Cambridge CXN V2 - My new audiophile streamer and internet radio - detailed review

[Deleted member 15865]

I don't know how much the official Roon Ready helps, but I was using Cxn V2 with Roon even before that. I could live with uncomfortable UI of stream magic instead of paying 120 USD yearly. I'm using Audirvana on PC for almost similar tasks of Playlist and Favorites creation, and Audirvana on PC can stream to Cxn v2 Streamer directly. Though the Discover Music Option isn't there, but other UI features are quite robust when compared to Roon.

In fact I chose a dedicated streamer with a decent software, instead of paying for Roon lifetime.. You always have stream magic for bit perfect playback.

Thanks @drkrack for sharing your experience and preference. It’s always useful to have multiple options for us the consumers and a healthy competition between providers to keep them innovating.

I do see that Roon is many times costlier than Audirvana - which, as per user reviews including yours, doesn’t seem any worse in sound quality. So I guess it boils down to the features, user experience and UI. And though there can be subjectivity there, Roon is widely believed to have an edge there. I guess those of us who don’t care much for Roon’s music exploration, discovery, metadata, library insight and UI would find its premium subscription charges exorbitant and prohibitive.

If I were using the apps only for listening, I’d think likewise too. But to me, the above utilities matter a lot. I use streaming primarily for exploring the world of music - artists, genres, styles et al. I am an avid Allmusic.com user and contributor too. And for serious listening to my favourite albums I depend on my copious CD collection. So for me, in a music serving app, the richness of experience and music exploration possibilities matter a lot.

Does it still justify the $119 annual membership fee? It is like asking does it justified to pay Rs 70000+ for an iPad Pro when there are Android tablets that rival it in specs available at one-third the price? I guess the answer will be person-dependent (I have an iPad Pro by the way - and am entirely on Apple platform for that matter). When evaluating the cost of something, we can either judge by comparison with alternatives or in absolute terms in terms of value one can derive out of it - a lot of which will be intangible and subjective when it comes to hobby and entertainment.

Also, I believe that a good chunk of what Roon charges also goes to pay the music databases it depends upon for it’s rich user experience and in maintaining and updating their library management software. Also, I don’t know about Audirvana (and have a good mind to try it out as well), but I have experienced very responsive and pleasant customer support from Roon in the past. I had taken their annual subscription only to realise later that CXN V2 was not Roon Ready (back then) and therefore the subscription wasn’t useful me as I didn’t want to use my laptop all the time to play music. When I wrote to them, they were empathetic and gracious - first trying to help me understand the various possibilities I could still gain from and then refunding my entire subscription and keeping the relationship warm to get back to them whenever CXN V2 becomes Roon Ready. As a customer (more so an Indian customer used to poor treatment and impersonal service), I value and cherish such a customer service experience.

So, all things considered, I find Roon’s subscription worth now with CXN V2 becoming Roon Ready and given my sound quality assessment using the Roon Ready mode (significantly better than in the Airplay - shared in detail in an earlier post in this thread). I am quite likely to go for one year Roon subscription at the end of the current trial period. And depending on my usage and experience I shall consider a lifetime subscription beyond that.

Edit:
Ok, here’s a latest and excellent link on what it means for the Cambridge CXN V2 to be Roon Ready (which has happened starting March 2020). This will explain the technicality behind why in my testing (read an earlier detailed post in this thread with pics), I found options 3 & 4 (using Roon Ready mode) far better in SQ than options 1 & 2 (using Chromecast and AirPlay) respectively.

As the article says, “in the Roon Ready mode (possible now), one now gets extended hi-res support that includes DSD on the CXN V2. Also now one benefits from Room RAAT’s clear practical advantage of asynchronous data handling in more revealing systems.

Cambridge Audio adds Roon Ready to EDQE NQ, CXN V2 | Darko.Audio

The British company enters the Music-First Audiophile's Golden Triangle.

darko.audio

 

[rikhav]

RAAT is their own proprietary method of connecting server and endpoint, and that's why any device being roon ready becomes essential so you don't need an external end point.
But all is software, no hardware changes are required.
Only thing needed is the computer inside the streamer should be capable to handle the roon end point software and they should have a system where they can upgrade firmware.

You can say RAAT is a much better iteration of dlna streaming

Companies have to pay huge sum to make their devices roon ready so not all companies are getting into it. But as roon becomes more and more popular companies have to adapt it.

So it's nothing too complicated but the whole package surely works well if you don't mind spending on roon

 

[drkrack]

I am an avid Allmusic.com user and contributor too. And for serious listening to my favourite albums I depend on my copious CD collection. So for me, in a music serving app, the richness of experience and music exploration possibilities matter a lot

That's great to know, quite impressive actually, Yes Roon is a good investment for Music Reviewers and Audiophile device Reviewers. Also its a great software for multiroom music reproduction. Unlike you it didn't matter a lot in my usage, so I wasn't very excited about Cxn v2 being Roon Ready with the new update, in fact I disabled all those services which I don't use on cxn.

Does it still justify the $119 annual membership fee? It is like asking does it justified to pay Rs 70000+ for an iPad Pro when there are Android tablets that rival it in specs available at one-third the price?

Well, that's not an apples to apples comparison, its compromised android tablet hardware you are comparing when nothing much happening on Android Tablet scene. Because if it comes to Mobile phones average android phone like Oneplus will surely surpass in efficiency ( BTW mine is Apple ecosystem too).
The Tidal provides decent info about album and artist in its info page( not visible on Stream magic app, but visible on Audirvana or Tidal app), Google and wiki are always available for further research.

am quite likely to go for one year Roon subscription at the end of the current trial period. And depending on my usage and experience I shall consider a lifetime subscription beyond that.

Roon might discontinue lifetime subscription option as far as the roon forum discussion goes, they've hiked the subscription amount to discourage. With Rupee falling I think buying a lifetime early is a good investment.

I do see that Roon is many times costlier than Audirvana - which, as per user reviews including yours, doesn’t seem any worse in sound quality

Most of the edge of Audirvana comes from using it as a Player on PC / Mac with a decent USB DAC, even Roon excels with a USB DAC output. Especially ROCK server gets rid of USB noise by a good margin and it makes a lot of sense to invest in a Roon dedicated music server and a good USB DAC.

New stream magic app is definitely better than the previous but it has a long way to get into the league of cutting edge mobile apps provided by Roon or Audirvana!

 

[Deleted member 15865]

I’d say both Roon Ready (I.e. options 3 & 4) and Tidal native (from Stream Magic - I.e. option 5) were equally good in sound quality - but different! The sound signatures were somewhat different. While Tidal native sounded more focused and elite, Roon Ready sounded more organic and had more reverb. But each sounded as uncompressed, detailed, rich and clear as the other. I am not sure if the qualitative difference is down to the apps involved - Roon vs Stream Magic.

Ok guys, let me own up my mistaken assessment (above) in haste after just one song yesterday. Perhaps I was excited due to the Roon already update. But today I heard a number of songs back to back using a) Tidal through Roon Ready (options 3 & 4) and b) Tidal native using Stream Magic (option 5). And I am convinced that Tidal native using Steam Magic consistently gives better sound than via Roon Ready. Not that Roon Ready is bad, it’s pretty good and some might like it more, but I find the sound has a hint of digital/boring sound. While there’s no issue with clarity/resolution, it is not engaging enough. Tidal Native played through Stream Magic, on the other hand, feels more natural and is more involving - the microtones are played better, leading to better ‘singing’ by both vocals and instruments. Once my ears have caught the difference, it is difficult to ignore it. May be the native Tidal sounds better because it doesn’t have to go via the Roon core (Mac), Roon processing and wi-fi transfer, but comes straight from the router to the CXN.

So now the decision (to go for Roon subscription) is more difficult. On one hand there’s the wonderful UE and UI of Roon, and on the other, the preferable sound of native Tidal. Over the hours that I was listening to both, I can see myself shifting towards the latter. The audiophile within might win.

i just hope and wish that Cambridge Audio employs a better team of software developers who improve the functionality and user interface of the Stream Magic app to bridge the gap between itself and Roon Remote App. It shouldn’t take much of designing and development skill to do that if they have the will and common sense. (For eg. Who makes an app in two dull shades of blue these days? What does it take to show in search results whether an album is MQA or FLAC... and so on)

The Tidal provides decent info about album and artist in its info page( not visible on Stream magic app, but visible on Audirvana or Tidal app), Google and wiki are always available for further research.

Wish I could use the Tidal app here in India. It’s almost impossible to download and use it from the App Store till it Tidal is officially launched in India. There’s no option to Stream Magic till then if one has to play Tidal natively.

 

[abawa]

Hi
Is thr any way to set preset to NAS media server playlists on cxn V2?
TIA

 

[sathtom]

@SachinChavan: Its an excellent review and enjoyed reading it.

I am in a dilemma to choose between "Bluesound node 2i" & "Cambridge Audio CXN V2"

As far as I researched, one major con in CXN-V2 is that it doesn't perform indexing for audio files in Hard drives unlike in Node-2i BluOS.

Another difference being lack of MQA support in CXN-V2 which I am not bothered of.

Please let me know any other major differences between these two that I should know of.

Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 15865]

@SachinChavan: Its an excellent review and enjoyed reading it.

I am in a dilemma to choose between "Bluesound node 2i" & "Cambridge Audio CXN V2"

As far as I researched, one major con in CXN-V2 is that it doesn't perform indexing for audio files in Hard drives unlike in Node-2i BluOS.

Another difference being lack of MQA support in CXN-V2 which I am not bothered of.

Please let me know any other major differences between these two that I should know of.

Thanks.

@sathtom, thanks. I did consider Node 2i briefly, but I wasn’t convinced about MQA. I valued CXN V2’s capable DAC (with Bluesound I’d have had to use a separate DAC to get required sound quality), CXN’s superior user experience (dial knob, screen, classic form) and native internet radio which justifies its premium. But if you have a spare DAC, you may evaluate them differently. I am not sure about the file indexing as I don’t use hard disk. But you can write to CA support to confirm - they are prompt with their replies.

 

[superczar]

Ok guys, let me own up my mistaken assessment (above) in haste after just one song yesterday. Perhaps I was excited due to the Roon already update. But today I heard a number of songs back to back using a) Tidal through Roon Ready (options 3 & 4) and b) Tidal native using Stream Magic (option 5). And I am convinced that Tidal native using Steam Magic consistently gives better sound than via Roon Ready. Not that Roon Ready is bad, it’s pretty good and some might like it more, but I find the sound has a hint of digital/boring sound. While there’s no issue with clarity/resolution, it is not engaging enough. Tidal Native played through Stream Magic, on the other hand, feels more natural and is more involving - the microtones are played better, leading to better ‘singing’ by both vocals and instruments. Once my ears have caught the difference, it is difficult to ignore it. May be the native Tidal sounds better because it doesn’t have to go via the Roon core (Mac), Roon processing and wi-fi transfer, but comes straight from the router to the CXN.

So now the decision (to go for Roon subscription) is more difficult. On one hand there’s the wonderful UE and UI of Roon, and on the other, the preferable sound of native Tidal. Over the hours that I was listening to both, I can see myself shifting towards the latter. The audiophile within might win.

i just hope and wish that Cambridge Audio employs a better team of software developers who improve the functionality and user interface of the Stream Magic app to bridge the gap between itself and Roon Remote App. It shouldn’t take much of designing and development skill to do that if they have the will and common sense. (For eg. Who makes an app in two dull shades of blue these days? What does it take to show in search results whether an album is MQA or FLAC... and so on)



Wish I could use the Tidal app here in India. It’s almost impossible to download and use it from the App Store till it Tidal is officially launched in India. There’s no option to Stream Magic till then if one has to play Tidal natively.

Just wanted to check if you are level matching the options?

If not, An app like Decibel X will do in a pinch if a SPL meter is not available.

Would be really interested in seeing if

a) All options yield the same SPL level (I presume you are leaving the Amp volume untouched)
b) The findings remain the same when level matched

I know i‘m asking for quite a bit of effort but would really appreciate if you could check on this

Reason I ask is because gain levels can vary considerably between the same stream for different end-points - e.g. there’s an average difference of 3-4 db on spotify if I stream directly to my receiver vs streaming to a CCA connected via optical.
Even though the AQ should have been broadly the same, the direct option used to feel subjectively better till I realized the subtly louder audio is the underlying reason.

 

[Deleted member 15865]

Just wanted to check if you are level matching the options?

If not, An app like Decibel X will do in a pinch if a SPL meter is not available.

Would be really interested in seeing if

a) All options yield the same SPL level (I presume you are leaving the Amp volume untouched)
b) The findings remain the same when level matched

I know i‘m asking for quite a bit of effort but would really appreciate if you could check on this

Reason I ask is because gain levels can vary considerably between the same stream for different end-points - e.g. there’s an average difference of 3-4 db on spotify if I stream directly to my receiver vs streaming to a CCA connected via optical.
Even though the AQ should have been broadly the same, the direct option used to feel subjectively better till I realized the subtly louder audio is the underlying reason.

@superczar, good point. I am usually aware during comparisons to ensure that volume levels are comparable. I didn’t do any objective measurement through app during A/B comparisons (though I use Decibel X regularly to check my listening levels and system’s resolution at lower volumes afteradjustments).

However in these trials I was using exactly the same material (the same Tidal file), same DAC (my CXN V2), identical volume setting on my CXN’s digital preamp and the same power amp. The only difference while comparing was the route I was using - Roon Ready (via MacBookPro and CXN) vs Native streaming (only CXN). Do you think that can still result in different gain levels? If so, what in the digital processing path could possibly cause it? Isn’t decibel level a function of the material, DAC and the analog section? I am open to redoing the experiment if I see the theoretical reason.

 

[superczar]

@superczar, good point. I am usually aware during comparisons to ensure that volume levels are comparable. I didn’t do any objective measurement through app during A/B comparisons (though I use Decibel X regularly to check my listening levels and system’s resolution at lower volumes afteradjustments).

However in these trials I was using exactly the same material (the same Tidal file), same DAC (my CXN V2), identical volume setting on my CXN’s digital preamp and the same power amp. The only difference while comparing was the route I was using - Roon Ready (via MacBookPro and CXN) vs Native streaming (only CXN). Do you think that can still result in different gain levels? If so, what in the digital processing path could possibly cause it? Isn’t decibel level a function of the material, DAC and the analog section? I am open to redoing the experiment if I see the theoretical reason.

In my use case, the gain levels are probably different because of the different DACs at play.
In your use-case, the gain levels may differ (esp b/w 1, 2 and 3/4) because of the difference in the transport protocols.
3 and 4 should probably be the same but it may be worthwhile to check.

Should be a simple enough check - Perhaps The average levels reported by Decibel X for a given 10 second passage for each case ?

 

[newlash09]

Hate to be a spoiler here

But after 2 years of roon, I've decided to move away from it. Roon is more for media and library management if one has a large collection of down loaded or ripped library. Which I don't have. Probably around 1 TB at max.

For single Pc setups audirvana trumps roon on sound quality . To improve on that..one needs twin pc setups, with one pc running roon core for libaray management, and the second running HQ player as renderer .

Too complicated. And now start adding linear power supplies to nas, Lan switch, router, 2 Intel Nuc's all running on their dedicated LPSU. Next we also need a roon end point, and then add a dac. That is one full cup board chock a block just for streaming.

The whole point of streamers with inbuilt dac's, and native app supports for streaming services is to clean the cup board off all this complicated mess. If I would ever buy a CXN V2, it would be because Iam more of a streamer than a player of my local ripped tracks. And also because I want simplicity, and good sound quality. For someone with a downloaded catalogue of music, just add a SDD to CXN, and it should do the job. Any omissions as being noticed now, can always be corrected via a future firmware upgrade.

But trying to buy a streamer with inbuilt dac, and then considering running it with roon. Is probably diametrically opposite directions for me.

If one needs DSP in the chain, there are cheaper options than roon

 

[Deleted member 15865]

Hate to be a spoiler here

Roon is more for media and library management if one has a large collection of down loaded or ripped library.

But trying to buy a streamer with inbuilt dac, and then considering running it with roon. Is probably diametrically opposite directions for me.

If one needs DSP in the chain, there are cheaper options than roon

@newlash09, you are not (being a spoiler). You’ve given your experience and perspective and that will be of value to us all. BTW, I made my decision on Roon (not to go for it) already.

Each one of us has different reasons to consider buying the same component. We can find value in the same purchase for altogether different functionalities. In my case, I don’t have ANY downloaded/ripped files nor am I interested in multi-room sound. Nor do I need a DSP in the chain (that’s a negative for me). My main reason to consider Roon (as already stated in one of the previous posts) was its exemplary library (playlist) management with Tidal integration, music exploration/discovery ability. and metadata. That’s a big, big value for me! I’d be extremely happy if my Streamer’s app (Stream Magic) develops any of these functionalities and won’t need to look for anything beyond.

However I didn’t want to blindly subscribe. I tested out the sound quality while streaming through Room with CXN as end point and streaming natively via CXN (described extensively in an earlier post) and found the former didn’t match up with the latter. And hence decided against subscribing to Roon. To me, it was a logical decision taken after due diligence. I am also coming to the conclusion that native Tidal sound through CXN will always be better than when processed through any app sitting on a PC and then fed to CXN. I guess I will have to continue using Stream Magic and hope it continues to improve.

 

[drkrack]

Tidal sound through CXN will always be better than when processed through any app sitting on a PC and then fed to CXN.

Well I completely agree with you on this, the Tidal sounds pretty crisp with meaty vocals on Cxn v2 which I haven't experienced with other options. The immediacy and liveliness of Tidal music is quite evident with Cxn v2 Streamer. I'm pretty happy with SQ so far, adding a superior external DAC (Gungnir, Ares2, AMR) improved the SQ performance by another notch!

 

[sathtom]

I think we don't lose much on MQA streaming in CXN V2 if we use TIDAL as it acts as a Core decoder which does the first unfolding to output 24Bit/96Khz. "The first unfold recovers all the direct music-related information. Output is 88.2kHz or 96kHz"

For Full/Final unfolding (or 2nd & 3rd unfoding), MQA-enabled-DAC is required which CXN V2 doesn't have unlike Bluesound Node 2i.

My doubt is, if we use an external MQA-enabled-DAC (in future) with CXN V2 along with TIDAL, can we achieve the master intended quality of 24Bit/192Khz or more ..?

 

[drkrack]

TIDAL as it acts as a Core decoder which does the first unfolding to output 24Bit/96Khz. "The first unfold recovers all the direct music-related information. Output is 88.2kHz or 96kHz"

For Full/Final unfolding (or 2nd & 3rd unfoding), MQA-enabled-DAC is required which CXN V2 doesn't have unlike Bluesound Node 2i.

I don't know about the technicalities but I was unable to Play DSD/MQA when Cxn V2 was used as transport to Esoteric DAC (cum Cdp). I was able to play DSD with Ares2, Ares 2 accepts DSD via coaxial inputs whereas Esoteric doesn't. Schiit Gungnir Multibit DAC was able to play DSD via Coax when Cxn was used as Transport. Ares2 was better as far as my experience is concerned.

You'd need to invest in a costlier DACs to get SQ improvements over Cxn. Hopefully it helps.

 

[Deleted member 15865]

I think we don't lose much on MQA streaming in CXN V2 if we use TIDAL as it acts as a Core decoder which does the first unfolding to output 24Bit/96Khz. "The first unfold recovers all the direct music-related information. Output is 88.2kHz or 96kHz"

For Full/Final unfolding (or 2nd & 3rd unfoding), MQA-enabled-DAC is required which CXN V2 doesn't have unlike Bluesound Node 2i.

My doubt is, if we use an external MQA-enabled-DAC (in future) with CXN V2 along with TIDAL, can we achieve the master intended quality of 24Bit/192Khz or more ..?

I don’t use any other DAC with the CXN. One of the reasons I bought it instead of Bluesound was because of its better DAC. I haven’t heard a fully unfolded MQA, but what I hear from the first unfolding that CXN does, I always prefer the FLAC version of each song/album over the MQA. All my favourites and playlists contain the FLAC versions therefore.

There’s a lot of debate on the net whether MQA is actually a higher resolution (like DSD) or just an intelligently marketed equaliser setting. I don’t know what’s true, but I see diminishing returns for resolution above CD quality anyway and pursue other aspects of the sound quality over resolution beyond the FLAC.

 

[sathtom]

Thanks @drkrack & @SachinChavan for your feedback. I too don't worry on audio resolution above CD quality but a part of me just want to find all possibilities & features for the $$$ I am going to pay for streamer. Thank you so much.

 

[drkrack]

find all possibilities & features for the $$$ I am going to pay for streamer.

Then Let me give you one more important parameter, I purchased Cxn v2 via official Indian dealer, the DAC USB input port which was working earlier, stopped working after 4 - 5 months of purchase. Rest everything is working perfectly but I can't use it as USB DAC. I tried reinstalling drivers, PC to Mac but the USB DAC is not getting recognized. Raised the complaint with the dealer and I am waiting since 2 months to get the USB DAC board replacement. Very pathetic after sales service, I will mail Cambridge Audio directly this week to see their response.
The after sales service is almost abysmal for most of the hifi gear in India.

 

[sathtom]

Hi @SachinChavan / @drkrack ,

I almost finalized to go for "Cambridge Audio CXN V2" but confused on below two points,

1. How to integrate a Subwoofer with CXN..? (Using Y Cable..?)
2. As CXN doesn't have HT Bypass, is there any way to integrate with HT without adding preamp (like Schiit Freya+) in the middle.

Please Note: Integrating SW with Stereo and integrating Stereo with HT are my future plans.

I came across 2 products which solves above 2 points but raises other problems,

1. Parasound Halo P6 (Preamp & DAC) ==> Streamer part is missing
2. NAD C658 (Preamp/DAC/Streamer) ==> It has all features like Sub-OUT, HT-Bypass, DIRAC, MQA, BluOS but user reviews are not promising.

 

[Deleted member 15865]

Hi @SachinChavan / @drkrack ,

I almost finalized to go for "Cambridge Audio CXN V2" but confused on below two points,

1. How to integrate a Subwoofer with CXN..? (Using Y Cable..?)
2. As CXN doesn't have HT Bypass, is there any way to integrate with HT without adding preamp (like Schiit Freya+) in the middle.

Please Note: Integrating SW with Stereo and integrating Stereo with HT are my future plans.

I came across 2 products which solves above 2 points but raises other problems,

1. Parasound Halo P6 (Preamp & DAC) ==> Streamer part is missing
2. NAD C658 (Preamp/DAC/Streamer) ==> It has all features like Sub-OUT, HT-Bypass, DIRAC, MQA, BluOS but user reviews are not promising.

Hi Sathtom, Am sorry I can't help you on either - I don't use a sub, nor do I use HT so never thought about those. Perhaps some knowledgeable FM could help. You could also write to Cambridge support. IN normal times I've found them very responsive.