Music Server Recommendation

I have been very pleased with the SQ from my Antipodes DX and I will be happy to have mine back from Antipodes today in its new Gen3 form (with the V4X electronics). I am going to set it up this weekend running a short CAT 7 wire from the DX to the latest SOtM ultra triad that will serve as the endpoint (or renderer) then a very short USB from the SOtM tx-USBultra Signal Regenerator into my Pavane Level 3 DAC. That set-up should be sort of like running the CX + EX combo except with the SOtM stuff as the endpoint instead of the EX.  As @astewart8944  says, Antipodes do change the top of the line-up but they keep improving an already very good product line and by offering owners the option of upgrades, they have kept the DX in the mix while improving it, which adds value. The folks at their N America service center have been great to deal with through two upgrades of my DX.

I also want to try Metrum's new Ambre as a ROON endpoint and they now have MQA and I2S modules that are user-installable into my DAC that would allow me to run I2S directly from the Ambre into the Pavane. I will probably eventually pick up an Ambre and the two modules and compare them directly with using the SOtM gear as my endpoint.    

Recently received my Antipodes DX back with Gen 3 upgrade and it sounds great to me.  As previously, it displays none of the electronic haze/glare/thinness I have sometimes heard through other digital sources or players. 

To further enhance things, I am running Roon core through the DX but using the SOtM triad of sMS-200ultra endpoint, tX-USBultra USB reclocker, and sPS-500 power supply to power both.  I use the short Curious Link between the sMS-200ultra and the tX-USBultra, and then my TotalDAC cable from the tX-USBultra to my Pavane Level 3 DAC.   Separating the endpoint does make a difference but the differences are subtle.  I need more time to decide whether the main difference is coming from the separated endpoint, the  tX-USBultra USB reclocker or both - i.e., would using the DX as both core and endpoint plus the tX-USBultra alone provide the same level of improvement?

I have another endpoint on the way, Metrum's Ambre, along with their I2S module that I can self-install in my Pavane Level 3 DAC.  This should be interesting as with that scenario I will have no USB cables, just Ethernet from the DX to the Ambre and then I2S from the Ambre into the Pavane.  I could be happy right now with the DX/SOtM solution but the Ambre/I2S option was too interesting to pass up.

As a sidebar, I am on the last month of a 60-day Roon trial.  I had not previously used Roon and I like how it sounds and the wealth of metadata so I am interested in continuing with it.  My question is whether there is any reason that I shouldn't simply move forward with the Roon lifetime membership?  Is there something even better than Roon on the horizon I should know about, or is Roon likely to be a good bet into the foreseeable future?  Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Things are sounding really good now.  I have two Roon endpoints here to compare against each other when run from my Antipodes DX as the Roon core.

A few weeks ago, I received the SOtM triad (three boxes) consisting of SOtM's sPS-200ultra (Roon endpoint), tx-USBultra (USB reclocker), and sPS-500 (power supply for both).  This week, I received Metrum's Ambre one-box endpoint. 

The thing that interested me in the Ambre is that I own Metrum's Pavane Level 3 DAC (which is the same as their flagship Adagio except without the volume control - I owned and compared both DACs directly and liked the sound of the Pavane through my preamp better than the Adagio).  Metrum sent along their I2S board, which is a drop-in replacement for their USB board.  The Ambre outputs I2S so when using the Ambre I am able to ditch the USB cable altogether.  For the comparison, I am using a USB cable from the  SOtM tx-USBultra to the Pavane and from the Amber I am using I2S into the Pavane.  The DX has a second Ethernet output that I can use to connect as the input with either endpoint. Separating the Roon endpoint from the DX box may be the optimal way to use the DX. Those starting out might want to consider Antipodes' CX as the Roon server then they would have a variety of endpoint options including but not limited to Antipodes' own EX.  

Out of the box, both endpoints sound great so my guess is there will be no losers here.  However, the two endpoints do sound somewhat different from each other.  Both are dynamic as all get out.  The differences are subtle with the SOtM boxes sounding just a touch beefier and maybe thicker while the Metrum has a bit more sparkle on top.  Bass is excellent from both.  I will share more observations after the Ambre breaks in a bit.....since it has only been playing for a couple of hours.

To update my post below, I received my upgraded DX3 back this summer, which can serve as both a Roon core and output - i.e., a one-box solution.  However, as with the EX and CX, the DX3 can also be used for Roon Core only with a separate endpoint connected by Ethernet.
I am currently switching between two endpoints - the SOtM triad (three boxes) described in my post below or Metrum's Ambre one-box endpoint.
I believe either of those (core + separate endpoint) options better the DX3 alone, but not by a huge margin.  Based on my listening, the DX3 with separate endpoint offers a bit more detail and dimensionality.  So far, I seem to like the SOtM triad endpoint just a bit more than the Metrum Ambre, but it is really close and the one-box Metrum being easier to set up and operate.  Sonically, the Metrum seems to have a bit more drive and leans more toward neutral while the SOtM (using the upgraded SOtM sMS-200 ultra Neo) seems to display a little more body and texture.   If I didn't have both, I would have been happy with whichever one I did have.

@audiotroy You want Antipodes pics....go here...
https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/antipodes/
In the end, what really matters is how they sound and how well the interface works for the end user.

No problem @ghasley 
I don't see this as a contest any more than what amplifier somebody likes best.
I looked at the  Innuos Zenith MkIII and also the much more expensive  Innuos Zenith Statement that all the reviewers say is outstanding.  They both seem to be very purpose-built pieces using advanced technologies, as are the Antipodes pieces.
The quality of a playback chain can be limited by the source, DAC, amplification, speakers, room, etc., which makes the "what is best" question sort of a moot point without adding "for my system, needs, and budget."
Based on reviews, user comments, and other information I have seen, I suspect both Antipodes and Innuos pieces are excellent at their price points and possibly well above some of the other competitors. 
What I can say for sure is that my current source of Antipodes DX Gen3 as server via Ethernet into either Metrum Ambre or SOtM triad as endpoint, sounds way better than my dedicated and fully tricked out Mojo Mac mini and also better than the several high-end CD players I was using prior to switching to non-physical media.  For me, the Ambre offers the benefit of going I2S into my Metrum Adagio DAC while the SOtM stuff outputs USB.  I do like non-MQA Roon playing my ripped discs or Tidal, and I am keeping my powder dry on Qobuz until they get a larger (rock/blues/popular) library, and on Amazon until I learn more about the size of the library, ability to play full albums, how many of the selections are actually hi-rez, and (hopefully) integration with Roon.