Everest Audio
Member
I recently went from running Roon Core on my PC to using the Roon app on my QNAP NAS and I'm preferring running it on my NAS. I bumped up the RAM on my NAS and it is working well for me.
roon core options
- Thread starter rrwmd
- Start date
As others have said before me, you will be better off NOT running Roon Core on a NAS. Using a separate computer will allow you flexibility to try out other computer intensive software such as HQPlayer. I considered replacing my existing NAS for one with faster processor that could have run Roon Core. I am glad I decided against going that route. Instead, I bought a powerful windows 10 machine that is being taxed by HQPlayer. You can’t do that with a NAS.
not really optimal as others, including roon, have said. while my digital library is less than 1TB, this roon statement was certainly enough to rule out the NAS route:
"NAS devices are electrically and mechanically noisy, not optimized for high performance audio, and not especially powerful (for their cost). With the arrival of 6TB and 8TB drives, most people no longer need a multi-disk NAS in the home because all their music can be stored on a single drive, and less expensive machines for running your audio system exist."
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Pretty much sums up the point I was trying to make. Internal storage is cheap for really good drives such as M.2's. NAS are really designed for mass storage, backup, and sometimes file shares. The QNap I recently bought at work can run some apps that are created for it, but I would never consider using for anything but backup, which is what it was designed for.
If one's collection is not MP3/MP4, even with FLAC 8TB is not a very large collection...
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
Running the Roon core on a pimped-up quad core Synology NAS with 256 GB SSD RAM, and another 256 GB SSD just for the core.
Works like a charm, way better than my Aurender.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
How big of a collection do you have? 8 TB is absolutely positively enormous....
I have about 1000 albums on my server, none below CD level. About 700 are DSD or High resolution PCM files, under 300 are CD rips and sized. I have over 50 that are higher level DSD, 5 of which are DSD512, so about 100 GB right there on the DSD512 alone. All of that together is taking up about 1.5 TB... I decided that 3 TB was enough on my server for now, but I can always add more if I so desire.
My DSD files alone take up over a TB, so over 700 Flac albums take up less then a 1/2 TB. To fill up 8 TB with Flac files it would take about 11,000 - 12,000 albums.
I know some people have that large of collections but I have never meet one. You could also rotate albums if you have that large of a collection I suppose.
I have about 40% of my collection on hard drives, which now total about 12 TB, all FLAC. I'm fairly sure there are other members here with (much) more than that, and for them that's only their digital music collections.
still-one
Active member
I am not sure that anyone requires 8TB of FLAC music. It would be almost impossible for someone to listen to that in a normal lifetime. As for myself I have no desire to own music that I will never listen to again. I am disciplined where I cull my music collection several times per year. I look at my play count in Roon and determine whether those "0" played titles need to be maintained on my server or tagged in Tidal. I look at is that listening to music is important not collecting it.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Exactly, I get music to listen to it, not simply collecting it. So if someone has 20 TB of music they would have to listen 24 hours a day and it would still take 3-4 years to listen to all only once.
I have hard enough time picking what to listen to with 1000 albums
.
I have hard enough time picking what to listen to with 1000 albums
.
still-one
Active member
Exactly, I get music to listen to it, not simply collecting it. So if someone has 20 TB of music they would have to listen 24 hours a day and it would still take 3-4 years to listen to all only once.
I have hard enough time picking what to listen to with 1000 albums
Yep, I keep somewhere between 700-1000 at most. If there is something I am missing I just look on Tidal. If for some reason it isn't there I just select something else.
roncagg
Member
Sonictransporter i5 bought used, external 2TB USB drive with 1200+ flac rips, even using Roon DSP rarely taxes cores more than 3%, sounds great and more stable than my previous windows 10 setup, the ultimate in “set and forget”!
A good description of why we are all different, here and elsewhere.
I don't have any music that I don't like (I do cull that out), so it's not realistic to say that I wouldn't want to listen to it again. And a sizable percentage of my collection is OOP or unofficial, so streaming it would not be an option.
What did you just said? [emoji15][emoji15]
That almost sounds illegal.
I think your dog just used your computer. Yes, right? [emoji2960][emoji2958]
Please note that for the purpose of Roon Core, the music selected from Tidal and Qobuz count towards the library size, not just your local files. The library size is a huge factor for the Roon Core database performance. Above a certain threshold (say 300K tracks) an i7 and 16GB RAM (for Nucleus+ or ROCK) is needed. For Windows and Mac users you need even more RAM for the OS and non-Roon tasks.
Kuoppis
New member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2015
- Messages
- 5,203
In the Synology NAS (quad core processor) you can expand RAM with an SSD for more temporary memory. I have 16 GB RAM with a 256 GB extension. Try that with a Nucleus+ or laptop.
Guess that will suffice to run a Roon core smoothly.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Trying to get an i7 NAS is going to be quite expensive. For the purpose of Roon Core, i7 NUC represents a much better value.
Many low price NAS run Celeron (quad core or not), which is below Roon official minimum requirements.
Many low price NAS run Celeron (quad core or not), which is below Roon official minimum requirements.