In the eastern Indian Ocean, south of Java in the vast sea stretching toward Australia, a fishing vessel slightly alters its course while operating near the boundary of its authorized fishing ground. Nothing appears unusual on deck. Nets remain in the water. Engines maintain a steady speed. To the crew, it is an ordinary day at sea.

Yet hundreds of kilometers above, satellites continuously record the vessel’s position. At Indonesia’s Marine and Fisheries Resources Surveillance Station in Cilacap, where I work, a monitoring platform receives the signal and automatically compares it against fishing permits, designated fishing grounds, vessel characteristics, and historical movement patterns. Within minutes, the system identifies a potential violation. Before any patrol vessel leaves port, before any inspector boards a vessel, and before any warning is issued, we have begun enforcement.

This transformation reflects a profound shift in maritime governance. The ocean has historically been opaque to regulators. States could only enforce laws where patrol vessels happened to be present. Today, however, integrated systems combining data from Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS), satellite remote sensing, geospatial analytics, and increasingly sophisticated data-processing tools are making marine activity visible at an unprecedented scale. Global Fishing Watch alone tracks hundreds of thousands of vessels worldwide, generating a near real-time picture of fishing activity across the world’s oceans.

Indonesia has emerged as one of the most ambitious examples of this transition. As the world’s largest archipelagic state, managing more than six million square kilometers of maritime space, Indonesia faces a challenge familiar to many coastal nations: there are never enough patrol vessels. Digital surveillance is a practical necessity that makes my job possible, even as it creates new challenges.

The Law of the Sea Meets Digital Reality

The international legal framework governing the oceans was designed in an era when maritime enforcement depended almost entirely on physical presence. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982, assumes that states exercise authority through patrols, inspections, vessel boardings, and direct observation.

For countries with extensive coastlines and limited enforcement resources, this model has always faced practical constraints. Indonesia’s Fisheries Management Areas (WPP-NRI) span waters ranging from the Indian Ocean to the Pacific and from the Strait of Malacca to the maritime boundaries adjacent to Australia and Papua New Guinea. Monitoring such a vast domain solely through patrol operations is both expensive and operationally impossible.

Beginning in the late 2010s, Indonesia accelerated the integration of satellite-based monitoring into fisheries enforcement. Vessel Monitoring Systems became a cornerstone of this strategy. By early 2026, a total of 9,394 Indonesian fishing vessels were actively transmitting through the national Vessel Monitoring System (VMS), representing an increase of 2,880 vessels during the 2021–2025 period. As part of Indonesia’s broader maritime surveillance architecture, VMS data are complemented by satellite remote sensing and other monitoring tools to help identify suspicious activities involving vessels operating without active transponders or outside the national VMS network.

Indonesian fisheries officials plan fishery patrols using data from tracking devices, satellites, and their understanding of the patterns of illegal fishing.Indonesian Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries

The implications extend far beyond vessel tracking. Continuous digital monitoring enables authorities to reconstruct vessel movements, identify suspicious behavioral patterns, detect unauthorized fishing activity, and verify compliance with licensing conditions. Rather than waiting to discover violations during patrol operations, regulators can increasingly prioritize inspections based on data-derived risk assessments.

Maritime governance is shifting from reactive enforcement toward predictive oversight.

The Surprising Geography of Digital Enforcement

The expansion of surveillance infrastructure has already generated measurable enforcement outcomes.

The Ministry of Marine and Fisheries Affairs Indonesia imposed 2,550 administrative sanctions during 2025, many involving violations detected through the Vessel Monitoring System, including fishing outside authorized fishing grounds and deliberate deactivation of monitoring transmitters.

This statistic is significant because many of these violations would have been extremely difficult to detect under traditional patrol-based enforcement. A vessel that briefly crosses into a prohibited fishing zone may never encounter an enforcement vessel. Likewise, a captain who temporarily disables a transmitter may escape detection if oversight depends solely on physical inspections.

Digital monitoring fundamentally changes this equation. Every vessel movement creates a data trail. Authorities can reconstruct routes, identify anomalous behavior, and compare activities against permit conditions long after the event itself has occurred.

The first quarter of 2026 demonstrates the scale of this surveillance capability. During just three months, Indonesia’s fisheries monitoring system tracked 14,571 fishing vessels, 182 fishing gear units, and 208 registered home ports while identifying 491 suspected violations across the country’s fisheries management areas. These violations included unauthorized fishing grounds, illegal high-seas operations, transshipment-related offenses, port-base discrepancies, licensing irregularities, and indications of poaching.

Such numbers reveal a fundamental transformation. Enforcement is no longer limited by the number of patrol vessels available at sea. Instead, surveillance capacity increasingly depends on the ability to collect, process, and interpret big data.

Illegal Operators Are Learning Too

Yet greater visibility does not eliminate illegal fishing. But it does change how poachers operate.

Indonesia’s expanding digital surveillance network, and a 2023 requirement that even small vessels use VMS when 12 nautical miles offshore, appears to have improved compliance among licensed fishing vessels. However, as enforcement capabilities become more sophisticated, some actors engaged in illegal fishing have also become more adept at exploiting technological and operational gaps.

Deliberately disabling VMS transmitters remains one of the most common enforcement concerns. While temporary signal losses, whether intentional or caused by technical failures—can complicate the reconstruction of vessel movements, they do not necessarily prevent authorities from detecting potentially illegal activity. Indonesia increasingly combines VMS with satellite-based observations, other maritime surveillance systems, intelligence-led analysis, and reports from community-based surveillance groups (Pokmaswas) to corroborate suspicious behavior and direct patrol resources where they are most needed. This layered approach—integrating digital technologies with local knowledge from coastal communities—helps reduce opportunities for illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing even when a single monitoring system is compromised.

A compromised surveillance network could potentially disrupt enforcement operations just as effectively as a vessel evading patrol detection.

As digital surveillance expands, one lesson from Indonesia’s experience is that stronger monitoring does not eliminate illegal fishing—it changes how illegal operators behave. Improved compliance across much of the fishing fleet has been accompanied by increasingly sophisticated attempts by a smaller group of offenders to avoid detection. This reflects a broader reality of technology-enabled enforcement: as monitoring capabilities evolve, so do the strategies used to circumvent them.

The result is a technological arms race. Every improvement in surveillance capability encourages new methods of avoidance, whether through disabling tracking devices, manipulating vessel identities, or exploiting gaps between different monitoring systems. Enforcement agencies must therefore continuously refine their analytical methods, integrate multiple sources of maritime information, and adapt their operational strategies to keep pace with evolving behavior at sea. Effective digital fisheries governance is not defined by a single technology, but by the ability to combine data, human expertise, and operational intelligence into a resilient and adaptive enforcement system.

The Next Battle May Be Over Data Integrity

The future of fisheries enforcement may ultimately depend less on detecting vessels and more on ensuring confidence in the digital systems that generate enforcement decisions.

As surveillance networks become increasingly integrated, questions surrounding cybersecurity, algorithmic accountability, and data integrity become more important. What happens if vessel tracking data are manipulated? How should authorities verify automated risk assessments? What safeguards exist when enforcement actions increasingly originate from algorithmic analysis rather than direct human observation?

These questions are no longer theoretical.

Modern fisheries governance increasingly depends on interconnected networks of satellites, communication systems, databases, cloud infrastructure, and analytical platforms. While these technologies dramatically improve visibility, they also create new vulnerabilities. A compromised surveillance network could potentially disrupt enforcement operations just as effectively as a vessel evading patrol detection.

For Indonesia, this means that investment in digital surveillance must be accompanied by investment in digital resilience. The effectiveness of a monitoring system ultimately depends not only on the volume of data collected but also on the credibility, security, and reliability of the information produced.

Governing Oceans Through Data

Indonesia’s experience illustrates a broader global transformation in maritime governance. The ocean is becoming increasingly transparent to regulators. Activities that once occurred beyond the reach of enforcement agencies can now be observed, analyzed, and investigated through interconnected digital systems.

The benefits are substantial. Expanded VMS adoption, improved monitoring coverage, and thousands of administrative enforcement actions demonstrate that digital surveillance can significantly enhance fisheries governance. Yet the transition also introduces new challenges involving data quality, cybersecurity, algorithmic accountability, and adaptive criminal behavior.

The central question facing maritime regulators is how governments can ensure that increasingly powerful monitoring systems remain transparent, secure, and accountable while preserving public trust and legal legitimacy. The most important lesson may be that digital surveillance does not replace traditional enforcement. It changes where enforcement begins. For generations, maritime law enforcement started when a patrol vessel encountered a suspected violator. Today, it often starts when an algorithm detects a pattern.

That shift may prove as significant for ocean governance as the invention of radar was for maritime navigation.

ai and ml

Extinction Rebellion claims responsibility for chemical-filled balloon attack targeting concrete and steel

In the United States, we usually protest datacenters peacefully – picket signs, council meeting comments, and all that – with mixed results. In the Netherlands, activists throw water balloons filled with an acidic mixture at datacenter foundations, also with questionable effectiveness.

The Dutch arm of international climate activist group Extinction Rebellion claimed responsibility for an attempt to sabotage a datacenter project in Amsterdam on Thursday. The group said that they threw water balloons filled with a mixture of hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, salt, and acrylic paint at the under-construction facility. Extinction Rebellion said the mixture is designed to degrade the concrete and accelerate corrosion of its steel reinforcement.

Extinction Rebellion spokesperson Martijn Dekker justified the attack by saying datacenters and the AI they power are exacerbating the climate crisis, as well as playing a role in the killing of Palestinians by Israel. 

“We must join forces and resist the anti-democratic power of this small group of the very wealthiest,” Dekker said in Extinction Rebellion’s press release. “Stopping the construction of this data center is a necessary step in that regard.”

The facility in question is being built by UK-based Pure Data Centres Group. If and when it is eventually completed, the facility will consist of three 85-meter (279-foot) towers, each containing 26 MW of data halls, for 78 MW of total site capacity. The site has its own power substation, which is already operational, and development of the data halls started in January 2026.

Pure DC says the facility is already fully leased, and while it doesn’t mention the lessee by name, local media have reported in a story about a prior protest at the site that Microsoft is the sole occupant. Amsterdam restricts new hyperscale datacenters, but Dutch media said the project’s three-tower design allowed it to fall below the threshold for a single hyperscale facility.

“Such data centers are superfluous,” Extinction Rebellion said. “They are mostly deployed for AI purposes, and although AI has some meaningful applications, the majority of them are undesirable: jobs are lost and the work of artists and others is shamelessly stolen to generate AI content.” 

With all that said, it’s still not clear what impact, if any, the attack may have had. Media in the Netherlands said that Pure DC and emergency responders had both confirmed balloons were thrown at the site, but neither said what they contained. Pure DC did tell Dutch newspaper NRC that the attack had no impact on construction, and that it intended to pursue legal action against those responsible. NRC spoke to Extinction Rebellion, which the paper said plans to carry out similar attacks on other datacenter projects. 

“The world is on fire, and we are building yet another data center,” an Extinction Rebellion spokesperson told NRC. “It has to stop.”

We reached out to Microsoft, Pure DC, and Extinction Rebellion for comment, but didn’t hear back from anyone. ®

Moonshot AI, the Beijing-based artificial intelligence startup backed by Alibaba, on Thursday released Kimi K3 — a 2.8-trillion-parameter model that the company says is now the largest open-source AI model in the world, and one that benchmarks show performs neck-and-neck with the most powerful proprietary systems from Anthropic and OpenAI.

The release, timed to land just ahead of the 2026 World Artificial Intelligence Conference in Shanghai, is a dramatic escalation in the global AI arms race and a watershed moment for the open-source AI movement. It also marks a remarkable comeback for a company whose market position had eroded significantly over the past 18 months following DeepSeek’s meteoric rise.

Full model weights are scheduled to be released on July 27, according to details shared by researchers who reviewed the company’s technical documentation. If you want to take Kimi K3 for a spin right now, you can — just head to kimi.com, sign up with a Google account or phone number (no credit card required), and start chatting with what may be the most powerful open-source model ever built.

Inside the architecture that powers the world’s largest open-source AI model

Kimi K3 is a frontier-class large language model with 2.8 trillion total parameters — roughly 75 percent larger than DeepSeek’s V4 Pro, which the company’s own timeline chart shows at approximately 1.6 trillion parameters. The model features a 1-million-token context window, native visual understanding capabilities, and an always-on reasoning mode that the company calls “thinking mode.”

The model is built on two key architectural innovations developed internally at Moonshot AI: Kimi Delta Attention, a hybrid linear attention mechanism, and Attention Residuals, which the company describes as a drop-in replacement for residual connections that delivers consistent scaling gains. Both techniques were previously published as open research by the Moonshot team on GitHub.

On the API side, Kimi K3 is compatible with the OpenAI SDK, lowering the integration barrier for developers already building on OpenAI or Anthropic toolchains. The model is priced at $3 per million input tokens and $15 per million output tokens, with cached input tokens dropping to just $0.30 per million — pricing that positions it roughly in line with mid-tier offerings from Western labs, but at a performance level the company claims approaches the top of the market. A promotional top-up rebate running through August 12 offers up to 30 percent back in vouchers for API credits of $1,000 or more.

As Xinhua reported, a Moonshot AI executive explained the significance of the parameter count in simple terms: parameters are like neural connections in the human brain, and nearly 3 trillion of them means the model can “store more knowledge and patterns in its brain, understand more, think deeper, and answer more accurately.”

Benchmark results show Kimi K3 trading blows with Claude and GPT at the top of the leaderboard

The benchmark results, drawn from public leaderboard data and a private evaluation by analytics firm Artificial Analysis, tell a striking story.

On GDPval-AA v2, a benchmark measuring real-world tasks across 44 occupations and 9 major industries, Kimi K3 scored 1,687 — placing it third overall, behind only Claude Fable 5 Max (1,815) and GPT-5.6 Sol Max (1,747.8), and ahead of Claude Opus 4.8 (1,600).

On AA-Briefcase, a private agentic benchmark from Artificial Analysis designed to test long-horizon knowledge work, K3 climbed to second place with a score of 1,527 — beating GPT-5.6 Sol Max (1,495) and trailing only Fable 5 Max (1,587).

Perhaps most impressively, K3 achieved a state-of-the-art score of 91.2 out of 100 on BrowseComp, a benchmark for long-horizon, high-difficulty information seeking.

The company says it accomplished this in a single-agent setup using its 1-million-token context window, without any context compression or additional context management techniques — a feat that suggests raw context length, when paired with strong retrieval capabilities, may be more powerful than elaborate multi-agent workarounds.

As one widely followed AI commentator put it on social media: “Open source is no longer lagging six months behind Western closed-source models. Read that again, and think about what it all means.”

That observation captures the significance of the moment. For much of the past three years, open-source models have typically trailed their proprietary counterparts by a meaningful margin. Kimi K3 appears to have closed that gap almost entirely.

How a 48-hour autonomous chip design demo reveals Moonshot’s real ambitions

Beyond raw benchmarks, Moonshot AI showcased a proof-of-concept that may be even more revealing of K3’s capabilities and the company’s strategic direction.

In a demonstration documented in the company’s technical materials, Kimi K3 was tasked with designing a physical chip to run a nano-scale version of itself. Over 48 hours of continuous autonomous agent operation, K3 independently completed the chip’s full construction pipeline — from architectural design through optimization and verification — using open-source electronic design automation tools. The result was a tiny but functional chip design, just 4 square millimeters, that achieved timing convergence at 100 MHz and could decode more than 8,700 tokens per second in simulation.

This is not a production chip. It is a demonstration of what Moonshot AI clearly views as the next competitive frontier: long-range autonomous agent capabilities. The ability to sustain coherent, multi-step technical work over a 48-hour window — reading documentation, making design decisions, running verification loops, and iterating on failures — represents a qualitative leap beyond the kind of single-turn question-answering that defined the first generation of large language models.

The company also highlighted a case in computational astrophysics, where K3 reportedly reproduced the universal I-Love-Q relation — a complex calculation that typically takes a senior researcher one to two weeks — in approximately two hours, reading and cross-validating more than 20 papers and implementing a complete numerical pipeline along the way.

Moonshot AI’s fall and rise tells the story of China’s brutal AI market

To understand why Kimi K3 matters, you need to understand where Moonshot AI was 18 months ago — and how far it fell.

Founded in 2023 by Yang Zhilin, a Tsinghua University graduate who previously conducted research at Google and Meta, Moonshot AI quickly became one of China’s most prominent AI startups. The company gained early traction in 2024 when users flocked to its Kimi platform for its long-text analysis capabilities and AI search functions. By early 2026, it had raised roughly $1.5 billion across multiple rounds, with its valuation climbing from $2.5 billion to $4.3 billion and the company reportedly seeking a new round at $5 billion.

Then DeepSeek happened. The release of DeepSeek’s low-cost R1 model in January 2025 disrupted the entire Chinese AI landscape, and Moonshot AI was among the hardest hit. Kimi, which had ranked third in monthly active users in China, slid to seventh. The company’s strategic pivot to open-source models — beginning with Kimi K2 in July 2025 and accelerating with K2.5 in January 2026 — was in large part an effort to reclaim relevance.

Kimi K3 is the culmination of that effort — and the sheer scale of the model suggests that Moonshot AI has been planning this move for some time. Training a 2.8-trillion-parameter model requires enormous computational resources and months of preparation, which means the architectural and infrastructure decisions behind K3 were likely locked in well before the model reached the public.

Why open-sourcing the world’s biggest model is a geopolitical chess move

The decision to release K3’s full weights on July 27 is strategically significant and worth parsing carefully.

The company’s own timeline chart of open-source frontier model scale positions K3 as a dramatic outlier, towering above competitors like DeepSeek (1.6T), Xiaomi (1.02T), and Alibaba (397B). By releasing the world’s largest open-source model, Moonshot AI is making a bid to become the center of gravity for the global open-source AI developer community.

This follows a broader trend among Chinese AI companies. As Reuters noted, open-sourcing allows companies to “showcase their technological capabilities and expand developer communities as well as their global influence, a strategy likely to help China counter U.S. efforts to limit Beijing’s tech progress.” DeepSeek, Alibaba, Tencent, and Baidu have all released open-source models. But none have released anything at this parameter count.

For enterprise technology leaders, the implications are concrete. A 2.8-trillion-parameter open-source model that performs at near-frontier levels creates new options for companies that want to fine-tune, self-host, or build proprietary systems on top of a capable base model — without being locked into API contracts with OpenAI or Anthropic. The trade-off, of course, is that running a model of this size requires substantial GPU infrastructure. Inference at 2.8 trillion parameters is not something that runs on a single server rack.

That said, Moonshot AI has signaled awareness of this challenge. Its Mooncake project, which won the Best Paper award at FAST 2025, pioneered KV-cache-centric disaggregated serving for large language models — an architecture designed specifically to make inference at extreme scale more practical and cost-efficient.

Kimi Code and a three-tier model lineup form the foundation of Moonshot’s enterprise play

Alongside K3, Moonshot AI continues to invest heavily in its coding agent ecosystem. Kimi Code, the company’s open-source coding tool that competes with Anthropic’s Claude Code and Google’s Gemini CLI, received two major updates on the same day as K3’s launch — versions 0.25.0 and 0.26.0 — adding features like expanded subagent tooling, background task management, and security fixes.

The Kimi Code CLI has accumulated over 3,100 stars on GitHub and features integration with VSCode, Cursor, and Zed. The latest release expanded the “coder subagent” tool set to include background tasks, todo lists, plan mode, skill invocation, and nested agents — effectively turning the coding agent into a multi-layered autonomous system capable of managing complex software engineering projects with minimal human intervention.

This is not incidental. Coding tools have become a critical revenue driver for AI labs. As Anthropic disclosed in January, Claude Code reached $1 billion in annualized recurring revenue. By building Kimi Code as an open-source alternative that defaults to Kimi’s own models — but supports other providers — Moonshot AI is positioning itself to capture developer workflows and, eventually, enterprise contracts.

The company’s model lineup now includes three tiers: K3 as the flagship ($3/$15 per million tokens for input/output), K2.7 Code as a specialized coding model ($0.95/$4), and K2.6 as a general-purpose option ($0.95/$4). All three support context windows of 256,000 tokens or above, with K3 offering the full 1-million-token window. Context caching is automatic — no cache ID, TTL, or extra parameter is required — a small but meaningful developer-experience advantage over competitors that require explicit cache management.

What Kimi K3 means for the future of enterprise AI and the global model landscape

Kimi K3’s release forces a recalibration of several assumptions that have guided enterprise AI strategy.

The performance gap between open-source and proprietary models has functionally closed at the frontier. If K3’s benchmark numbers hold up under independent evaluation — and particularly once the open weights are available for community testing on July 27 — it will be difficult for closed-source providers to justify premium pricing purely on the basis of capability.

The locus of AI innovation, meanwhile, continues to shift. China’s AI ecosystem, which many Western observers questioned after early struggles with chip export restrictions, has now produced a model that competes with the best systems from companies with direct access to Nvidia’s most advanced hardware. The architectural innovations behind K3 — particularly the hybrid linear attention mechanism — suggest that algorithmic efficiency may matter as much as raw compute.

And the agentic capabilities demonstrated by K3 — chip design, multi-week research compression, long-horizon information seeking — point toward a future where AI models are not just answering questions but autonomously executing complex, multi-day projects. For enterprises evaluating AI investments, this shifts the value proposition from “productivity copilot” to “autonomous technical workforce.”

Xinhua, China’s state news agency, framed the release as a national milestone, reporting that K3 “marks a new step forward in the development of China’s artificial intelligence models.” Liu Tieyan, dean of the Zhongguancun Academy in Beijing, was quoted as saying that a wave of Chinese open-source models has moved from isolated breakthroughs to collective advancement, providing “new solutions and new paths” for global AI development.

Just two years ago, Moonshot AI was a scrappy startup named for the audacious problems it hoped to solve. Eighteen months ago, it was a cautionary tale about how quickly a market darling can lose its footing. Today, it is the maker of the world’s largest open-source AI model — one that can, given 48 hours and an internet connection, design a chip to run itself. The frontier, it turns out, is not a place. It is a race. And the field just got a lot more crowded.

McIntosh does not replace its home theater processors every time HDMI acquires another acronym, but the MX123 has been anchoring the company’s multichannel lineup since 2019. Although it received an important 8K hardware update in 2021, nearly seven years is a long time in a category where video standards, immersive-audio formats, room-correction platforms, and bass-management capabilities continue to evolve at an exhausting pace.

The newly announced McIntosh MX124 A/V Processor is therefore less an impulsive refresh than an overdue response to a much more competitive high-end home theater market. Marantz continues to apply pressure with the AV 10, while Trinnov and StormAudio offer highly configurable processors with more channels, sophisticated bass management, and upgrade paths aimed directly at demanding custom installations. A bank of blue meters and a substantial glass faceplate still carry considerable weight, but at this level, heritage alone will not prevent the competition from eating your popcorn.

Building on the MX123, the MX124 supports 13 main audio channels and four independent subwoofer outputs for configurations including 7.4.6 and 9.4.4. It also adds Dirac Live Room Correction and Dirac Live Bass Control alongside Audyssey MultEQ XT32, expands 8K connectivity across all seven HDMI inputs, and introduces updated streaming, configuration, and installation features designed to keep McIntosh relevant in theaters where both the expectations and equipment budgets are substantial. 

The McIntosh MX124 is an A/V preamplifier/processor designed to function as the central command center of a high-end home theater system. It handles source switching, surround decoding, room correction, bass management, video routing, and system control, but it does not include onboard amplification.

That distinction matters. The MX124 must be connected to one or more external power amplifiers, or to active loudspeakers, before it can produce any sound. A television or projector is also required to display the video signals it processes and routes. In other words, the MX124 may run the theater, but it still needs the rest of the cast before the lights go down.

McIntosh has engineered the MX124 for sophisticated home theater installations where flexibility, long-term integration, and installer support are just as important as raw specifications. Its expanded connectivity, configurable speaker layouts, room-correction options, and control features are intended to let a system evolve over time without forcing owners to replace the processor every time the theater grows or another component joins the rack.

Related Reviews: Marantz AV 30 Home Theater Preamp/Processor Review: Power Of Separation

Speaker Configurations & Physical Connectivity

The MX124 A/V Processor supports speaker configurations of up to 7.4.6 or 9.4.4 through 13 audio channels and four independent subwoofer outputs. Compared with its predecessor, the MX123, the MX124 doubles the number of subwoofer outputs from two to four, enabling more advanced system configurations, greater bass-management flexibility, and improved performance in larger, more sophisticated home theater environments.

Additional connectivity includes seven HDMI inputs and three HDMI outputs, along with four digital audio inputs, one balanced and eight unbalanced analog stereo inputs, component and composite video inputs, and dual analog stereo outputs for two additional listening zones, plus Bluetooth headphone support.

Immersive Audio

The MX124 supports Dolby Atmos, DTS Pro, Sony 360 Reality Audio, and MPEG-H Audio. It also employs nine premium 32-bit digital-to-analog converters designed to deliver greater detail, wider dynamic range, and improved sonic accuracy.

Bass and treble controls provide additional tuning flexibility, allowing the system to be adjusted for personal preferences, room acoustics, and specific installation requirements.

Room Calibration

To help deliver optimal performance in a wide range of listening environments, the MX124 A/V Processor incorporates multiple room-calibration options. Licenses for Dirac Live Room Correction and Dirac Live Bass Control are included, while Audyssey MultEQ XT32 is available without an additional license.

These options allow installers and owners to select the calibration platform best suited to their system, room, and level of setup complexity. Both technologies are designed to improve speaker integration, bass performance, imaging, tonal balance, and overall clarity while preserving the natural musicality and sonic character associated with McIntosh.

Video

For video, the MX124 provides seven HDMI inputs and three HDMI outputs, including one with eARC. Two HDMI outputs support the primary video zone, while a third provides independent video playback in a second zone. All HDMI inputs and the primary outputs support 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz video and are compatible with Dolby Vision, HDR10+, HLG, and IMAX Enhanced. 

Additional HDMI support includes HDCP 2.3, Rec. 2020, 4:4:4 Color Spacing, Dynamic Lip-sync, 3D Video Passthrough, and gaming features such as Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM), Quick Frame Transport (QFT), and Variable Refresh Rate (VRR). 

Wireless Connectivity

Beyond home theater, the MX124 A/V Processor can also serve as the centerpiece of a premium whole-home entertainment system, with support for high-resolution streaming at up to 32-bit/192 kHz.

Integrated streaming options include Apple AirPlay, Bluetooth, Qobuz Connect, Spotify Connect, and TIDAL. The MX124 is also Roon Ready, providing additional flexibility for managing and distributing music throughout the home.

Custom Control

To further support professional custom integration, the MX124 supports web-based configuration, pre-configuration and file upload capabilities, backup and restore support, RS232 and IP control, and certification for Control4 Simple Device Discovery Protocol (SDDP) integration. 

Comparison

The Bottom Line 

The McIntosh MX124 does not try to beat Trinnov or StormAudio in a channel-count arms race. Instead, it targets McIntosh owners and custom installations that want modern connectivity, sophisticated room correction, and support for serious 7.4.6 or 9.4.4 home theater systems.

Its most significant upgrades are four independent subwoofer outputs, Dirac Live Room Correction and Bass Control, Audyssey MultEQ XT32, and seven HDMI inputs with support for 8K/60Hz and 4K/120Hz video. Offering both Dirac and Audyssey gives installers more flexibility, while doubling the MX123’s subwoofer outputs should improve bass integration in larger rooms.

There are some notable limitations. Auro-3D, which was supported by the MX123, is absent from the MX124 specifications and owner’s manual. McIntosh has not explained the omission, so claims about licensing costs or changes at Auro parent company Goer Dynamics would be speculation.

The phono input supports moving-magnet cartridges only, which means owners using a moving-coil cartridge will need an external phono preamplifier. More importantly, the MX124 provides 15.4 RCA outputs but only 11.4 balanced XLR outputs. A full 13-speaker system therefore cannot be connected entirely through balanced outputs.

The MX124 also requires external amplification. Owners can use 13 monoblocks, six stereo amplifiers plus one monoblock, two five-channel amplifiers plus one three-channel amplifier, or another suitable combination. Add speakers, subwoofers, a television or projector, cabling, networking, and rack space, and the final system cost will rise considerably.

Buyers who want McIntosh home theater without a rack full of power amplifiers can consider the MHT300 receiver, while the MX200 offers a lower-priced path into McIntosh separates.

The MX124 is not the most expandable processor in the high-end market, but it combines four-subwoofer management, two respected calibration platforms, extensive HDMI connectivity, broad streaming support, and enough processing power for nearly any residential theater that does not require its own ZIP code.

Price & Availability

Built to remain the center of a luxury home entertainment system for years to come, the MX124 A/V Processor will be available through authorized McIntosh dealers at a reported price of $15,000.

For more information: mcintoshlabs.com

Related Reading

• A joint Insider/Der Spiegel/Le Monde investigation published leaked documents showing a Chinese-authored, three-level plan to contain and defeat Starlink
• The plan, presented to Russian officers at a secret forum in 2023, highlights a three-level approach to contain and destroy SpaceX’s Starlink
• A separately signed June 2023 Moscow protocol also commits Russia and China to jointly build a hypersonic-missile-defense system based on technology Russia had never before been willing to share, even with allies

Starlink is the world’s largest satellite constellation ever built, and as a result, it also doubles as the backbone for many civilian and military communications channels.

With approximately 10,400 satellites in low-Earth orbit as of June 2026, SpaceX’s low-Earth-orbit satellite internet network covers nearly 160 different countries and territories while delivering low-latency communications (20-40 milliseconds) that often make it a better choice than GEO systems that have a baked-in round trip delay of 500-700 milliseconds.

Vinyl’s resurrection stopped being a charming nostalgia story years ago. U.S. vinyl revenue surpassed $1 billion in 2025, with 46.8 million records sold and the format recording its nineteenth consecutive year of growth. Luminate previously reported that annual U.S. vinyl album sales had increased from 13.1 million in 2016 to 49.6 million in 2023, an increase of nearly 300 percent. 

That growth has transformed the turntable category along with everything connected to it. Consumers can now choose from inexpensive wireless record players, sophisticated direct-drive designs, restored vintage decks and turntables with genuinely balanced outputs. Phono preamplifiers have consequently become a serious battleground again rather than an inexpensive circuit manufacturers conceal beside the headphone jack.

EAT, or European Audio Team, has operated at the more ambitious end of that market for years. Its turntables, tonearms, cartridges, vacuum tubes and phono stages are not designed for shoppers searching Amazon for something to play the copy of Aja they bought at Target — an album whose reputation remains vastly more impressive than the music itself.

The new E-Glo CB and E-Glo SB continue that approach with full-width chassis, dual-mono construction, discrete circuitry, extensive cartridge adjustment and tube-based amplification. VANA Ltd., EAT’s North American distributor, has announced immediate availability at $4,599 for the E-Glo CB and $6,250 for the E-Glo SB.

Related Reviews:

The EAT and Pro-Ject Connection

EAT is owned and led by Jozefina Lichtenegger, who is married to Pro-Ject Audio Systems founder Heinz Lichtenegger. That relationship has inevitably resulted in some shared analog DNA, manufacturing resources and expertise, but the two companies are not merely different badges attached to the same products.

Pro-Ject has built its reputation by making serious analog playback accessible across a wide range of prices. EAT operates several floors higher, with heavier construction, more elaborate materials, tube-based electronics and products aimed at listeners assembling genuinely high-end vinyl systems.

That relationship also helps explain EAT’s interest in balanced phono playback. Pro-Ject has spent several years expanding its True Balanced ecosystem with compatible turntables, phono stages and cables, including the X1 B, X2 B and X8. 

Two Models Built Around a Common Platform

The E-Glo CB and SB occupy the space between EAT’s compact Petit B and flagship E-Glo FB. Both use three gain stages, discrete components rather than integrated-circuit op-amps, split passive and active RIAA equalization and dedicated DC servo circuitry to minimize offset at the outputs.

The first gain stage uses three discrete semiconductor amplifier circuits. Separate circuits handle the positive and negative phases, while a third sums the two signals to reject common-mode noise. The high-frequency portion of the RIAA equalization is also applied at this stage.

Both models accept moving-coil cartridges through their balanced XLR inputs, while the RCA inputs support both moving-magnet and moving-coil designs. Balanced XLR and single-ended RCA outputs can be used simultaneously. 

EAT reserves the balanced input for MC cartridges, whose very low output makes common-mode noise rejection especially valuable. Although a phono cartridge is inherently a balanced signal source, the internal wiring of many MM designs prevents access to the complete differential signal. Purpose-built balanced MM cartridges exist, but the E-Glo CB and SB are not designed to accept them through their XLR inputs.

The Difference Is in the Second Stage

The two models diverge most significantly in their second amplification stages.

The E-Glo CB uses a hybrid, single-ended tube and transistor circuit composed of two ECC83S triodes and one transistor. This stage handles the low-frequency portion of the RIAA equalization and incorporates a switchable subsonic filter.

The more expensive E-Glo SB moves closer to the architecture of the flagship E-Glo FB. Its second stage is a symmetrical tube design using two ECC83S and two E88CC triodes. EAT also specifies higher-grade semi-crystalline hydrocarbon polypropylene capacitors in the gain and RIAA networks. 

The difference is not simply one additional pair of glowing bottles behind the ventilation slots. The SB maintains balanced operation through its second gain stage, while the CB converts to a single-ended signal before its output stage creates the balanced output.

That does not make the CB badly designed, but it does mean that “balanced” requires some qualification. The CB provides a symmetrical MC input stage, common-mode noise rejection and balanced XLR output, but it is not a fully differential circuit from cartridge to output. An XLR socket is a connector, not a blessing from your rabbi.

The SB comes considerably closer to the flagship concept through its symmetrical tube stage and upgraded capacitor selection.

Cartridge Adjustment

Both models provide enough adjustment to accommodate a broad range of moving-magnet and moving-coil cartridges.

Moving-magnet resistance can be selected from 30,000 to 75,000 ohms, while capacitance settings range from 50 to 620 pF. Moving-coil loading options extend from 10 ohms to 1.2 kilohms.

Six gain settings are offered: 40, 45, 50, 55, 65 and 70 dB. According to EAT’s specifications, using the balanced XLR outputs adds another 6 dB.

Both models also include a 20 Hz subsonic filter with an 18 dB-per-octave slope. That will be useful for systems vulnerable to record warps, turntable suspension movement or subwoofers attempting to reproduce low-frequency information that was never part of the recording. 

RIAA accuracy is specified within 0.5 dB from 20 Hz to 20 kHz. The CB claims an MM signal-to-noise ratio greater than 92 dBV and an MC figure greater than 80 dBV. The SB is rated at greater than 90 dBV for MM and greater than 80 dBV for MC.

Each measures 395 x 86 x 262 mm (15.6 x 3.4 x 10.3 inches). The E-Glo CB weighs 5 kg (11 pounds), while the E-Glo SB weighs 5.1 kg (11.2 pounds). Both use an external 18-volt power supply, keeping the transformer away from circuitry responsible for amplifying signals measured in fractions of a millivolt.

The Bottom Line

Neither model represents an attempt to make balanced tube phono amplification affordable in any conventional sense. The E-Glo CB costs $4,599, and the E-Glo SB raises the admission price to $6,250 before one buys the turntable, tonearm, cartridge, cables or records.

Welcome back to high-end analog, where the software occasionally costs $150 and the component amplifying it can cost more than the car used to bring it home.

The CB nevertheless fills a credible position for listeners using a serious moving-coil cartridge who want balanced input capability, extensive loading control and some tube character without climbing into five-figure phono-stage territory. Its hybrid architecture also gives EAT an alternative to competitors such as the Nagra Compact Phono, MoFi UltraPhono Pro and upper-tier phono stages from Rega, Musical Fidelity and Pro-Ject.

The SB is the more technically ambitious product. Its symmetrical tube-based second stage, upgraded capacitors and closer relationship to the E-Glo FB make it the logical choice for systems already built around a high-end balanced preamplifier and a low-output MC cartridge.

EAT has not simply removed parts from its flagship, installed cheaper capacitors and declared victory. The CB and SB are distinct implementations for different buyers, and their construction, flexibility and circuit design suggest products created for long-term analog systems rather than another brief ride aboard the vinyl revival train.

Vinyl, after nineteen consecutive years of growth, is no longer waiting at the station.

For more information: europeanaudioteam.com

Related Reading: