They may do… I haven’t asked, but I’ll have a good look when it comes back (haven’t sent off it yet, though BTW - awaiting instructions)
2 Likes
What is currently shown on the Innuos website is the new Next Gen spec, as I said AFAIA the original Statement didn’t have Ethernet isolation/re clocking similar to what the Phoenix Net provides.
It did have the USB isolation/re clocker.
No it always had ethernet reclocking. Take a look at the old Hi-Fi Plus review <-link published March 2019, for example, which states:
“Four rails are for the motherboard, with one each for the SSD storage, Ethernet clock, USB clock, and for the USB 5V.”
and
“This features one of two OCXO clocks (the other is for the Ethernet), both of which have their own dedicated supplies and claim 3ppb accuracy. This element was designed to improve the quality of signals streamed from both the server and the world beyond.”
1 Like
Looks like you’re correct then.
What I got when I recently tried the Phoenix Net with my Statement was a fuller sound (as apposed to thin) and PRAT for the first time in my Naim system which I really enjoyed.
But it looks like if the Statement already has the Ethernet isolation and re clocker then maybe I shouldn’t of been using or shouldn’t of needed the Phoenix Net.
I’ve sent an email to Innuos so hopefully they can clear up if it’s recommended to use a Phoenix Net with the Statement and also what the new Next Gen will bring to the table.
1 Like
Do you think the new offerings from Innuos will have any/much effect on second hand prices for the Zenith SE?
Yes it was. They work well together. I wrote about it at length in this thread here (<- link) which will be more accurate about what I found than any memory I may now have.
So I have both and will be interested to hear what Innuos tell you.
1 Like
I doubt it, since there was already such a big price difference between it and the Statement, with the Next Gen PS adding quite considerably again.
1 Like
I’ve been using the Statement together with Phoenix Net since the PN first released and I was initially able to try a well run-in pre-production prototype prior to obtaining my own unit
So lets straighten out a few things
- PhoenixNET is basically the Statement ethernet input and output cards which are clocked with a 3ppb accuracy OCXO oscillator. In the PN, this comes with its own 2 rail Sean Jacobs LPS powering the ethernet clocks and switching chip.
- Like other hi-fi components, an audio network works on the principal of better data stream (less noise and jitter) in —> better signal out, so cleaning the ethernet data stream with a PN prior to the Statement’s input is highly beneficial and contributes to a large increase in SQ.
- The Statement Next-Gen upgrade has nothing really to do with PhoenixNET or the Statement’s corresponding ethernet circuitry, other than providing it with superior power.
Next-Gen is based on work done by Sean Jacobs plus Innuos’s own R&D. Essentially you get 2 ARC6 AC/DC modules with active rectification, a large 10mH choke and nearly 4 times the Mundorf capacitance of the original Statement. The new regulators are based on Sean’s DC4 design with a 15A power booster for the CPU! The new components are mounted on a Panzerholz + frequency optimised gel layer for improved vibration control. In total the new supply has lower impedance and increased dynamic response to meet demands for instantaneous DC.
Adding a PN to a Next Gen equipped Statement should bring even greater rewards than adding a PN to a standard Statement. In terms of networking, my experience has been that the better the network gets, the bigger the effect and positive impact of upgrades…
4 Likes
Indeed. Everything you wrote in 3 with my added comment that superior power is not be sniffed at 
Plus, there’s also - as part of all that but not in your list:
“All rails are further smoothed by new Audio Note KAISEI capacitors benefitting all the main components: Motherboard, USB Reclocker, Ethernet Clock module and SSD.”
2 Likes
Message reply from Innuos.
"Apologies for the late reply, i was away last week for Munich High End and returned last night.
That’s right, whilst the the STATEMENT basically has all the PhoenixUSB technology built in, the PhoenixNET is actually an evolution beyond the Ethernet stage of the STATEMENT. The key differences would be as follows;
-
Isolation Transformers; a pair of these are found on the STATEMENT RJ45 ports, but the PhoenixNET uses much larger ones for better noise isolation.
-
Dedicated Clock; the STATEMENT shares its clock, whereas the PhoenixNET gets the benefit of the 3ppb OCXO being completely devoted, and is mounted straight to the mainboard for maximum accuracy.
-
Shared board vs bespoke PCB; the PhoenixNET uses a very high quality PCB board carrying the ports which we build ourselves specifically for this purpose, whereas the STATEMENT port is seated on the main overall motherboard.
-
Gigabit vs 100mb; Curiously a slower passthrough speed is actually better for audio which is why the PhoenixNET is specced at 100mb, whereas the STATEMENT Ethernet is Gigabit which, while faster, is a little noisier.
-
Socket gauge; the PhoenixNET uses very heavy duty RJ45 sockets with no disruptive LEDs at all, whilst the STATEMENT port is slightly more typical and does have LED indicators.
For all these reasons, the PhoenixNET does still represent a very decent upgrade to existing STATEMENTs, especially if frequently using streaming services or if you have another streamer in your system such as Linn or Naim etc.
Please do let us know if you require any further assistance."
5 Likes
Many thanks for posting that. Of course the question we’re all asking ourselves is how the Statement with the Next Generation power supply upgrades compares to the PhoenixNet where Ethernet reclocking is concerned.
I guess my original statement “AFAIA the original Statement didn’t have Ethernet isolation/re clocking similar to what the Phoenix Net provides.” is therefore correct.
I guess that Innuos, in the response to @Yorkshireman , would write, if it was the case, that the improved ps in the Statement has a consequence of making the PhoenixNet redundant. I feel that the PhoenixNet is still giving better results than the Ethernet ports inside the improved Statement.
1 Like
Quite possibly, assuming the ports aren’t changed.
But of course the difference is about power supply as much as ports and the Next Gen PS is a very big step up on the original in that and also several ancillary aspects, including vibration isolation of the circuit boards etc.
It’s worth noting that the reply is very clearly limited to existing not Next Gen Statements:
None of which means that adding the PN might not stil make a big difference - possibly a bigger difference than previously as Blackmorec has suggested above:
In the Innuos response to Yorkshireman, there are 5 points.
I understood, if I have not misunderstood, that the points 2 to 5 included will still differentiate the PhoenixNet vs Statement 1 and 2. Only the first point, relative to isolation transformers, may change and close the gaps.
But power supply is not all.
1 Like
I think you’re right there, but the only things that really couldn’t change are I suspect 2 and 3, though 2 is new to me and not what I was told in the past, nor what is stated on the website: " Custom-designed Ethernet and USB Reclockers with 3bpp OCXO clocks" - note the plural.
I suppose it comes down to how much of a statement they want the new Next Gen Statement to be, incorporating what they learnt from the original Statement and then built in to the PhoenixNet. Some of it will of course also depend on how much the SQ also benefits from doubling up the clocks, with the PN having its own in a dedicated and separate box.
Hopefully I will be able to let my ears decide soon enough, but it will be interesting to know what Innuos were aiming for and have found.
1 Like
You will be the only one here to be able to tell us, the difference between PhoenixNet and Statement 2 switch port, as you have them both and will upgrade the Statement.
Maybe Blackmorec too.
1 Like
Reply from Innuos to your question bellow:
Question.
“How does the Statement with the Next Generation power supply upgrades compare to the Phoenix Net where Ethernet re clocking is concerned.”
Answer:
“As i say, the Ethernet re-clocking in the STATEMENT will get a lift along with everything else internally from the new power architecture, but the Next-Gen upgrade is much more broad in its scope as it not especially targeted at the Ethernet exclusively. The PhoenixNET is still a much more optimised and purpose-built machine in the context of Ethernet, so if this particular aspect is your primary concern then the PhoenixNET would be the much better choice and consideration.”
2 Likes
I have also asked Innuos about that and got the following response:
“ … a streaming-heavy system would still greatly benefit from a PhoenixNET in addition to either version of STATEMENT.”
4 Likes
Thanks to you both for doing the legwork there…ò.
2 Likes