bit/768kHz
- DoP to DSD512
- Native DSD to DSD512
Stereo Analog Output
- Processes PCM to 24bit/192kHz
- Transcodes other formats before conversion
Ethernet Direct Output
- Direct connection between separate server and renderer
Complete Antipodes Application Suite
- Server Apps
- Renderer Apps
- Admin Apps
Pre-installed SSD Storage 0TB 0TB 0-8TB 0TB
Plus, User-Installable Storage - 2.5" 7mm Sata 0-8TB 0-8TB 0-8TB
Automatic CD Ripper
Medium Power V4X Circuit For Server Apps
- Not suitable for some Roon DSP functions
High Power V4H Circuit For Server Apps
- Enables demanding Roon DSP functions
Internal Dual (A.1) ODAPS1 Linear Regulated Supplies
Internal Single ODAPS2 Linear Regulated PSU
Power Required
- 110-120VAC 60Hz or 220-240VAC, Switchable
Width 240mm (x2) 240mm 432mm 240mm 240mm
Depth 290mm 290mm 273mm 290mm 290mm
Height (Including Feet) 90mm 90mm 85mm 90mm 30mm
Weight 13Kg 6.5Kg 9Kg 6.5Kg 1.5Kg
- 2 Years
- Extendable to 3 Years With Registration

Note A - Audio Performance Differences

We are often asked which model sounds best and how the sound differs. We have tried here to describe the hierarchy. However in blind tests, the results are unanimous in only one thing - the superiority of the CX+EX solution. While the majority put the hierarchy for the other units as CX, DX, EX, each of them has its proponents. For example, the EX is favoured by those that like musical life and verve. The EX may be the least expensive of the trio, but its design means it does some things better than the other two. The CX is favoured by those that like refinement and fullness. The DX is favoured by those that like a sense of ease. These are not night and day differences, but you asked.

The main reasons for the sound quality differences are this. Using a single computing device to perform both server and renderer functions has economic benefits in that you only need to make one high quality device, and this will sound better than using two separate low-quality devices (one for the server and one for the renderer). But to push beyond that performance level, it becomes worthwhile to begin insulating the running of the renderer app from the server app, and this can be done in a number of ways. This concept of providing isolation to the renderer function drives the differences in the audio performance levels of the X-Series models. The size of the performance level differences is arguably small, but in higher resolving systems the differences become very obvious and significant. A deliberate benefit of our approach is that you can start with say an EX or CX and upgrade later to the CX+EX Solution without needing to sell anything.

  • The EX is designed to the same specification level as the rest of the X-Series except that it provides the least separation between the running of the server app and the renderer app.
  • Note A.1 - The DX improves on the EX because it provides separation of the power supplies running the two functions, but it uses the older ODAPS1 power supply technology.
  • The CX improves on the DX and EX by providing a lot more server app headroom with its high power V4H platform. But note that it does not use the power supply separation used in the DX.
  • The CX+EX solution is a dramatic improvement on the other models because it completely separates the running of the server app and the renderer app. In this context, because it is running just the renderer app, the EX audio performance is unhindered and there is no need to use a CX or DX instead of the EX. In fact the EX has the best renderer performance of the three. So using the CX as the server and the EX as the renderer is the best sounding solution (needs a good quality short Ethernet cable to connect them).