Cambridge Audio MXN10 & AXN10 Streamers Reviewed

I’ve had a lot of readers urging me to cover more big-brand products here and I am trying my best. Unfortunately getting the PR agencies representing some of those brands onboard has become such a challenge that there have been times I’ve considered giving up the blog altogether, or taking it in a different direction. But there’s a great need for honest, unbiased reviews in this industry. I firmly believe that hi-fi should be accessible to everyone and that you shouldn’t have to wade through marketing hyperbole, disingenuous advertising, BS audiophile pseudoscience and brand snobbery when you’re trying to make a purchasing decision. So I aim to continue to bring you these reviews, and sincerely thank the readers who reach out to me on a daily basis with feedback (good and bad) and kind words on my work.

In particular I’ve had many requests to check out more Cambridge kit. Cambridge recently announced two new additions to their lineup, the AXN10 and MXN10, the primary difference between them being the size of their enclosure. The half-width MXN10 was so appealing to me that I bought one with my own hard-earned cash. Let’s check it out together.

Cambridge Audio’s stream magic platform has long been a favourite of mine in the hi-fi streaming arena. They have the best app, and generally all the features you could need, besides fully featured multi-room functionality and niceties like CD ripping, USB audio output and SSH console access. I’ve had a CXN V2 in my system for some time and it’s never let me down, effortlessly handling my simple streaming needs. It’s primarily used to stream internet radio, from Apple devices via AirPlay, and from a Sinology NAS over the local network.

Overall Front

My approach to system building is led by measurements and scientific data. If it measures well, it should sound good. My ultimate goal has been a system that gives me an accurate representation of the source material, not the coloured palette that most audiophiles actually favour and view as ‘neutral’, when it is in fact anything but. The best objective performance money can buy tends to come in smaller packages. Think of the current Hypex Nilai amps, for example, phono stages from Michael Fidler’s Classic Audio or DACs and preamplifiers from Topping.

They’re all half-size, and as a consequence my system comprises stacks of half-sized boxes. There are only a few full-sized hi-fi boxes left. I still have a Cambridge CXC CD transport, and a Cambridge 651T DAB / FM / AM tuner, which in my opinion is one of the finest tuners ever made. I was intrigued by the half-size form factor of the new MXN10, suggesting that perhaps there is more half-size Cambridge kit to come. A slimmed-down CXC, hopefully.

While the MXN10 cuts the box size in half, it remains fully loaded in terms of features. Besides the physical dimensions, the AXN10 and MXN10 are identical, so this review applies to both. The extra £100 buys you a bigger chassis to fit neatly along-side traditional hi-fi. I’m sure at least 1 reviewer will claim the extra air in the box has mysterious, wondrous sound quality benefits, but here in the real world the extra dimensions are aesthetic only.

You get optical and coaxial digital outputs, capable of 24/96 and 24/192 PCM resolutions respectively. The DAC is an ESS Sabre ES9033Q, capable of 32-bit, 768kHz PCM and DSD512. The DAC in the CXN is archaic in comparison. The WM8742 proceeded the sale of Wolfson Microelectronics to Cirrus Logic, and maxed out t 24-bit, 192kHz PCM. The CXN does support DSD64 at least, though I’m not sure if it’s using the native DSD support int eh DAC or a PCM conversion.

Both new models have a single-ended output only, but it’s a good one. Signal to noise ratio is better than 110dB (20Hz – 20kHz), distortion is 0.001dB from 20Hz to 20kHz reference a 0dB output, and frequency response is 20Hz to 70kHz, with a maximum 1dB rolloff at the upper extreme. Essentially ruler flat performance within the audioband, and the bandwidth is not filtered so actual frequency response is better, albeit with a more significant rolloff at both extremes. Either way, you can’t hear it.

Rear View

RCA output impedance is 500Ω at the industry standard 2V RMS (±10%), and unlike the CXN there is no digital preamp mode so the AXN10 and MNX10 must be used with an amplifier that has its own volume control. This makes sense as there is neither a physical dial nor a display on either streamer, and neither have a remote handset either. They are controlled exclusively via the Stream Magic app, with a row of buttons on the fascias programmable to favourite presets for quick, easy access.

I’m sure many are asking whether the CXN is still worth the extra outlay. The digital to analogue conversion hardware in the AXN10 and MXN10 is undoubtedly superior bar the omission of a balanced output. The CXN gives you a display, physical transport controls and a remote, but none are dealbreakers given that the Stream Magic app is how most people will control the streamer. The CXN has a front USB port for connecting storage devices which, sadly, the AXN10 and MXN10 do not. And of course, the CXN can operate as a preamplifier, with a couple of extra digital inputs and a volume control to feed a power amp directly.

The choice ultimately comes down to your needs. If the display, transport controls, remote, preamp functionality and a balanced output are important to you, the CXN ticks those boxes. If you want current DAC hardware and the ability to stream the highest resolution PCM and DSD audio files, and pass through MQA content to an external DAC, the AXN10 or MXN10 are the current options to choose from. Hopefully a CXN upgrade in the not-too-distant future with updated digital hardware. But I dare say most won’t find the features of the AXN10 and MXN10 lacking.

The 4th generation Stream Magic module is based around a 64-bit, Quad core ARM Cortex-A53 CPU clocked at 1.8GHz. It has most streaming bases covered from Spotify to Deezer and Tidal (native or Connect), AirPlay2 to Amazon Music and Qobuz, internet radio, Chromecast and Roon. There’s UPNP and DLNA playback too and you can hook up a USB drive formatted as FAT32, NTFS, ext3, ext4 or ExFAT and play digital music files directly. Format support is extensive with ALAC, WAV, FLAC, AIFF, DSD (up to DSD512), WMA, MP3, AAC, HE AAC, AAC+, OGG Vorbis, HLS/DASH, and playlists in .m3u or .pls all covered.

Neither contain an MQA decoder, but they will pass through MQA content to an external DAC via the digital outputs. The matching DACMagic 200M is MQA compatible. This isn’t a dealbreaker, as in this author’s opinion (backed up by fact) MQA is yet another audio industry profiteering exercise with no real-world or scientific benefit.

Apple Music subscribers can stream via AirPlay or Bluetooth, though AirPlay is preferable as it supports 16-bit, 44.1kHz lossless streaming. You can’t stream high-resolution 24-bit, 192kHz content from Apple Music to the AXN10 or MXN10. The lack of native Apple Music support is a shame, but Apple making native integration difficult for manufacturers is nothing new. I wonder if something could be achieved using the StreamMagic app and the MusicKit API, or whether further liaising with Apple might bear fruit as proper Apple Music integration in the Stream Magic app would certainly be in the interest of Apple Music subscribers. Further proof that owning the music you play is better all around.

Networking is either wired or wifi. I was surprised, and a little disappointed to note that the wired networking is not gigabit (1000 base-T) capable, which would be more robust streaming high-res files over the network. I wasn’t even aware anyone still made a 100 base-T controller. Wifi is supported on both the 2.4gHz and 5gHz bands with WPA2 and WPA2PSK encryption. There’s no mention of WPA3, so I’m not sure how the AXN10 and MXN10 would cope with the latest generation of Wi-Fi 6E routers and WPA3 security. For most users both are probably a long way off becoming standard and I’m sure the lack of WPA3 support can be addressed in software.

Bluetooth is onboard, version 5.0 A2DP/AVRCP, supporting SBC and AAC. Sadly there is no AptX or AptX HD support which is a shame, you have to shell out for the Cambridge DACMagic 200M for AptX. The Bluetooth implementation is as a receiver only, you cannot transmit to Bluetooth headphones or speakers from the AXN10 or MXN10.

Angle View Rear

There are some gaps in the software that are filled by competing products. The ability to connect up a CD drive, for example, and rip, encode and tag discs to a USB storage medium or a network volume would be a very welcome addition. Likewise a facility to connect an IR blaster and remotely control other components through the Stream Magic app. The most obvious omission however is the lack of USB output support. Connecting an external DAC via USB seems a logical way to turn the smaller MXN10 especially into a streaming bridge, capable of streaming high-res content all the way up to PCM768 and DSD512 (or even DSD1024) to a DAC of your choice.

This could easily be added in software and is a suggestion I hope Cambridge take onboard. Likewise CD ripping is simple with existing open-source packages that need only be wrapped in an interface. I’d do it myself if Cambridge allowed SSH access for developers and admins who want to squeeze a bit more functionality from what is, in effect, a small computer running a customised Unix operating system.

I’d also like to see more configuration options for the front preset buttons. The ability to turn them into transport buttons, for example, to quickly skip a track from the front of the streamer, or the ability to switch sources. There’s a lot of potential here, as yet unexploited.

The MXN10 is identical in size to the DACMagic 200M at 215 mm wide, 25 mm high and 191 mm deep, excluding the terminals and antennas. It is constructed of a two-part chassis with the same floating design that Cambridge have adopted across most of their product range. It comes finished only in ‘Lunar Grey’, which (I’m told) blends reasonably well with typical black and silver components as it is a darker colour.

The enclosure could benefit from some damping inside the top panel which rings when tapped, but otherwise it’s it’s nicely put together. The switching power supply is self-contained with a figure of eight power connection on the rear panel. Regional cables are included in the box, as are the two antennas for wifi and Bluetooth and basic quick start documentation.

Setup is a doddle. I connected via Ethernet, but wifi setup is easily achieved by following the instructions in the Stream Magic app. The streamer will apply any outstanding firmware updates during the setup process, with the option to enable ‘early updates’ to receive beta firmware if you like. I always enable this as you get early access to new features and I’ve never encountered any instability as a result, though users who aren’t technically confident may wish to leave this disabled and stick to the fully tested release firmware.

You can change the device name, AirPlay name, power down timer (default 20 minutes) and the standby mode. In eco mode the streamer can only be woken by the front standby button. Network standby allows you to wake the streamer via the Stream Magic app, though with higher standby power usage as the network circuits are always active. The Roon Ready DSD mode for the digital outputs is configurable for DoP or PCM. I don’t use Roon and haven’t tested the integration. Settings are accessible via the Stream Magic app or from a browser. There are no playback or source controls available from the browser interface which would be good to see, or perhaps even a simple API to facilitate automation over the network.

It occurred to me that I’ve yet to cover the Stream Magic app UI, so here’s a basic rundown. The Home Screen gives you access to recent stations, sources and presets, your available stream magic devices and their settings.


The source list is configurable so you can hide services you don’t use. There are 99 preset slots available, 4 of which can be accessed via the front panel.


The radio tab gives you access to well over 20,000 global internet radio stations. It’s an extraordinary amount of choice with categorised ‘local’ stations by region, and a handy search function to narrow down your selections.


You can find everything here from sports to news, local stations, worldwide BB stations and stations exclusively broadcasting tracks from popular artists. There’s more content available here than any radio fan could consume in a lifetime.

Searching for Phonic FM, a local community station.

The music library tab gives you a list of your connected USB devices, along with network servers and the native Tidal, Deezer and Qobuz integration.


UPNP / DLNA network servers appear here, with the option to browse by folder or metadata, with a persistent search function available on almost every screen that, despite the lack of indexing, is fast, efficient and accurate, even scanning a NAS loaded with hundreds of thousands of tracks.


The ‘now playing’ screen shows the current track, time and bitrate, with transport controls too. There’s a volume control here for compatible devices, which in the case of the NP30, Stream Magic, CXN, 851N and Edge NQ will control a compatible amplifier over the control bus.


The queue function can be edited on the fly to create a playlist of content from any library source. You can manually edit the track list or clear the queue, or use the shuffle button to play the queue randomly. 


Lastly we have the player settings, which essentially replicates the webpage you access by typing the ip address of your player into a browser. There are a small handful of app settings too including dark mode, language switching and a facility to send app feedback to Cambridge directly.


The app is excellent. There are a couple of general bugs here and there, and a few accessibility bugs that need to be ironed out, but it’s a solid, dependable app. With the exception, perhaps, of Yamaha’s MusicCast, and Arylic’s 4Stream as a noteworthy runner up, it’s the best streamer control app in the industry by a country mile.

How does the MXN10 sound? In a word, neutral. It’s an honest, accurate representation of the source, with nothing added and nothing taken away. The CXN had a slight top end lift and perhaps a bump int eh upper mids too which gave it an air of excitement. It was a jubilant performance that in partnership with a companion CX-series amp was an exciting, ballsy performance. The MXN10 and AXA10 take a leaf from the tree that grew the AX-series CD players in that their digital to analogue circuitry is sophisticated yet simple, and doesn’t appear to have been tuned for any particular character. It’s clean and uncoloured, and simply faithfully represents the source media.

I also tested the MXN10 as a digital streaming bridge, feeding its coaxial output into my Topping D90LE DAC. Naturally in this configuration the MXN10 imparts no sonic signature of its own as any good digital bridge should. I’d like to see the aforementioned USB output facility to maximise the data resolutions I can send to the DAC, but the coaxial output easily handled 24/bit, 192kHz FLAC with no problem and sounded exactly as I would expect.

Angle View Front

The Cambridge MXN10 and AXA10 streamers bring the price of entry into the Stream Magic ecosystem to a more affordable level, but don’t compromise on the most useful features and quality of sound or build. The MXN10 is my pick of the two. A condensed, half-sized Cambridge streamer is a product I’ve wanted to see for a long time. It makes a terrific standalone device, and comes into its own as a streaming transport. If it ever becomes possible to get the highest resolution data out of it via USB into your external DAC, it would be one of, if not the best options for a streaming network bridge out there.

The software is what really makes the Stream Magic devices what they are. It’s the Swiss Army knife of streaming, with most features catered for and a future proof architecture that can remain current for years to come. It has one of the best apps on the market with an interface that blows Volumio and Play-Fi devices out of the water. Rock-solid performance, sonic neutrality and an abundance of features, all in a tiny box. What’s not to love?

By Ashley

I founded Audio Appraisal a few years ago and continue to regularly update it with fresh content. An avid vinyl collector and coffee addict, I can often be found at a workbench tinkering with a faulty electronic device, tweaking a turntable to extract the last bit of detail from those tiny grooves in the plastic stuff, or relaxing in front of the hi-fi with a good album. A musician, occasional producer and sound engineer, other hobbies include software programming, web development, long walks and occasional DIY. Follow @ashleycox2


  1. Thank you for this excellent, in-depth review of both, the streamer(s) and the app. It’s the first one I found which didn’t read like a typical marketing material.
    I was planning to get AXN10 (and your review further strengthened it) but I came across (on Cambridge Audio’s website) the newest replacement for CXN V2, i.e., CXN100 and now I have some second thoughts on whether I should invest more and get that instead.
    Have you had a chance to look into CXN100 and if so would you say it’s worth spending more than double (vs AXN10) to get it?
    I definitely don’t care about having the “latest and greatest” for the sake of just having the “latest and greatest” but if there are significant breakthroughs/improvements then I could consider it.

    1. THank you Rob for the kind words on the review. I hate reviews that read like marketing material, or are obviously advertorial, they do the industry a disservice. Unfortunately I have not had the opportunity to look at the CXN100. I have been trying to work with Cambridge (or their PR agency at least) but haven’t had much success. I’ve had a lot of requests to review one already so I will try again. If you’d like to see my take, feel free to let CA know you’d like to see me cover it. In the meantime, have a look at the review of the WiiM Pro I recently published which may be of interest.

      1. Thank you for your reply. I just sent CA a message encouraging them to work with you on your review of CXN100. Let’s hope it works!

    2. Hi Rob,

      If you dont need Pre-amp, display function, I would stick with MXN10 which I just acquired. It sounds exactly how it is described here. I demoed both MXN10 and CXN 100 at hifi store and couldnt tell much difference. There may have been slight difference but it was hard for me to pick up. Gears used: CXA81 integrated amp, Dynaudio EMIT 10 Speakers on Dynaudio stands, QED XT40 Speaker cable.



      1. Thanks, Bhishan for your comments.
        Yes, a display would’ve been nice but I figured that it wasn’t worth paying more than twice just for that (I know there are more differences but none that I could “substantiate” with regards to my needs) so I ended up getting AXN10 (having the full size factor was a must for me).
        So far I’ve been very pleased with the sound quality. The app could work a little bit better/faster but in my understanding it’s still way better than most competitors. And for the albums where I don’t need the gapless playback, streaming from my phone via Chromecast works surprisingly well (and I could use my regular music app).
        Overall – if the build quality holds, I should be very happy with it.

  2. Hi Ashley, you mentioned Sonos port in one of your responses. I have a Sonos port connected to Arcam AVR 390. I am thinking of buying the Cambridge MXN10. how does the Sonos port (latest model) compare to MXN10. I mostly listen to Spotify. so will MXN10 provide better sound quality than Sonos Port as source ?

  3. Thanks for the review. I have a Bluesound node (i generally use the DAC on my Arcam SA20 rather than the onboard dac, and find the app not great), and would appreciate your thoughts on the comparison with the MXN10). Thank you

  4. How does the DAC in the MXN compare to the Topping? It would also be helpful to compare this DAC streamer to at least one other similarly priced product – the Bluesound Node comes to mind.

    How can you tell if a product is neutral sounding without any baseline and comparison??

    1. I have years of experience listening to, repairing and developing all manner of hi-fi, and have had a background in pro audio for even longer than that. I’ve recorded, mixed and mastered tracks so I understand the concept of making a track that translates well in the real world (I.E outside of the ‘perfect’ studio environment) and by extension that gives me a very good understanding of what is ‘neutral’ and what is ‘coloured’. The MXN10 actually sounds similar in many ways to the Topping. The Topping exposes more top-end detail and has better definition in certain areas, reverb for example. But where current digital hardware is concerned the law of diminishing returns kicks in quite early. The DAC hardware we have now is a lot better than even the best human ear, so any character or colouration is intentional by design.

      1. Finally someone in the review mentions what to me was obvious. The DAC in the CXN devices is like a hundred years old :-). It’s the same one that was in my 2011 Cambridge Blu-ray player! The new X and CSN that finally updates the saber has to be an improvement there… Because although the deck is not everything, it certainly is a big part.

        I have an Oppo 205 that I would use the DAC and I’m just trying to stream Qobuz the best possible way into it and not pay a subscription fee… So I’m debating between something in Cambridge or the musical fidelity MX stream device you’ve also reviewed.

        The only extra I would use other than Q is internet radio. Is the Cambridge stream magic internet radio selection quite a bit better than Musical Fidelity/Volumio selection.

        A dark horse in all this is the Andover Audio Songbird HR that I never see reviewed but looks very promising–including having an analog audio input.

        1. I haven’t heard the Songbird, but it looks like an interesting device. Another one worth considering is the Sonos Port, which has a very mature app with native support for many streaming services. You’re right that the WM8742 DAC is very old, and I do feel the CXN is lagging behind with that chip. But in reality it is fine for 24/192K PCM. It doesn’t measure as well as other devices, but neither does the output stage of a CXN. Personally I wouldn’t buy an MX Stream as I think it is far too expensive for what it is. The Stream magic internet radio selection is better, and the interface is much nicer too. Likewise Sonos which has a brilliant internet radio system. You could also look at devices from Arylic, , some of which have digital outputs, as they too have a fantastic internet radio interface. I believe all of these devices use the Airable service.

  5. Ashley, thanks so much for writing the comparative review I was hoping to find, namely between the MXN10 and CXN V2. I’ve held off buying the latter for some time, partly due to price but also that it had features I didn’t need, principally the screen display. When the MXN10 was announced last month it took me by surprise, and wrong footed my CXN V2 plans. My first thoughts were that there must be a compromise built in to explain the lower price. Your review suggests not, rather that you get everything you need and nothing you don’t. The Sabre DAC alone sells the MXN10 to me. I’ve been a long time coming to this decision, hanging on doggedly to my (still favourite) Sugden/Harbeth system. It will sit well I think with an MXN10, but it heralds the end of the SDT-1 CD player as the sole source of music. I’ll order the MXN10 next month. You’ve helped me make that decision with confidence, so thanks again.

    1. Glad you found the review helpful. I think your summary of the MXN is exactly right. I suppose a lot of people will see it as a cost-cut streamer when really that couldn’t be further from the truth. Streamers aren’t costly devices really, they’re just a single-board computer with a decent onboard DAC in a nice box. The basic hardware of a CXN is quite a few years old now, and its digital conversion hardware goes right back to the original Stream Magic 6 though it’s had a few changes over the years. If anything it’s gotten cheaper to produce, as the original Stream Magic units had expensive toroid-based linear power supplies and retailed for less money, about £700 if memory serves.

      Most of the ‘personality’ and the cost of a streamer is in the software. They could (and probably should) cost a lot less than they do, but the reality of the audio industry is that if a streamer like the MXN was brought out at a lower cost, the press would push it as a budget device and for that reason most wouldn’t take it seriously as a capable unit with high-end performance. What I will say is that I replaced my own CXN with the MXN10. I’ve found nothing it can’t do, it feeds high-res files to my DAC just fine, and the analogue output is all you really need. I’m sure it will work great in your system, let me know how you get on 🙂

      1. I’m going to add a DacMagic 200 to the MXN10. You mention connecting the MXN10 to your own DAC, Ashley, and I’d be interested to know how you connected the two units (I’m planning to use coaxial). I imagine that the MXN10 is daisy chained to the DacMagic 200, which in turn connects to the pre-amp via the RCA in/out. I note that the DacMagic has a volume control. This no doubt controls volume to headphones. Does it have any control over the volume of music played through the main speakers, usually managed through the pre-amp control? I appreciate I’m asking questions beyond the remit of this review but would appreciate your thoughts on this. These changes to my system are challenging my knowledge levels a little!

        1. You’re exactly right, connect the MXN to the DACMagic via coaxial and the DACMagic to your preamp. I’m afraid I don’t have any direct experience of the new DACMagic 200M, but with previous generations of the DACMagic you could disable the volume control on the outputs, and it would become active again if you connected headphones. I can’t see any reason why the volume control can’t be disabled on the 200M, in which case you’d use the volume control of your existing preamp.

          1. Reading further on the DacMagic 200M, connecting ‘phones dedicates the volume control to that task, so the function is exactly as you describe. In making sure that what I buy matches my priorities, I’d like to know a little more on pairing the MXN10 and DacMagic. My top priority is being able to connect headphones. I’d like to understand what additional audio benefits the DacMagic (or any DAC) would bring to the onboard ESS SABRE ES9033Q DACs in the MXN10. The alternative would be a purpose built headphone amp like that offered by NJC Audio, with a passthrough to the pre-amp for output to speakers. This option of course omits the DacMagic MQA processing digital inputs but arguably focuses investment on my chosen priority.

            1. The main difference really is in detail and resolution. Resolution being the definition of things like reverb, and the sense of space reverb gives you in the stereo image. Better DACs give a better representation of this, and hence the impression of better stereo imaging as a whole. Yes, better DACs also give you lower noise – but even with noise at 110dB down, it’s on the threshold of what you can hear. With headphones, you might be able to tell the difference in this area. I can, but I also have a Topping A90D – perhaps the best headphone amp out there at the moment.

              Personally I think it’s splitting hairs, and if you did a blind audition with a pair of good modern DACs that measured well (such as the MXN10 and DACMagic for example) I don’t think most people, if anyone, could reliably tell the difference. Though I’ve used the MXN10 with my Topping DAC, I’ve actually just connected its analogue output to my preamp and use it that way as it sounds fine to me for my needs. My system is transparent and detailed in the extreme and the Topping DAC does give me more detail than the MXN10 does, but the difference isn’t night and day and the comparison isn’t exactly fair as the Topping is running balanced to the preamp.

              The best option for you might be to borrow a DACMagic on demo and try it. I wouldn’t worry about MQA support, there’s plenty of evidence that it’s generally worthless. As for headphone amps, Michael Fidler at Classic Audio has a head amp in the works that will, I’m sure, be an exceptional piece of analogue design. I’m sure he’ll tell you about it if you drop him an eMail.

              1. Thanks Ashley, that’s helped fill the remaining gaps for me. Coincidentally I’m just on a month’s free trial with Tidal. Just on the strength of the linked YT on MQA, I’ll not take up the subscription, choosing instead to remain with Apple Music. I’ll get the MXN first and at my leisure decide which way to go with either a DacMagic or headphone amp. Thanks also for the suggestion, I’ve emailed Michael Fidler.

              2. I took delivery of the MXN10 yesterday afternoon. The setup with StreamMagic was irritating initially. Connected first via Ethernet cable everything worked seamlessly. I then tried to swap to wireless mode with the two antennae connected. This took several attempts to achieve. Even then, getting the MXN10 to connect after standby was very awkward. So much so that I went back to wired connection and everything is fine now. My first thoughts yesterday afternoon were that the margin between the MXN10 and my CD player was more pronounced than I’d hoped. This morning however, and with the setup problems behind me I think my perspective was wrong. Playing the same tracks back to back between the streamer and CD player, I’d say the difference more equates to that between different CD players. I’m happy I bought the MXN10, the benefits simply outweigh any negatives. To underscore this point, I’m very likely to sell the CD player as a consequence. I expect to make some marginal improvements to the streamer with some new interconnects. I’ve decided against the DACMagic, in favour of a dedicated heap amp. The one made by NJC Audio is top of my list. Thanks again for the review and advice, Ashley.

                1. Glad you’re enjoying the MXN but sorry to hear of your network issues. I didn’t encounter any issues with a wireless connection (in fact I run mine on WiFi). If you haven’t already, try typing DeviceName.local (device name is shown in the app) into a browser, and configure your wifi there. There could also be a conflict with another wireless device or with the router. For example, most routers allow you to have a single SSID (network name) shared across the 2.4 and 5gHz radio bands, but not all routers are smart enough to correctly allocate the right band to the right device.

      2. Hi, thank you for the review. I am glad that you showed me that CXN model has no additional value in music quality. However, I am disappointed by: “ Essentially ruler flat performance within the audioband, and the bandwidth is not filtered so actual frequency response is better, albeit with a more significant rolloff at both extremes. Either way, you can’t hear it.”
        This is disappointing because it is very obvious that when the sound is not there, it cannot be heard. Can you please specify which frequencies are lost? Thanks you!
        Kind regards, Kas

        1. Nothing in the audio band (20Hz to 20kHz) is “lost”. There’s a 1dB roll off at 70kHz. You can’t hear 70kHz, no human can. most people over the age of 20 can’t hear accurately past 17kHz. A 1dB rolloff at 70kHz is well beyond 2kHz, and it’s a rolloff not a 1dB cut- so effectively the MXN should have a flat response throughout the bandwidth that actually matters.

Share Your Thoughts

Discover more from Audio Appraisal

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading