Sound Quality of new roon versions (builds)

[engadin]

Ummm…

Software Release Notes

Release notes will be posted here for new versions of the software.

community.roonlabs.com

2.0.1 seems to be new.

 

[bryans]

Ummm…

Software Release Notes

Release notes will be posted here for new versions of the software.

community.roonlabs.com

2.0.1 seems to be new.

This was an update to 2.0 two weeks ago. The big driver was to add back concert information.

 

[bryans]

Roon 2.0.1 is out now.
Problems? Sonic drawbacks?
Or should I go from 2 to 2.0.1?

Only your ears can tell you about sonic issues. I personally updated as I like having the concert information on the artist page.

 

[Blue58]

Can’t get Roon back up on my Extreme since the 2.0 update. Updating the remote didn’t work so deleted it. I’ll have to ‘suffer‘ TAS until XDMS is rolled out.

 

[engadin]

Can’t get Roon back up on my Extreme since the 2.0 update. Updating the remote didn’t work so deleted it. I’ll have to ‘suffer‘ TAS until XDMS is rolled out.

Oh oh.
Maybe I’d better not update …
ipad and Taiko extreme here, too.

 

[bryans]

Can’t get Roon back up on my Extreme since the 2.0 update. Updating the remote didn’t work so deleted it. I’ll have to ‘suffer‘ TAS until XDMS is rolled out.

You probably need to jump over to the Extreme topic thread as I'm sure someone can help.

 

[brad225]

2.0 is the latest version. Previous was 1.8. I thought I had it figured out as to not allow automatic updates. Wrong! Sneaky little F@@@ers! It was installed unbeknownst to me, they snuck in while I was asleep! However NO DISCERNABLE difference in SQ...

Same thing happened to me. All of a sudden I noticed that I had 2.0 and I hadn't decided if I was going to do the upgrade.
I will say that I noticed that it has a bit deeper and wider sound stage. I have noticed no downside yet.
I have not intention of going to ARC at this time.

 

[John T]

Same thing happened to me. All of a sudden I noticed that I had 2.0 and I hadn't decided if I was going to do the upgrade.
I will say that I noticed that it has a bit deeper and wider sound stage. I have noticed no downside yet.
I have not intention of going to ARC at this time.

I also have no intention to mess with ARC, it serves no purpose for me. I tend to agree with you in regards to deeper and wider sound stage. 5 hours of listening yesterday. Just 2-3 weeks back I thought Roon took a turn for the worse, not sure what it was? It certainly doesn't sound bad. I finally have High speed internet. 25 years of being on satellite. This has also enhanced my situation. Satellite is well known for latency, I went from 650 to 10 and up and down is almost symmetrical at 500 on my ipad. So I also think this has had a positive impact...

 

[jacobacci]

I have been reading this forum regularly but have not posted in a long time.

As many I have been dissatisfied with Roon SQ for as long as I can remember. I use Roon for casual listening during dinner, but I always use Mosaic on my dCS (soon to be upgraded to APEX) Rossini for deep listening. Even on the Rossini, I hear a significant difference between using Mosaic through Ethernet (through a Melco S100 and Z1A) and using Roon through Ethernet (same Melco front end). This puzzles me, given essentially the same Hardware is being used in both use cases. There is a difference in signal path on the Stream Unlimited Board, but the rest (upsampling, mapping) should be identical.

At HighEnd 2022 in Munich I heard Guido Tent's demo of the MU1 (playing Maria Joao Pires' 'Voyage Magnifique') and I was struck by the sense of realism of the reproduction. I was very surprised when Guido told me at the end that the MU1 is using Roon.

Some questions are going through my head since:
- why are dCS not able to achieve the same reproduction quality using Mosaic and Roon? It seems to me all the buffering / upsampling / mapping should cure any jitter or other issues that might be causing differences. I am assuming the bitstreams are identical in both cases.
- what is different in Grimm's approach for the MU1 that makes Roon quality so much better than any other I have heard. I do not have an MU1, so I cannot compare Ethernet / Roon to Grimm MU1 / AES Roon on my Rossini
- is there a fundamental issue with the Roon Bridge software that causes these differences. I asked Guido Tent after the demo and his response was essentially that "yes, the Roon stack is known to have timing issues. We have taken measures to completely eliminate these'". If this is correct, would it be possible to achieve 95% of what the MU1 with much less effort? I am aware cost is not usually a prime criterium in this forum but as an engineer I am intrigued by efficient solutions.

Many thanks for any inputs

 

[nonesup]

If this is really interesting. It seems that Wadax users also don't have the “heaviness” sound problem that I experience with Roon and my Extreme.

 

[PYP]

I have been reading this forum regularly but have not posted in a long time.

As many I have been dissatisfied with Roon SQ for as long as I can remember. I use Roon for casual listening during dinner, but I always use Mosaic on my dCS (soon to be upgraded to APEX) Rossini for deep listening. Even on the Rossini, I hear a significant difference between using Mosaic through Ethernet (through a Melco S100 and Z1A) and using Roon through Ethernet (same Melco front end). This puzzles me, given essentially the same Hardware is being used in both use cases. There is a difference in signal path on the Stream Unlimited Board, but the rest (upsampling, mapping) should be identical.

At HighEnd 2022 in Munich I heard Guido Tent's demo of the MU1 (playing Maria Joao Pires' 'Voyage Magnifique') and I was struck by the sense of realism of the reproduction. I was very surprised when Guido told me at the end that the MU1 is using Roon.

Some questions are going through my head since:
- why are dCS not able to achieve the same reproduction quality using Mosaic and Roon? It seems to me all the buffering / upsampling / mapping should cure any jitter or other issues that might be causing differences. I am assuming the bitstreams are identical in both cases.
- what is different in Grimm's approach for the MU1 that makes Roon quality so much better than any other I have heard. I do not have an MU1, so I cannot compare Ethernet / Roon to Grimm MU1 / AES Roon on my Rossini
- is there a fundamental issue with the Roon Bridge software that causes these differences. I asked Guido Tent after the demo and his response was essentially that "yes, the Roon stack is known to have timing issues. We have taken measures to completely eliminate these'". If this is correct, would it be possible to achieve 95% of what the MU1 with much less effort? I am aware cost is not usually a prime criterium in this forum but as an engineer I am intrigued by efficient solutions.

Many thanks for any inputs

You might be interested in the findings that Grimm Audio used to design the MU1: https://www.grimmaudio.com/publications/the-pure-nyquist-filters-of-the-mu1/

Thanks for posting Guido Tent's remark. Since I'm using the MU1, I have found the comments about differences in sound resulting from Roon updates and about how inferior Roon sounds (relative to other software) to be puzzling. It seems that Grimm Audio chose Roon as the software platform, then designed the MU1 to provide the ideal hardware platform for Roon.

Grimm is apparently working on a software update that will allow the MU1 to use other software options. It will be interesting to hear if the MU1 also "elevates" other software.

 

[treitz3]

Does anyone know if Roon will come out with something that does not affect the sound quality? I like what I am seeing about what it does, but do not want to sacrifice sound quality for convenience.

Tom

 

[oldmustang]

Does anyone know if Roon will come out with something that does not affect the sound quality? I like what I am seeing about what it does, but do not want to sacrifice sound quality for convenience.

Tom

I wouldn't hold my breath for Roon to do that -- if you have your asbestos suit handy, try posting on the Roon forum about how different builds have affected SQ (but be prepared for the flames!). Roon denies their software has any effect on sound quality because bits are bits or something something. Their fanboys are worse.

I think the best we can hope for is that equipment designers figure out how to better insulate their products from the effects of Roon's massive processing overhead and Roon's implementation of network communications.

And I say this as someone who purchased a lifetime license as soon as Roon came out and who still considers (most of) Roons UI to be the best in the industry.

Steve Z

 

[Steve Williams]

I agree about the Roon platform. It is seductive but as you say try mentioning deterioration of SQ on the Roon forums and wait for the blowback. Wear your flame retardant suit just in case. I too have a lifetime subscription to Roon. I’ve used it once or twice in the past 4 years

 

[sbo6]

IME the difference in versions of ROON is minimal. However, how much the SQ change is insulated because I run ROON -> HQplayer I'm not sure.

 

[oldmustang]

IME the difference in versions of ROON is minimal. However, how much the SQ change is insulated because I run ROON -> HQplayer I'm not sure.

That could indeed be a part of it. Some time ago (back when HQP was v3.xx) I found Roon SQ to be significantly improved by running it with HQP in pass-through. Later I experienced the same improvement in SQ using Innuos' Zenith MK II running Squeezelite in conjunction with Roon.

Steve Z

 

[bryans]

I wouldn't hold my breath for Roon to do that -- if you have your asbestos suit handy, try posting on the Roon forum about how different builds have affected SQ (but be prepared for the flames!)

This isn't only a Roon forum thing.

 

[christoph]

That could indeed be a part of it. Some time ago (back when HQP was v3.xx) I found Roon SQ to be significantly improved by running it with HQP in pass-through. Later I experienced the same improvement in SQ using Innuos' Zenith MK II running Squeezelite in conjunction with Roon.

Steve Z

Same here

First roon alone, then roon and HQP 3.x, then roon and HQP 4.x, then roon with Squeezelite as output engine and now again roon alone, alongside with roon and Squeezelite to compare back and forth as a reference point.

Atm, I prefer roon alone but I wonder how long that will last, given the plethora of new versions of roon lately

 

[the sound of Tao]

Same here

First roon alone, then roon and HQP 3.x, then roon and HQP 4.x, then roon with Squeezelite as output engine and now again roon alone, alongside with roon and Squeezelite to compare back and forth as a reference point.

Atm, I prefer roon alone but I wonder how long that will last, given the plethora of new versions of roon lately

Also had preferred Roon with squeezelite post whatever the last best version of Roon was, now also preferring Roon alone… till the next time it changes

Still learning more about music via Roon than ever so I’m comfortable with this… besides my setup is the best I’ve ever had and the joy factor is up in the mid heaven so I’m not complaining. I’m a humble music- addled scholar so while the tunes sing along so wonderfully and capture me as fully as they do I just go with the flow… it’s maybe just a Tao thing.

 

[christoph]

Also had preferred Roon with squeezelite post whatever the last best version of Roon was, now also preferring Roon alone… till the next time it changes

Still learning more about music via Roon than ever so I’m comfortable with this… besides my setup is the best I’ve ever had and the joy factor is up in the mid heaven so I’m not complaining. I’m a humble music- addled scholar so while the tunes sing along so wonderfully and capture me as fully as they do I just go with the flow… it’s maybe just a Tao thing.

Keeping Squeezelite as alternative/reference point, makes it much easier to evaluate each new roon version sonically