Roon Keeps Improving...
- Thread starter nicoff
- Start date
Kingsrule
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2014
- Messages
- 646
I look at it very differently
Roon is becoming a low-fi music source. Who gives a crap about Chromecast?
I posted on the Roon forums months ago that Danny was setting up to dump Roon to Google and run. He vehemently denied it but I maintain its a forgone conclusion. I'm even more convinced today.
I signed on with Roon as a state of the art music source to control and serve up my music files. I afraid this is looking to be no longer the case.
Seems like there are 2 alternative choices:
1. Look for an alternative...maybe the Linn software? Not sure but time to start looking
2. Hope that there is a spin-off within Roon for a "Roon Audiophile" version.....
Roon is becoming a low-fi music source. Who gives a crap about Chromecast?
I posted on the Roon forums months ago that Danny was setting up to dump Roon to Google and run. He vehemently denied it but I maintain its a forgone conclusion. I'm even more convinced today.
I signed on with Roon as a state of the art music source to control and serve up my music files. I afraid this is looking to be no longer the case.
Seems like there are 2 alternative choices:
1. Look for an alternative...maybe the Linn software? Not sure but time to start looking
2. Hope that there is a spin-off within Roon for a "Roon Audiophile" version.....
I think Roon sounds terrific. I love the interface and speed.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
still-one
Active member
+1
Swisstrips
Member
I don’t think Roon’s time is over just yet 
Interesting take on Google. If you’re correct on them dumping and running, that would be a massive disappointment. I hope they do not become some over bloated commercial sell out. Although as with everything, just follow the money.
It’s still the best solution / player (for me + my setup) imho. But I suppose it can only last for so long.
Maybe PS Audio’s up and coming solution will keep things interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Interesting take on Google. If you’re correct on them dumping and running, that would be a massive disappointment. I hope they do not become some over bloated commercial sell out. Although as with everything, just follow the money.
It’s still the best solution / player (for me + my setup) imho. But I suppose it can only last for so long.
Maybe PS Audio’s up and coming solution will keep things interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread Author
- #6
I look at it differently. The more options for Roon end points, the greater the chance for Roon to gain subscribers. My case in point: I had several Logitech squeeze boxes devices. When Roon added the ability to make them Roon end points, I became a subscriber. I have yet to see a music management software as versatile as Roon.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
I love Roon, and as such I am a lifetime subscriber. I also do not believe it is the best playback engine; I believe HQPlayer is. Because Roon's engineers keep enhancing their software I can now get the best of both worlds.
HQPlayer is the best engine, but the user interface is archaic at best. But now that Roon added the ability to interface with HQPlayer, handing off the signal to HQplayer to over-clock and playback I can now get both. The best user interface, meta data, digital library control and organization, etc., with the best playback engine.
Anything that improves or expands Roon's capabilities is good in my view!
HQPlayer is the best engine, but the user interface is archaic at best. But now that Roon added the ability to interface with HQPlayer, handing off the signal to HQplayer to over-clock and playback I can now get both. The best user interface, meta data, digital library control and organization, etc., with the best playback engine.
Anything that improves or expands Roon's capabilities is good in my view!
Randy Myers
Well-known member
In my system I tried Roon upsampling several times and I always felt that non-upsampled sounded better. I then tried HQPlayer and it sounded vastly better, in my system. Upsampling to DSD256 was very good with my previous DAC. After getting the T+A and upsampling to DSD512 with 48 base clock and there was no going back. It made even my lowest resolution files (mainly Redbook rips) sound like true high resolution/DSD files. Roon upsampling never did this for me.
However, in my view, there is no finer interface and control then Roon. Combining the two is the best of both worlds!
However, in my view, there is no finer interface and control then Roon. Combining the two is the best of both worlds!
still-one
Active member
I tried HQPlayer but found I preferred to let my Rossini handle my files.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
Does your dCS have a playback application or do you use some other software package? Just asking because I do not know ....
....
still-one
Active member
Does your dCS have a playback application or do you use some other software package? Just asking because I do not know
It has its own app which can be used to play music but the best part is you can also adjust just about all your settings from the app. You can select from multiple filters, choose if you want DXD or DSD upsampling, phase swap and more all from the app. I don't use the app for music as I much prefer Roon for that.
The SQ of the s/w based up-sampling really depends on the DAC and how its designed.
For some DACs, like PS Audio, the s/w up-sampling is just redundant (you are doing up-sampling twice), while for some it kills the SQ, like the Dave and for some it benefits. For DACs that have an internal SRC, s/w based up-sampling can have excellent result if there is a way to bypass it. For DACs if they have an excellent implementation of SRC, like DS or Dave or as Jim suggested in the above post with his Rossini, up-sampling yields no additional benefit and can be detrimental to SQ. So its not necessary that up-sampling in Roon (or other s/w) is required or necessary always.
While s/w based up-sampling can have great results and one can easily choose filters/modulators to their liking with few clicks on a button, it must to used in correct topology - try to isolate the up-sampling server from DAC by not connecting it directly and introduce a high quality streamer in between. This is necessary since up-sampling means high CPU utilization, which means more high freq circuits at play and hence more noise - introducing a streamer will decouple it. In my setup, I use a server and streamer both running Roon - while the server up-samples, the streamer interfaces the DAC is decoupled by optical networking.
For some DACs, like PS Audio, the s/w up-sampling is just redundant (you are doing up-sampling twice), while for some it kills the SQ, like the Dave and for some it benefits. For DACs that have an internal SRC, s/w based up-sampling can have excellent result if there is a way to bypass it. For DACs if they have an excellent implementation of SRC, like DS or Dave or as Jim suggested in the above post with his Rossini, up-sampling yields no additional benefit and can be detrimental to SQ. So its not necessary that up-sampling in Roon (or other s/w) is required or necessary always.
While s/w based up-sampling can have great results and one can easily choose filters/modulators to their liking with few clicks on a button, it must to used in correct topology - try to isolate the up-sampling server from DAC by not connecting it directly and introduce a high quality streamer in between. This is necessary since up-sampling means high CPU utilization, which means more high freq circuits at play and hence more noise - introducing a streamer will decouple it. In my setup, I use a server and streamer both running Roon - while the server up-samples, the streamer interfaces the DAC is decoupled by optical networking.
- Thread Author
- #15
Certainly a lot of information that I did not know about. Thank you for sharing. FWIW, i am waiting for a new DAC that can handle and benefits from s/w upsampling (can do DSD512). I am looking forward to that.
Kingrex
Active member
I run HQ player through Roon, so as far as I know, all Roon does is catalog my music and get me to Tidal. I don't hear Roon as a sonic feature.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
This is my understanding also. Roon is the controller and organizer with fantastic meta data, etc., but in turn hands off your chosen music to HQPlayer to up-sample/render. HQPlayer is the play back engine.
Kingrex
Active member
I don't upsample ever. Not on my machines.
Randy Myers
Well-known member
HQPlayer is a great playback engine weather you up-sample or not. Roon is the best controller... therefore, an excellent combination that works fantastic together.
I don't believe one is better than other, weather you up-sample or not. Its all setup & DAC dependent.
I was an avid HQP user (along with Jplay) at one point but after Roon introduction of sox modulator, the SQ advantage is all gone in my setup as my DAC is designed for DSD bypass mode. When I use the other DAC, PSA DS, I don't up-sample and there is no SQ difference between Roon and HQP - I have taken great measures to isolate PC noise from the DAC though.
On library management part, I agree there is nothing like Roon today hands down. PS Audio is coming up with their music s/w - both player and library manager and their design goal is to do something even better than Roon, though it will be closed end system initially.
I was an avid HQP user (along with Jplay) at one point but after Roon introduction of sox modulator, the SQ advantage is all gone in my setup as my DAC is designed for DSD bypass mode. When I use the other DAC, PSA DS, I don't up-sample and there is no SQ difference between Roon and HQP - I have taken great measures to isolate PC noise from the DAC though.
On library management part, I agree there is nothing like Roon today hands down. PS Audio is coming up with their music s/w - both player and library manager and their design goal is to do something even better than Roon, though it will be closed end system initially.