Bolding above is my own and represents a statement that may not be valid.
Modern DA chips - like the Sabre - are complicated devices with many different ways of using them. Also, a DAC design may use one of the post conversion analogue filter options built into the DA chip - or it may build in its own. Even the nature of any post-filter amplification can affect the performance to some degree.
In short, saying different devices using the same DA chip should sound the same is not always valid - especially across different manufacturers.
There is a chance that the CXN100 and the DacMagic200M, being both from the same manufacturer, do use very similar designs and will thus sound very similar. But it is equally possible that the Cambridge Audio design engineers have learnt from their experience with the DacMagic200M and have thus used a modified design in the CXN100. At this point, who can tell?
ARC stands for Audio Return Channel. It allows for a receiving device to send the audio back to another device. Handy in 2-channel set-ups to play audio from a TV. Nothing to do with video though. I think what you really want is HDMI video out. What you want is a HiFi Rose type functionality where it can display a ânow playingâ screen via HDMI.
I was checking to see if the CXN100 had already received Roon Ready status and it has. Something that struck me as strange though was that it was described as a Bridge and the CXN V2 was described as a DAC - see below. Iâm probably missing something obvious but I thought they would both come under the same category?
@ipeverywhere, thank you for that clarification; yes, that is the feature I suggested: to send the image out over HDMI, or, I guess, some other way.
Some other thoughts:
I mentioned earlier that I really like the v2 DAC. I run my Sony disc player through it on a digital connection. As I type this, Iâm listening to the Mercury CD release of Schubertâs Sixth Symphony, London Symphony Orchestra, Hans Schmidt-Isserstedt (c). This was originally recorded in 1958, during the golden era of the Mercury Living Presence line. Both the original recording and the CD issue (Box Set Three) were directed by Wilma Cozart Fine.
Here is the path: Sony UBP X800m2 â HDMI audio optical extractor* â CXNv2 â Cambridge Audio 851a integrated amp â Sennheiser HD 660S headphones**
Glorious.
*p.s. I hear a slight but noticeable improvement versus a direct coax out of the Sony itself, a comparison that the v2 makes easy: I have each set up as an input source in the Stream Magic app.
*P.p.s. (@Mike_O_Neill) to your earlier discussion of headphones: the jack in my integrated amp serves well, but I agree with the points that you made
I just order my CXN100 today. I also have the DACMagic 200M. Both have the ES9028Q2M chip, however since the DACMagic 200M has 2 ES9028Q2M I think it still has the edge from a A/D perspective.
BUT I donât have an amp, I am , with the exception of a couple of BT speakers, 100% headphone. I originally used a CXN > AV amp then headphone socket until I went speaker free.
I then had an RPi/ Roon > Audiolab M-DAC as the headphone source
So an all in one box was an obvious move for me. My CXN (V1) has been unused for quite a time 6-7 years) ,as it is not Roon Ready
But jokes aside. My impression of the CX series is that they were designed to be used in a hifi stack connected to an amplifier. Or active speakers connected to the RCA output.
I agree. Early last year I was trying to decide between the CXN V2 and the Arcam ST60. Neither one provided a headphone connection of any kind but that did not matter to me since it was going to go into a AV equipment stand anyway and was located more than 3m from my listening position anyway.
Had I been looking to set up a headphone station (which I did later in the year) neither would have been on my shortlist.
I eventually went with the Arcam because I found one on offer (and I have a soft spot for Arcam - I still have my original Arcam Alpha amplifier which was my first amp purchase in 1987) - but, for me at least, I donât think that there was much to choose between them.
Pretty much all set up, just a few bibs and bobs still to do. Really impressed with the unit, nice and light and easy to set up. Not really a big believer in burn in but will give it a few days to 'warm up" before commenting on sound quality. Early impressions are really good, nice firm bass and midrange and treble hit the spot.
Only issue so far is cannot get radio stations to play, or save to preset, and local music wonât play either. Errors are âfailed to add to queueâ for local music, and "failed to save preset "for radio. When I selected âplay nowâ for radio station it just did nothing, no error displayed. Done a search online and one fix suggested was that the Stream Magic had got out of sync with router and to recycle player and router, that did not work though.
Any ideas?
I notice that the Cambridge blurb claims "Firstly, the internals have been completely redesigned and now include the StreamMagic Gen4 module with âMQA compatibility.â. Does that mean Gen 3 could not service MQA? I thought MQA was pretty much universally disliked anyway and in fact didnât the company cease trading and go bankrupt? Also Tidal have pretty much phased it out, or are in the process of doing it.
Canât say MQA was anything I ever got interested in so no big miss for me if indeed it is being consigned to the hifi bin.
My guess is that CA had the development of this going long before MQAâs demise became public. CA might have had parts, software, fimrware, whatever already in the pipeline and it would be a set back to redesign the system again to remove MQA.
Again, a guess on my part.
I really donât want that MQA garbage in my DACâs. But the DACMagic 200M has it, and I have one. It burns me up a little knowing part of the price I paid was licensing for MQA. If there was a non-MQA model available, I would have bought that.
I donât think MQA is going away for good. Yes, there maybe services that are moving away from MQA, but long term I think it will stick around as they continue to innovate, like the SCL6. Additionally I think services and labels will come back to supporting it. Imo we might even see it become open after Lenbrookâs acquisition of MQA and in comments from CEO of Lenbrook Gordon Simmonds, âWe view this acquisition as an opportunity to ensure the technologies developed by the scientists and engineers at MQA continue to serve the industryâs interests rather than be confined to any single brand or company.â -Forbes sept 23â. Reading between the lines here but that suggest open source imo. So lets see what happens.
As for it going open-source, I have my doubts. That would then confirm beyond any doubt that it is a lossy format.
As for DAC and DAC/streamers, I know it would probably be more costly to produce, but I would like to see non-MQA models available at reduced prices, meaning no licensing fees added in.
