Qobuz is Amazing

[Kingrex]

Shadowlight set me up with a pre authorization code to run Qobuz in the USA. I'm telling you, this is it. Very clean, dynamic, open and just good. Easily playing as good and most likely better than Tidal via Roon with HQ player. I don't upsample at all, I use native format. I am throughout blown away but a 24/96 file I am listening too. Way better than anything of late I remember listening too. I will definitely sign up for Ultimate streaming when available in the USA. Wow, just so easy and delightful to listen to. Absolutely no fatigue. The music asks you to give it more if you want it. Even my wife is saying this sounds good. She is very picky.

[Jack]

Glad you were finally able to get it to work. To me the sound is better all around than Tidal. How the catalogs stack up against each other we won't know until they get all the licensing agreements worked out.

[bzr]

This is interesting to me as I am not happy with hifi Tidal & I subscribe to master Tidal.

[Kingrex]

I am stunned. I sat for hours last night and listened. I wonder how much of the sound is the software. We know operating systems and software impact the sound. Qobuz is utterly non fatiguing. Its very natural sounding. Just sounds right. I was not so much trying to listen. It was washing over me. I became very relaxed and just took it in.

Today I will take some time to work the architecture. This is not so much like Roon /Tidal as far as looks and searching. I'm sure it wont be hard. Not sure the sort parameters. Lets say I search Art Pepper. Will it easily highlight the high rez from CD from lower. I shall try and figure out.

[shadowlight]

@kingrex, you can use Soundiiz to convert your Tidal playlist over to Qobuz. Some of the songs will not come over cleanly because of different versions or meta data mismatch but it will give you the options of generating a csv files with what was converted and what was not converted.

[nonesup]

It's been a few months since I changed from Tidal to Qobuz Sublime +. Absolutely happy

[Kingrex]

I did some comparisons of music via Tidal and Via Qobuz. I do not have an mqa setup. I don't try messing with it in ruin or hqplayer either. I just go native with the 16 44.1 Tidal tracks. Qobuz has a little more clear and dynamic bass response.Qobuz also has more clear and pronounced symbols. I don't find myself listening for them in the music. They're more clearly defined. In Tidal there's more of a grain that makes it difficult to hear the leading edges or just the definition.

[rrwmd]

I've just recently been messing around with Qobuz as well on my Lumin.

I agree that there's a difference in sound compared to Tidal, with Qobuz seemingly more defined.

Qobuz also has more albums from a handful of artists that I've searched for.

Not a huge deal, but one thing I don't like as well is the search function on Qobuz. If you just type in the first name Tidal always seems to show artists by popularity. In Qobuz it seems totally random -- i.e. not by popularity or even in alphabetical order. For instance, if I type "Van" in Qobuz I have to go through several screens/dozens of artists before I get to Van Morrison.

[Kingrex]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the Roon interface. I have not tried Tidal direct. It's always through Roon

[Kingrex]

I'm still liking the qobuz sound quality but it drops songs all the time. They start, then stop and will never play through. Even restarting the computer does nothing. They stop at the acme place Evey time. Makes me wonder if their catalog is corrupted.

FYI. Tidal via Roon is rock solid.

[Audiophilehi]

How do you obtain a pre authorization code to run Qobuz in the USA?

[Jack]

Rex

If the songs stopping at the same place are Hi-Res then they are probably songs that are authorized for download only and what you are getting are authorized samples. As to Qobuz dropouts I have been a customer since last July and the one thing that isn't a problem with them is dropouts. None in only 18 months on my end. I gladly pay the five buck currency conversion premium for the lack of dropoust compared to Tidal and the better sound quality.

[still-one]

Rex

If the songs stopping at the same place are Hi-Res then they are probably songs that are authorized for download only and what you are getting are authorized samples. As to Qobuz dropouts I have been a customer since last July and the one thing that isn't a problem with them is dropouts. None in only 18 months on my end. I gladly pay the five buck currency conversion premium for the lack of dropoust compared to Tidal and the better sound quality.

Once I adapted my setup by inserting the proper gear I returned to zero Tidal dropouts.

[Kingrex]

I though about that. I will check and see if they are all at about 20 seconds. I thought some ran longer then stopped. Other only a couple seconds. I will double check. Maybe ask qobuz. Of course, I don't want to rock the boat since I am trial in the USA.

[Alpinist]

I'm still liking the qobuz sound quality but it drops songs all the time. They start, then stop and will never play through. Even restarting the computer does nothing. They stop at the acme place Evey time. Makes me wonder if their catalog is corrupted.

FYI. Tidal via Roon is rock solid.

Never had a single dropped song on Tidal for the several months I’ve been using it. I’d like to try Qobuz if they ever reach an agreement with Roon.

Ken

[bart]

Qobuz here is very stable.
Tidal is also, and can be used more easily (handsfree) in my car, but Qobuz is working on that.

[shadowlight]

I have run into to some issues with the desktop app where it would not transition to the next song after the song has completed. Hitting forward starts the next song playing. I think the issues is with the old laptop that I am using but I have not really investigated much, since my primary usage is with BubbleUPnP and HQPlayer Embedded UPnP renderer mode.

[nicoff]

I had read that Qobuz had financial issues but just realized that it was years ago.
I would not consider Qobuz unless it works nicely with Roon.

[shadowlight]

The link to the article that you posted about was from 2015. For me personally, Roon support is nice to have but not a must have. I have other ways of streaming Qobuz (UPnP, Desktop App, Audirvana)

[nicoff]

The link to the article that you posted about was from 2015. For me personally, Roon support is nice to have but not a must have. I have other ways of streaming Qobuz (UPnP, Desktop App, Audirvana)

I just saw a copy of an announcement made by Qobuz stating that Roon integration is coming this fall. So it looks like Qobuz+Roon are just around the corner!

[Jack]

Nothing coming until CES.

[Kingrex]

I use to think I wanted it to integrate with Roon, but then it will sound like Roon. I like how it sounds now.

The link to the article that you posted about was from 2015. For me personally, Roon support is nice to have but not a must have. I have other ways of streaming Qobuz (UPnP, Desktop App, Audirvana)

[Alpinist]

I use to think I wanted it to integrate with Roon, but then it will sound like Roon. I like how it sounds now.

It’s great that you like the sound of your current configuration and if so, you should stick with it. But trust me when I tell you that Roon integration with a properly configured network that includes a Roon Nucleus Plus is producing world class sound quality in my system. Based on Nicoff’s post it looks like Qobuz + Roon will become a reality soon.

Ken

[Mike]

It’s great that you like the sound of your current configuration and if so, you should stick with it. But trust me when I tell you that Roon integration with a properly configured network that includes a Roon Nucleus Plus is producing world class sound quality in my system. Based on Nicoff’s post it looks like Qobuz + Roon will become a reality soon.

Ken

It’s funny how some knucklehead on a site makes a generic statement that Roon doesn’t sound good and 9000 people pick up on it. That’s complete and utter nonsense. For the Lumin users, you can easily make a playlist in both the Lumin app and the Roon app and switch back and forth. I’m using a Nucleus+ and there is NO difference.

HOWEVER, if you have not optimized Roon (which admittedly likes its resources), then that may affect the sound. Running Roon on an old Windows or Mac? It may be affected sonically. Run Roon on a Nucleus/Nucleus+ and it’s superb and as good as any other control point sonically.

The future is DAC’s with built in Roon Renderer modules. Simplicity and ease of use, coupled with great sound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kingrex]

It’s funny how some knucklehead on a site makes a generic statement that Roon doesn’t sound good and 9000 people pick up on it. That’s complete and utter nonsense. For the Lumin users, you can easily make a playlist in both the Lumin app and the Roon app and switch back and forth. I’m using a Nucleus+ and there is NO difference.

HOWEVER, if you have not optimized Roon (which admittedly likes its resources), then that may affect the sound. Running Roon on an old Windows or Mac? It may be affected sonically. Run Roon on a Nucleus/Nucleus+ and it’s superb and as good as any other control point sonically.

The future is DAC’s with built in Roon Renderer modules. Simplicity and ease of use, coupled with great sound.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait a second Mike. If you're talking about me, I never said I don't like the sound of a Roon. And I don't think I'm a knucklehead. I think we can all agree software impacts sound. It's been proven over and over again with operating systems and individual manufacturers proprietary code used to operate their equipment. My point was fairly simple. If Qobuz is integrated with Roon, Qobuz will voice as hqplayer passed through the Roon software. Driving both sets of software on my current server, I find I very much enjoy the way Qobuz software presents music. That's all I said. To combine them would eliminate the option of hearing Qobuz presented as such. Again, that's all I said.

[Mike]

Wait a second Mike. If you're talking about me, I never said I don't like the sound of a Roon. And I don't think I'm a knucklehead. I think we can all agree software impacts sound. It's been proven over and over again with operating systems and individual manufacturers proprietary code used to operate their equipment. My point was fairly simple. If Qobuz is integrated with Roon, Qobuz will voice as hqplayer passed through the Roon software. Driving both sets of software on my current server, I find I very much enjoy the way Qobuz software presents music. That's all I said. To combine them would eliminate the option of hearing Qobuz presented as such. Again, that's all I said.

I wasn’t talking about you. I said some knucklehead on a site. Not you, but people keep regurgitating the same nonsense bashing Roon, when in reality, it’s their own setup.

I, like others, hope Roon will add Qobuz (I just can’t see them not doing it.). To me, HQplayer is another unnecessary step. It can help a bad PC make Roon sound better, perhaps. But it’s a bandaid. A purposely built Roon Renderer card like the one from MSB and the new one from MBL (featured here: http://www.mbl.de/mbl_and_roon/?lang=en) is the future. People running Roon on a LUMIN U1 mini or U1 aren’t needing extra software, so what does that tell you? It’s about the implementation.

We are getting there, and Roon and Roon network cards (Running Linux) are the future. And to be fair, PS Audio and Ayre were early adopters. But the Roon network cards are getting better and better. Just look at the early cards in the Lampizator Pacific vs what’s shipping now. Night and day better. Just ask Alrainbow!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kingrex]

My only point is I hear sonic differences in Roon Vs Qobuz. Sure the top 1%ers with big budgets are going to have gear with the least compromises and most cutting edge technology. I may have a few million but I'm sorry, I just cant spend $40K and up on front end gear. I have to play with compromised amps, speakers, servers, dacs, cables etc.

I do agree the one box solution is the future. Even Mojo Audio 2 weeks ago signed with Roon and will integrate a Roon card right into their DAC like everyone else. 1 box solutions are going to be a popular offerings. It might even end up being the best sonic offering. The MSB Select thread seems to be finding it to be the case.

I believe I am hearing Lumin owners with Qobuz really liking the sound their hearing. I don't know if they feel its better than the Roon/Tidal sound, but they are liking it. If they do hear a sonic difference and it works well in their system, integration to Roon may eliminate that functionality and everything will sound like Roon. Roon is good, but at what point do you eliminate your choices for ease of use. I had been saying I want Qobuz in my Roon, but I question that now. Would it be easier to catalog one library. Maybe. I do have to switch out of Qobuz to get to Roon to play one of my 1800 album on my NAS. Is that hard. Not really. I do it every day without issue.

I wasn’t talking about you. I said some knucklehead on a site. Not you, but people keep regurgitating the same nonsense bashing Roon, when in reality, it’s their own setup.

I, like others, hope Roon will add Qobuz (I just can’t see them not doing it.). To me, HQplayer is another unnecessary step. It can help a bad PC make Roon sound better, perhaps. But it’s a bandaid. A purposely built Roon Renderer card like the one from MSB and the new one from MBL (featured here: http://www.mbl.de/mbl_and_roon/?lang=en) is the future. People running Roon on a LUMIN U1 mini or U1 aren’t needing extra software, so what does that tell you? It’s about the implementation.

We are getting there, and Roon and Roon network cards (Running Linux) are the future. And to be fair, PS Audio and Ayre were early adopters. But the Roon network cards are getting better and better. Just look at the early cards in the Lampizator Pacific vs what’s shipping now. Night and day better. Just ask Alrainbow!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bart]

I'm still ignorant - not yet a Roon user - and might be mistaken, but I thought Roon doesn't touch/affect the sound quality.
Isn't it just a brilliant tool to get much easier access to your libraries, in whatever quality they are on your harddrives/streaming service?

My only point is I hear sonic differences in Roon Vs Qobuz. Sure the top 1%ers with big budgets are going to have gear with the least compromises and most cutting edge technology. I may have a few million but I'm sorry, I just cant spend $40K and up on front end gear. I have to play with compromised amps, speakers, servers, dacs, cables etc.

I do agree the one box solution is the future. Even Mojo Audio 2 weeks ago signed with Roon and will integrate a Roon card right into their DAC like everyone else. 1 box solutions are going to be a popular offerings. It might even end up being the best sonic offering. The MSB Select thread seems to be finding it to be the case.

I believe I am hearing Lumin owners with Qobuz really liking the sound their hearing. I don't know if they feel its better than the Roon/Tidal sound, but they are liking it. If they do hear a sonic difference and it works well in their system, integration to Roon may eliminate that functionality and everything will sound like Roon. Roon is good, but at what point do you eliminate your choices for ease of use. I had been saying I want Qobuz in my Roon, but I question that now. Would it be easier to catalog one library. Maybe. I do have to switch out of Qobuz to get to Roon to play one of my 1800 album on my NAS. Is that hard. Not really. I do it every day without issue.

[still-one]

I'm still ignorant - not yet a Roon user - and might be mistaken, but I thought Roon doesn't touch/affect the sound quality.
Isn't it just a brilliant tool to get much easier access to your libraries, in whatever quality they are on your harddrives/streaming service?

Bart
Even many of us Roon users either do not know about or use all of the capabilities of Roon. It does have built in DSP capabilities and you can integrate it with HQPlayer if you desire. I mainly use it for combining my (stored) music and that from Tidal.

I have absolutely no issues with either Roon's or Tidal's SQ. I may test out Qobuz when it is available to see if any SQ differences with Tidal are worth worrying about. What I like about Tidal are the +10,000 MQA titles of all types of music including new releases. Not "just" mainly the SOS releases we often see from other Hi Rez sites.

[Alpinist]

My only point is I hear sonic differences in Roon Vs Qobuz. Sure the top 1%ers with big budgets are going to have gear with the least compromises and most cutting edge technology. I may have a few million but I'm sorry, I just cant spend $40K and up on front end gear. I have to play with compromised amps, speakers, servers, dacs, cables etc.

It doesn’t have to cost big bucks to optimize the performance of Roon. Just run Roon through a Nucleus/Nucleus+ on a DAC with a built in Roon Renderer Module. To quote Mike, “Simplicity and ease of use, coupled with great sound”. Not rocket science, heck, if I could do it, anybody can!

Ken

[kzhtoo]

It doesn’t have to cost big bucks to optimize the performance of Roon. Just run Roon through a Nucleus/Nucleus+ on a DAC with a built in Roon Renderer Module. To quote Mike, “Simplicity and ease of use, coupled with great sound”. Not rocket science, heck, if I could do it, anybody can!

Ken

I threw a dart a few weeks ago and hit the bull’s eye . Thanks, Ken for the affirmation. Discrete + Renderer module are on their way to meet the already arrived Nucleus.

[kzhtoo]

I may have a few million but I'm sorry, I just cant spend $40K and up on front end gear. I have to play with compromised amps, speakers, servers, dacs, cables etc.

If you have a few millions, yes you definitely can spend $40K and up on front end gear. Or else I will have to question your audiophilia.



Of course, this is just kidding.

[Kingrex]

Chasing digital can be an endless trail. If you sought out the latest and greatest, you would end up frustrated and burned out by the process. It's a rapidly churning market. Very hot with lots of tech changes obsoleting your cherished purchase in maybe a year. I do like the idea of updatable software and inter changable hardware cards. Keeps from having to crapcan the whole shebang every year. Just watch what you listen to from the crowd. They all want to tell you how bad your setup is and how great theirs. At some point you just have to dive in and play. Get your feat wet and learn what works for you.

I picked my route because I am excited about the selection streaming services available. How about Primephonic. Anyone listen to them. There good too. I like my server because I'm not limited to what is in the box. I stream Primephonic, Local Radio Stations, Pandora, Spotify, Tidal, Qobuz. I like each for different reasons. I like Pandora as I can play the David Bowie channel and a band will come on I never heard before. Then I go to some other service, find the band and follow where it goes. Its all about finding new music. Not how technologically advanced and wonderful my setup is. If it was just about the sound, I would get a tape machine.

[Alpinist]

Chasing digital can be an endless trail. If you sought out the latest and greatest, you would end up frustrated and burned out by the process. It's a rapidly churning market. Very hot with lots of tech changes obsoleting your cherished purchase in maybe a year. I do like the idea of updatable software and inter changable hardware cards. Keeps from having to crapcan the whole shebang every year. Just watch what you listen to from the crowd. They all want to tell you how bad your setup is and how great theirs. At some point you just have to dive in and play. Get your feat wet and learn what works for you.

I picked my route because I am excited about the selection streaming services available. How about Primephonic. Anyone listen to them. There good too. I like my server because I'm not limited to what is in the box. I stream Primephonic, Local Radio Stations, Pandora, Spotify, Tidal, Qobuz. I like each for different reasons. I like Pandora as I can play the David Bowie channel and a band will come on I never heard before. Then I go to some other service, find the band and follow where it goes. Its all about finding new music. Not how technologically advanced and wonderful my setup is. If it was just about the sound, I would get a tape machine.

No one is suggesting that you should change your system. You have a system that provides the sound quality and flexibility that you enjoy, this is a great thing! My comments were only relative to your implication that there is a sonic penalty for integrating with Roon. When Roon’s performance is properly optimized, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Enjoy and Happy Holidays,
Ken

[Mordante]

It doesn’t have to cost big bucks to optimize the performance of Roon. Just run Roon through a Nucleus/Nucleus+ on a DAC with a built in Roon Renderer Module. To quote Mike, “Simplicity and ease of use, coupled with great sound”. Not rocket science, heck, if I could do it, anybody can!

Ken

You and I have very different ideas on the definition of "big bucks".

The most basic Nucleus costs about 1500euro. The plus version is 2600euro. Add to that the $119 yearly costs of Roon.

To me that is big bucks money. Also Lumin, Aurender, Auralic all come with their own software. So I cant see the point of Roon at all.

Since about a month I have Qobus Studio. While there is very little hires content it sounds decent. But the overall content is rather limited. When I look up some artists like Kari Rueslaten and Einsturzende Neubauten most releases are not in Qobus. I have to see what they do have but if the content stay this limited I might cancel my subscription.

[Kingrex]

You and I have very different ideas on the definition of "big bucks".

The most basic Nucleus costs about 1500euro. The plus version is 2600euro. Add to that the $119 yearly costs of Roon.

To me that is big bucks money. Also Lumin, Aurender, Auralic all come with their own software. So I cant see the point of Roon at all.

Since about a month I have Qobus Studio. While there is very little hires content it sounds decent. But the overall content is rather limited. When I look up some artists like Kari Rueslaten and Einsturzende Neubauten most releases are not in Qobus. I have to see what they do have but if the content stay this limited I might cancel my subscription.

I was just musing on another thread that Roon is really not necessary in my setup. I like the Qobuz sound as is. I have no problem opening just HQ player and finding my 1800 album on my NAS. The only real difference would be Tidal would sound as Tidal. It would not be through HQ player and I'm not sure If I would get the first 2 unfolds or not.

Roons big selling point when I got it was it's search function. As in looking at all the associated artist, producers etc that might be related to a song I am playing. I have not used that feature in ages. If I'm searching in Tidal, I find I get little benefit using either the Tidal search vs Roon search.

I think I need to try something. I currently have Roon on my core machine running as Server. No GUI. All you see is the little Roon icon in the bottom right of the screen. This is suppose to provide superior sound (and does on my machine) as it reduces the amount of software process on the machine sending a signal to the DAC and has that processes done on your laptop or tablet controlling the core. Again, it sounds better on my machine. What if I took that a step further and eliminated Roon altogether and just played the files direct with HQ player? I don't really need Roon. I already output through HQ player in Roon. Am I not eliminating even more processing noise by turning Roon off completely. That would save me another $119 a year in subscription cost.
We shall see.

[nicoff]

I was just musing on another thread that Roon is really not necessary in my setup. I like the Qobuz sound as is. I have no problem opening just HQ player and finding my 1800 album on my NAS. The only real difference would be Tidal would sound as Tidal. It would not be through HQ player and I'm not sure If I would get the first 2 unfolds or not.

Roons big selling point when I got it was it's search function. As in looking at all the associated artist, producers etc that might be related to a song I am playing. I have not used that feature in ages. If I'm searching in Tidal, I find I get little benefit using either the Tidal search vs Roon search.

I think I need to try something. I currently have Roon on my core machine running as Server. No GUI. All you see is the little Roon icon in the bottom right of the screen. This is suppose to provide superior sound (and does on my machine) as it reduces the amount of software process on the machine sending a signal to the DAC and has that processes done on your laptop or tablet controlling the core. Again, it sounds better on my machine. What if I took that a step further and eliminated Roon altogether and just played the files direct with HQ player? I don't really need Roon. I already output through HQ player in Roon. Am I not eliminating even more processing noise by turning Roon off completely. That would save me another $119 a year in subscription cost.
We shall see.

If you are not using Roon features, I can see your point of letting it go.
However, your experience with Roon is the exact opposite from mine. The GUI of Roon is much better than Tidal or HQP. I refuse to use the search feature of Tidal. I can use Roon to search Tidsl library and it does it faster and more intuitive than Tidal. The data management of Roon are amazing. Using Focus and bookmarks I can control my library in ways not possible with any other software I know of. And Roon with HQP are a marriage made in heaven. Again, if you are not taking advantage of all the Roon features, I can understand why you don't need it. In my case, I bought the lifetime subscription and never looked back.

[Kingrex]

I don't use Roon to it's fullest. I have read the Roon literature which is limited at best. They seem to direct you to their forums where fiding what I'm looking for is not always easy. I assume they have some employee responding to help request there, but it seems to be a lot of users throwing out there thoughts and solutions. I am a little disapointed in their failing to provide a comprehensive user guide. It leaves you to stumble upon someting good or having a fellow forum member mention something such as "Focus" What the heck is that?

P.S. The Roon search, and "others" bother me when I try to find an album such as "The Beatles", but I get a totally different response if I just Type "Beatles". The Roon search function actually irritates me quite often. For an organization that toutes its virtues on such, it should have a better understanding of what I am looking for when I enter tchaikovskey instead of Tchaikovsky. The prior get me nothing.

If you are not using Roon features, I can see your point of letting it go.
However, your experience with Roon is the exact opposite from mine. The GUI of Roon is much better than Tidal or HQP. I refuse to use the search feature of Tidal. I can use Roon to search Tidsl library and it does it faster and more intuitive than Tidal. The data management of Roon are amazing. Using Focus and bookmarks I can control my library in ways not possible with any other software I know of. And Roon with HQP are a marriage made in heaven. Again, if you are not taking advantage of all the Roon features, I can understand why you don't need it. In my case, I bought the lifetime subscription and never looked back.

[still-one]

I don't use Roon to it's fullest. I have read the Roon literature which is limited at best. They seem to direct you to their forums where fiding what I'm looking for is not always easy. I assume they have some employee responding to help request there, but it seems to be a lot of users throwing out there thoughts and solutions. I am a little disapointed in their failing to provide a comprehensive user guide. It leaves you to stumble upon someting good or having a fellow forum member mention something such as "Focus" What the heck is that?

P.S. The Roon search, and "others" bother me when I try to find an album such as "The Beatles", but I get a totally different response if I just Type "Beatles". The Roon search function actually irritates me quite often. For an organization that toutes its virtues on such, it should have a better understanding of what I am looking for when I enter tchaikovskey instead of Tchaikovsky. The prior get me nothing.

Did you miss this or do you feel this is not sufficient enough for your Roon Guide needs. (I am not trying to sound sarcastic)

https://kb.roonlabs.com

[Kingrex]

Did you miss this or do you feel this is not sufficient enough for your Roon Guide needs.

https://kb.roonlabs.com

I have read it many times. It's very superficial.

[shadowlight]

Personally, use which ever tool/service that works best for you and you are able to afford. I recently got access to Roon, but I have not used the functionality to it's fullest, since I am strictly using to to access music on NAS. No Tidal here. I am also trying out Audirvana which has integration for Tidal, Qobuz and local music and it's working out very well for me so far. The one major down side with Audirvana that I see is the remote portion requires you to have iOS device.

I am also a firm believer of, what I have gets me to 95% of being there, I am satisfied and happy with the outcome. Saves me a ton of money where I stop chasing the last 5%

[Kingrex]

Thanks Shadowlight. By the way, back to the real topic. Qobuz. I looked into why I am having dropouts. I don't know the reason, but lets say I like a high Res album such as the Mercury Living Presents Tchaikovsky: The Nutcracker. I was getting drops on this. I added the album to my offline library and it works fine. No more dropouts.

I personally suspect this is not a Qobuz issue. I was told my machine works best on a Linux platform. I like the sound of Windows and they installed it, but they are concerned about the resource demands of windows on a machine that only used 6 wats of power. It might be to much to stream and playback 24/96 files.

I have no issues with Roon as either a Core or Server mode.

I have some work to do today. I will try and do a listen between HQplayer via Roon and HQplayer native. My gut says I won't hear much, but you never know till you try.

I will have to look more at Audirvana. How have you found it to voice. I use to use JRiver but I find it too thick and ?????? Something is not right. HQplayer is much more neutral

and clean

to my ears . It's just more natural, to me. JRiver was great when I had a lesser machine and played more rock. After making audio friends in Seattle, I discovered what to really listen for, and more to the point, how to tune to get a more true reflection of the source material. I am focused more that route than just making rock kick butt.
Thanks

[shadowlight]

I will have to look more at Audirvana. How have you found it to voice. I use to use JRiver but I find it too thick and ?????? Something is not right. HQplayer is much more neutral and clean to my ears .
Thanks

I use Audirvana as front end to HQP Embedded in UPnP mode so no clue on voicing on it's own, but folks on CA seems to enjoy the sound on it's own also and say it's better than JRiver. I do like how it integrates with Tidal/Qobuz/Local music when you search it gives you all options so you pick the one that you want to play. Roon has a nicer interface.

[bzr]

Last time, the renderers are coming.

[jadedavid]

Last time, the renderers are coming.

OK, I'll bite.
What do you mean by this statement?

[Mr Peabody]

The writer of Merrill Audio's newsletter and a member of the NJ Audio Society did a comparison of Qobuz/Tidal, I believe they both still preferred the ripped High res over each, then the 24/96 was a toss up, but felt 16/44.1k Quboz had an edge. It wasn't a long article, I'll try to post it here this weekend, if I remember. They definitely said Tidal has the largest library.

I'm still just tipping my toe but from friends experiences and hearing their systems with changes I really think a lot of it is your digital rig. I have a friend with a Lampi and one of the most complex setup's I'm aware of, computer, NAS's and such, sometimes small adjusts or different cable will amaze me at the effect. He does use Roon.

I have to admit having music in your hand, at your command is nice, but, when these streaming systems get that complex and you see how small things affect the sound, I begin to think, just dropping in a disc isn't so bad

[Kingrex]

OK, I'll bite.
What do you mean by this statement?

https://community.roonlabs.com/t/lis...enderers/42758

DAC with MQA and Roon built in. At least that is what I read. I might be totally off. I am not a tech but it seems there has to be a OS for the Roon core to operate on. I would assume it would have a clock that sends it's data to the DAC clock for conversion to analog. Those clocks could be I2s connected for potential superior sound quality.

[Mr Peabody]

Qobuz and Tidal - A Preliminary Comparison


By Alan H., Editor.

I have been dying to try Qobuz. There was much buzz about Qobuz at the Capital Audio Fest which I attended. After I got home I signed up for a 30 trial. The thought of streaming up to 24/192 had me intrigued. I have been using Tidal for a while. Not always thrilled with the sound quality. To me it is hit and miss.

Streaming and Digital play back in my system is a Wire World Starlight Cat8 Ethernet cable, Aurender N10 server, Synergistic Research Galileo LE USB cable and an EMM Labs Dac2x V2 D/A converter. I have the MQA option on the Aurender but my dac does not support MQA. So only getting part of the advantage of MQA.

My friend Izzy a fellow New Jersey Audio Society member came over and we compared the two. He also brought over the CD of "Melody Gardot - The Absence". Beside the CD I also have the 24/96 download from HD Tracks.

We played the song "Lisboa". We compared the CD played on my Oppo 205 used as a transport first. The the standard resolution on both Tidal and Qobuz. Finally the 24/96 on Qobuz and the MQA version from Tidal which also shows 24/96 resolution.

Izzy and I both felt the download sounded best. More body and dimension. The standard streaming 16/44 resolution sounded the worst although we both preferred the Qobuz. He felt the Tdal MQA induced 24/96 was better than the Qobuz 24/96 because of an added mid bass emphasis and not as smooth highs on the Qobuz. I was not sure and I am still not sure after a couple of weeks. They are very close.

I guess in order of preference: 24/96 download, 24/96 streaming a toss up, CD, Qobuz 16/44 and last Tidal 16/44.

Another album I have compared myself is "Alison Krauss - Windy City" on both Tidal (MQA - 24/96 ) and Qobuz (24/96). I played the two tracks "Losing You" and "You Don't Know Me". Both of the Tidal and Qobuz versions are very, very good. Both are pristine and sound really beautiful. I think the Qobuz is slightly better having just a bit more body. But again not really sure.

I have been driving my self crazy comparing Tidal and Qobuz. In general I think Qobuz is slightly better with 16/44 and the high rez is a toss up. The main advantage of Qobuz is you do not need to rely on MQA. Plus it does offer some 24/192 music. Tidal has much more music to chose from at this point and is cheaper. $19.95 vs $24.95 per month for the best sound quality. I did play various 24/192 files from Qobuz. Did not find them significantly than the 24/96 but will keep listening to more.

Here is a good review of Qobuz vs Tidal with much more info: https://www.whathifi.com/qobuz/review
It is a good read.

[Kingrex]

Thanks Peabody. I tried to get on the Merrill newsletter but could not. About what I would expect. I always hear high rez at home is generally best. High rez streaming a close second best (done right). Your network, cabling and switch could made a difference. Then the 16/44.1. I wonder if the files on the Aurender were stored internal as opposed to streaming from a NAS. I too can not unfold MQA all the way, so that is pointing to why I like Qobuz so much. I get the full 24/96.

Interesting that non of the files went through Roon. Aurender has its own software. I still want to compare Roon playback vs Tidal or HQ player direct on my setup. I'm just holding off till I have my new amps. They were suppose to be here today but have not arrived. I fear my old ones are adding a lot of distortion. There is a pretty good amount of hum coming from the woofers.
Happy listening

[GSOphile]

Qobuz and Tidal - A Preliminary Comparison


By Alan H., Editor.

I have been dying to try Qobuz. There was much buzz about Qobuz at the Capital Audio Fest which I attended. After I got home I signed up for a 30 trial. The thought of streaming up to 24/192 had me intrigued. I have been using Tidal for a while. Not always thrilled with the sound quality. To me it is hit and miss.

Streaming and Digital play back in my system is a Wire World Starlight Cat8 Ethernet cable, Aurender N10 server, Synergistic Research Galileo LE USB cable and an EMM Labs Dac2x V2 D/A converter. I have the MQA option on the Aurender but my dac does not support MQA. So only getting part of the advantage of MQA.

My friend Izzy a fellow New Jersey Audio Society member came over and we compared the two. He also brought over the CD of "Melody Gardot - The Absence". Beside the CD I also have the 24/96 download from HD Tracks.

We played the song "Lisboa". We compared the CD played on my Oppo 205 used as a transport first. The the standard resolution on both Tidal and Qobuz. Finally the 24/96 on Qobuz and the MQA version from Tidal which also shows 24/96 resolution.

Izzy and I both felt the download sounded best. More body and dimension. The standard streaming 16/44 resolution sounded the worst although we both preferred the Qobuz. He felt the Tdal MQA induced 24/96 was better than the Qobuz 24/96 because of an added mid bass emphasis and not as smooth highs on the Qobuz. I was not sure and I am still not sure after a couple of weeks. They are very close.

I guess in order of preference: 24/96 download, 24/96 streaming a toss up, CD, Qobuz 16/44 and last Tidal 16/44.

Another album I have compared myself is "Alison Krauss - Windy City" on both Tidal (MQA - 24/96 ) and Qobuz (24/96). I played the two tracks "Losing You" and "You Don't Know Me". Both of the Tidal and Qobuz versions are very, very good. Both are pristine and sound really beautiful. I think the Qobuz is slightly better having just a bit more body. But again not really sure.

I have been driving my self crazy comparing Tidal and Qobuz. In general I think Qobuz is slightly better with 16/44 and the high rez is a toss up. The main advantage of Qobuz is you do not need to rely on MQA. Plus it does offer some 24/192 music. Tidal has much more music to chose from at this point and is cheaper. $19.95 vs $24.95 per month for the best sound quality. I did play various 24/192 files from Qobuz. Did not find them significantly than the 24/96 but will keep listening to more.

Here is a good review of Qobuz vs Tidal with much more info: https://www.whathifi.com/qobuz/review
It is a good read.

The CDs might have fared better if they had been played back on a machine of quality comparable to the EMM Labs DAC (e,g,. one of the better Esoterics) rather than an Oppo 205.