Taiko Audio SGM Extreme : the Crème de la Crème
- Thread starter CKKeung
- Start date
Hi Christian. I have been checking my "Device Setup" in Roon and it is as I accompany in the screenshot. However, in the manual I cannot find information on how to configure the following two inputs: Use power-off-2 Buffer sizes and Multichannel mixing
Attachments
Christiaan Punter
Well-Known Member
Hi Francisco,
Multi-channel mixing is a user preference. Unless you have a surround setup, leave it at "Downmix as needed". This only applies to multichannel music, where you will want Roon to mix the multiple channels, 5 or more, into 2 for your main 2 speakers.
As for Power-Of-2 Hardware Buffer Size, best leave it at the default "No" setting.
See also below quote from the Roon site https://help.roonlabs.com/portal/en/kb/articles/audio-setup-basics#Clock_Master_Priority
Use Power-Of-2 Hardware Buffer Size (CoreAudio Exclusive Mode + ASIO only)
"This one is sort of like Use Max Hardware Buffer Size except it forces buffer sizes to the nearest power of 2 instead of the largest possible size. This is a workaround for bugs in some audio drivers and devices. It's worth a shot if you're experiencing dropouts, clicks, or pops during playback, but in 99% of cases, it adds nothing of value. We don't recommend turning this on unless it solves problems for you."
Last edited:
While searching for more information on Roon Settings I came by this unofficial User Guide that was created from the Roon knowledge base content by Michael Whitehead.
Not sure if it has been posted previously nor how up to date it is. Might be helpful if you are not aware of it.
Roon User Guide by Michael Whitehead
Not sure if it has been posted previously nor how up to date it is. Might be helpful if you are not aware of it.
Roon User Guide by Michael Whitehead
Great guide, many thanks, just helped me to solve a Roon issue. It would have saved me a lot of time in the past!
I was listening to the BBC broadcast last week of Fairport at the Cropredy Festival (the first one 3 years!) and experienced a problem with TAS that I don't understand.
The concert was parsed into separate cuts spread over 3 discs, all in the same directory.
Metadata looks fine in Tagscan.
When I loaded the directory into TAS, the queue showed tracks out of order as follows:
T1
T10
T11
T12
T13-T19
T2
T20
T21-T26
T3
T4
Any idea what is going on with the queue ordering? I'd love to understand this.
I'm sure XDMS will not have this problem.
The concert was parsed into separate cuts spread over 3 discs, all in the same directory.
Metadata looks fine in Tagscan.
When I loaded the directory into TAS, the queue showed tracks out of order as follows:
T1
T10
T11
T12
T13-T19
T2
T20
T21-T26
T3
T4
Any idea what is going on with the queue ordering? I'd love to understand this.
I'm sure XDMS will not have this problem.
2 comments:
1 - The track numbers should all have 2 digits. 01, 02, etc
2 - if you look at the metadata of the track number is it populated?
TAS is ordering the tracks in ascending numerical order, looking at the leading digit first. As @dminches says, appending a zero to the start of each number will re-order the sequence correctly. I haven't found a setting in LMS' server, player or settings that would do so automagically, or would correctly order the tracks.
Steve Z
That's it then, no leading zero.
Now, that is true of much of my music and would be a PIA to deal with.
@Ed
XMDS will be smart enough to deal with and without leading zeros, right?
There is nothing I have yet to experience with Wilson where he says it can not be done. He always finds a way
Christiaan Punter
Well-Known Member
I would fix the metadata instead of relying on the software to try to figure it out. It shouldn't take too much time to do this in a good tag program, like Tag&Rename.
Is that viable for 90k tracks?
Fyi, I use Tagscan but would happily purchase a program that could batch process all my music
Absolutely. I have spent 2 years constantly working on metadata. Plus, my guess is that less than 20% have issues.
As someone who's obsessively "groomed" the metadata of their digital music files ever since I first ripped my CDs back in early 2000s, I sometimes forget that not everyone does that. And if you don't, then you are always going to have problems with any music software (like LMS) that relies solely on tags. That's because a subset of digital music — @dminches 's guess of 20% seems about right — is atrociously tagged by the labels.
This was one of the huge positives of Roon, because it broke the reliance on file tags for music organization. Roon uses a 3rd party music database vendor (still Rovi?) for the actual information about albums, and only used the file tags as a means to identify an album in their internal database. Even this isn't perfect, but it's much easier for the perfectionist "groomers" like me to plug the remaining gaps.
I seem to recall @Taiko Audio and @EuroDriver mentioning that XDMS would use a similar service to identify albums, rather than relying on file tags exclusively. Perhaps Ed can clarify that this is still the design point.
If so, then these issues with poorly-tagged files should be easily surmountable. If not, it may be time to don your boots and start grooming! I personally use and like MP3tag on WIndows.
This was one of the huge positives of Roon, because it broke the reliance on file tags for music organization. Roon uses a 3rd party music database vendor (still Rovi?) for the actual information about albums, and only used the file tags as a means to identify an album in their internal database. Even this isn't perfect, but it's much easier for the perfectionist "groomers" like me to plug the remaining gaps.
I seem to recall @Taiko Audio and @EuroDriver mentioning that XDMS would use a similar service to identify albums, rather than relying on file tags exclusively. Perhaps Ed can clarify that this is still the design point.
If so, then these issues with poorly-tagged files should be easily surmountable. If not, it may be time to don your boots and start grooming! I personally use and like MP3tag on WIndows.
First, let me thank folks for their comments and suggestions.
I actually do obsessively groom my tracks, I just seem to have missed the leading zero issue.
Every album has been through Tagscan, and I ensure the disc and track numbers are correct, then rename each file as:
"d-t track" where
D is disc number
T is track number
Track is tagged name of track
All the disc and track numbers were carefull checked. In what bizarre computer coding universe is 10 less than 2? Some dumb integer sort to save comparisons??
a legacy of a time when coders optimized for simplicity?
Why?????
Roon is a no go here, even if it sounded good as I detest the interface and keep my music in a logical folder structure that works beautifully for me and has been groomed and adjusted in the decades since I first ripped all my CD.
Also, much of my music cannot be tagged by any external service as it will not be found. For example, I have a lovely recording of Fairport Convention playing live at Cropredy from a week ago, as broadcast by the BBC. I carefully checked all the titles, disc numbers and track numbers. It just doesn't work correctly because some stupid software (lms' fault, not TAS) can't recognize that 2 < 10.
I need to check how some mobile apps treat this issue before I decide how much effort to put into adding leading zeros. Pray for me.
Is all your track metadata messed up? If you downloaded music it should be fine.
Who created the track numbers that are messed up?
There is no way to batch this.
maybe you have never programmed but 2 is not <10, but the program needs to understand how many digits the the track number field occupies. It can’t just assume that in some cases it is 1 and others it is 2.
If you want to send me 1 show via Dropbox I can edit the metadata and show you what it should look like.
