Cambridge EXN100 streaming D/A processor

The marriage of little streaming computers to DACs was at first a shotgun thing, a way to add Swiss Army knife capabilities at a price point. That was back when it was cutting-edge to have a NAS server full of digital files on the home network, and when commercial streaming was new, primitive, and lossy. Remember Pandora? Cool idea, but who wants to sit through ads and not be able to skip over more than a handful of disliked tunes every hour. Then Spotify came along. Then Apple and Amazon jumped in, and that's all she wrote. Eventually, streaming even got around to us audiophiles who desired lossless audio of at least CD resolution. Viva Qobuz!

Since streaming became the main mass medium for listening to music, a device that's just a DAC without an attached streamer seems uninteresting, and a poor value (footnote 1), unless the streamer is a little USB gadget to drive headphones from a phone or computer.

Many hi-fi manufacturers seem to agree, since nowadays the market is flooded with streaming DACs of many sizes and shapes, and prices ranging from a couple hundred to tens of thousands of dollars. A sweet spot for build quality, features, and superb sound seems to be between $1500 and $2500. Scan the past two years of Stereophile, and you will find many streamer-DACs and streamer-DAC-amplifiers in this price range. In this segment of the market, competition is fierce.

From England, a new contender
The EXN100 is Cambridge Audio's state-of-the-art streaming DAC. It's half of the new EX line; the other half is the EXA100 integrated amplifier.

These components are positioned above Cambridge's midline CX series and below the "reference-level" Edge series (footnote 2). Priced a buck less than $1800, the EXN100 includes the latest iteration of Cambridge's StreamMagic platform (4th generation), an internal computer that plucks music from various streaming services or a home network and feeds the bits and bytes to the DAC, in this case one that's based on the well-regarded ESS ES9028Q2M (footnote 3). The main control interface is Cambridge's user-friendly StreamMagic app, which is available for iOS and Google devices. The EXN100 is certified Roon Ready.

Beyond the full-function streamer, the EXN100 is a DAC with multiple and varied inputs: coaxial S/PDIF on RCA, optical TosLink, HDMI-eARC for TV sound, USB connection to a computer, a USB socket for a flash drive, and wireless antennas for Bluetooth, Apple AirPlay, and Google Cast.

Internet and local network connectivity is provided by an Ethernet port and/or Wi-Fi. Two digital outputs, RCA S/PDIF and TosLink, mean the EXN1000 can be used as a pure streamer with a separate DAC. Users can choose either the balanced (on XLR) or unbalanced (on RCA) analog outputs.

To the right of the large 1280×569–pixel TFT color display screen is a volume control knob—so the EXN100 can function as a standalone preamp in an all-digital system. The StreamMagic app, and the device's on-screen menu tree, include a setting to turn "preamp mode" on or off; set to off, the volume knob doesn't work, and the outputs are at standard line level: 4V max from the balanced outputs, 2V max single-ended.

The EXN100 was designed in England by Cambridge's crack engineering staff and manufactured in China.

Getting it going
I still have the Cambridge MXN10 streamer-DAC I reviewed last year; the StreamMagic app was still installed on my devices. I started out by setting up the EXN100 in my Wi-Fi network: I plugged it in and turned it on. The app was able to locate it by Bluetooth, pair with it, and sign it onto the Wi-Fi network. Then the EXN100 automatically undertook a firmware update, which took several minutes to complete. Then it restarted, and the app took a while to locate it in the Wi-Fi network again, and then all was good. I streamed various albums and tunes from my local network's NAS server (a Synology DS213i, running MinimServer), and from Qobuz, which can be accessed directly from the StreamMagic app.

This first dance with the EXN100 was with my office system: McIntosh MA6500 integrated amplifier driving Amphion One18 speakers. I connected to the amp from the RCA unbalanced output.

Right away, I was impressed with the EXN100's sound. It is quick, precise, and complete, like the MXN10 but even more so. It seemed like I got even closer to hearing everything there was to hear, with my head about 4' away from the small but mighty Amphion speakers, which are located above and behind my computer monitor on Auralex foam wedges that angle them down toward my face.

The multiple voices with Natalie Merchant on her song "The Peppery Man" (from Leave Your Sleep, HD Qobuz stream) were around and behind her, an excellent 3D illusion that served to keep each voice distinct. A very different example was "George's Dilemma" from Clifford Brown and Max Roach's Study in Brown (streamed from a needle drop I made of the Mosaic LP reissue). This old (1955) recording, made at Capitol Studios in New York City, is a great example of a 3D-sounding mono mix. Each musician's sound was distinct. I heard each individual note even when the group played together. Each soloist seemed to pop out to the front, between the two speakers (of course), their life force emerging over decades, grooves, and digital bits. All this came through fine with the killer-value–priced MXN10, but with the EXN100, it was cinematic, with a bit more flesh-and-blood humanity to the voices and punch and drive to the instruments.

What's not cinematic is the EXN100's screen, though it is fairly generous. Using the Info ("i") button at the screen's top right, I could change the display to a digital clock or animated "VU meters" (which look cool but don't react like real analog meters, at least not like the professional kind I'm used to), or track and album metadata, with a nice, full-color image of album artwork. From a couple of feet away, I could read the metadata and take in some artwork details, but the screen is too small to be of much use from across a room. That's okay because all the same info is displayed in the StreamMagic app or Roon (often, with the latter, with additional metadata and context information).

The front panel of the EXN100 is attractive. Far left is the power On/Off button. Far right is the volume control. To the left of the display screen are transport-control buttons (skip forward, skip reverse, play/pause). To the right of the screen, under the Info button, are scroll-up and scroll-down buttons. The info button also toggles to device settings, all of which can also be accessed in the StreamMagic app.


Footnote 1: It could be argued that at a time when a quality DAC is durable yet streaming technology is still evolving, it makes sense to separate those functions. It could be counterargued that firmware updates can accomplish a lot, that streaming tech isn't changing very fast and that having the streamer and DAC close together makes sense.—Jim Austin

Footnote 2: The EXN100 is the company's state-of-the-art streamer-DAC because, while the Edge series includes the Edge NQ, which Cambridge calls a preamplifier with network player, there is no Edge streamer-DAC. See Mark Henninger's Industry Update item about Cambridge's EX line in the February 2025 issue of Stereophile.

Footnote 3: See tinyurl.com/subvwekc.

COMPANY INFO
Cambridge Audio USA
1913 N. Milwaukee Ave.
Chicago
IL 60647
(877) 357-8204
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
cognoscente's picture

"Streaming is the future."

Giving up the right of ownership of the right of use is not my future. After all, ownership is influence and has economic value. Streaming is like leasing and renting, the ownership is in the hands of a few, I do not want to be dependent on them. You?.This in addition to the quality aspect of streaming. A streamed music file is of less quality than a purchased and downloaded music file. Relatively cheap availability of music files comes with a price, namely the quality. Simply look at the MBs of a streamed music file and a purchased and downloaded file. What do you find more important? Quantity or quality? I prefer to drink a bottle of wine of 100 dollar/euro every now and then than regularly one of 10 dollar/euro. (Not to mention the health aspect of alcohol.) And you?

hb72's picture

the streamed HiRes music data is the same as the one from ssd. SQ is almost the same, if not exactly. The advantage of streaming is the accessibility: it is your infinite record shop with an unlimited number of records to borrow (for free, except for a monthly fee), all accessible with a remote control on your ipad or phone. Your available time being the only limiting factor (mostly). No competition there.

deckeda's picture

Some listeners decided to become collectors when they learned favorite titles got changed, and the only version available is the new version. Labels are re-mixing and re-mastering to re-sell music as new.

Labels have a simple formula: If it's a digital release, it typically gets squashed dynamically and no they do not care about the hi res version. In their mind, digital playback = cheap earbuds end of story. Qobuz and Tidal nor anyone else cannot fix that scenario.

It's renting Star Wars and only seeing George Lucas' re-write of Greedo shooting first. It's one person's preference against a collective that understands the art better than the people who originally made it. Think I'm wrong? Then why do some remixes and remasters often sound worse? People want shared memories, not constant churn.

Control is ceded, and it feels like a bit of a cheat.

hb72's picture

I get this part, and I too do not like it, but it started to be an issue with LP reissues (1980s), it was an issue with CDs of original analog tapes, that were poorly digitized and mastered, and now some vinyl issues seem to sound different than highres digital issues. But, to my knowledge, the latter affects only one style of music and then not entirely, ie modern mainstream Pop/Rock etc. To my knowledge not an issue with classical (and earlier or later than that), jazz or all sorts of crossovers. For some, streaming still remains that giant library…

hb72's picture

1. "Spotify's lossiness, the hollowed-out and processed sound quality..." - ok, I do not own a real reference system, and as long as my pro-ject / volumio streamer could connect to Spotify I found it definitely not as good as Qobuz (especially with more recent hi-res recordings), but I'd call it a bit less colourful, and yes a bit more sandy (as in noisy, w/o actually being noisy), more vague in musical expression & spatial resolution, but not a pain. Are you sure you got the full (yes..) 320kB/s? My notion was a great track remains a great track on Spotify, and on Qobuz it is more of an event I am glad to experience (in the best case).

2. Measurements! wow! Not bad for a budget-friendly device!

cheers
H

bhkat's picture

I always download or have physical media whenever possible. In the future I envision a time when enough people will get offended by a movie like Blazing Saddles and they might force the owners to stop it from being available for streaming. Or someone like Neil Young deciding to take his music off of spotify before realizing how irrelevant he became and had to come back with his tail firmly tucked between his legs.

deckeda's picture

Young essentially said in March '24 he values what Spotify means to his business, but that's a "loss" in your view? Wow.

Tell us you disagreed with his reason for leaving without telling us you disagree with why he did that.

I suspect Neil will be OK. I now have a proper copy of Sail Away and Pocahontas with his Oceanside/Countryside LP, all analog, regardless of whatever he does or does not stream.

bhkat's picture

He left in a huff and pulled his music because of what he thought was misinformation on the Wuhan flu on the Joe Rogan podcast. What he actually wanted was to have spotify fire Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan is much more important to Spotify than Neil Young which is why he came back. Whatever reasoning he stated for coming back he's just trying to save 'face'.

deckeda's picture

"I still haven't heard every track."

Yep, that's some magic all right!

Don't get me wrong, if I was a reviewer or wanted the convenience, I'd subscribe in a heartbeat. Very useful for comparisons to other media and yeah, some discovery. Streaming is essentially free music, and the royalties paid to artists reflects that. Especially on Spotify, which today can objectively be argued only exists to exploit. I'm not interested.

I have a modest collection of physical media I will likely never have time to listen to. More becomes meaningless at some point. Granted, I keep buying new music, "making the situation worse" objectively, but since when was collecting EVER rational?

I will preview on Bandcamp for titles available there, or YouTube for most everything else. If I don't care to invest, I have not. If I care to spend, an LP arrives and now I have a better version of what I first heard PLUS all the inherent advantages of proper metadata.

I highly recommend Radio Paradise if willing to accept its limited to rock and pop music (they also do "world.") It's more like Pandora, but curated -- no algorithm bullshit. You'll hear a mix of chestnuts, deeper cuts, newer songs. So no, it's not "listening with intention" in the way that the little tea ceremony of an LP or CD is, but it does represent a pathway for discovery. And the lossless stream sounds very good.

Chazz7's picture

If you have hard drive storage in your computer or a NAS, you don't need to buy a streamer box. There is plenty of low-cost software to run in your computer and on your tablet, with which you manage access to your music files, your Qobuz or other subscription, and your URLs for Internet radio stations. For local wi-fi, you will need an inexpensive box to receive the streamed data and hand it off to your standalone DAC.

X