1.8 is pseudo-artistic typography by folks who have no idea about real-life functionality. Or they don't care

I was looking forward to the new style and features. Now that I have seen and tried it (a bit), I am vastly disappointed.
Just one thing I do appreciate: Reviews now “normal” black on white instead of white on dark photo. That annoyed me each and every time, because it projects a striped pattern on the retina that is just bothersome.
The main thing I don’t like at all: It seems like we are supposed to see as little as possible on the GUI / screen. I mean: As little information as possible.
What I need, in terms of information, is a) photographic info, meaning foremost album covers, then also artist pictures, but far less importantly – and b) text, meaning album titles, track titles, meta info etc.
But apparently all of this – photos, text – are only secondary for the genius designers of the new version. All they like is blank space. Depending on what view / feature is being displayed, more than half of the screen is just nothing. Emptiness.
So the effect of this is endless scrolling in order to get to what one wants to deal with.

  • Take the track listings for an album. The vertical spacing is absurdly generous. If they put double the number of lines into a given space, it would still be overly generous, but mostly all album titles would actually fit into the screen space and all the scrolling would be unnecessary.
  • On the other hand, album titles are being displayed in yelling big font sizes. We are apparently supposed to have perfect eyes for tiny little typo and at the same time awful eyes that need placard font sizes.
  • Similarly, both the album covers and the text info are ridiculously small, e.g. when looking for all recordings of a certain composition. The covers could easily take three times the real estate on the screen, within the same basic structure. But no, it’s just unrecognizable blotches of color, in favor of useless empty space all around again. My gosh, I’m looking at my screen and get nothing back.

I could go on with instances of dysfunctional typography, endlessly, but I’m already fed up.
What they apparently went for was pretentious “gallery style” or something, but actual readability, structural clarity and functionality got third tier treatment.
That’s what happens when “artists” create the visual style, instead of actual real-world craftsmen who know how things work.
This is the equivalent of a “beautiful” super sports car that is just a pain in the ass when you need to drive to work, bring children or buy stuff at the supermarket.


Which devices are you using? Spacing is worse on some than others.

Mostly a normal iPad, so space is very limited anyway and I would like to have much more info at a glance, but with slightly larger font sizes and larger covers at the same time.
On the other hand, even on my large 27 iMac, there is a total waste of space going on. Half the screen is empty in many cases. Ridiculous.

I have an absolutely different opinion on the whole story - and now what?

You are exactly right. I would be embarrassed to show this design to my graphic design friends who have worked with typography for decades. Unfortunately it’s too easy now for anybody to become a ‘designer’ but there are those who realize that typography is more than just choosing a font from a drop down menu because it looks cool, and that choosing the correct typography for both functionality and emotional impact is an art form.


While I have said it differently on other threads, I do agree that the UI is…well…to ME…horrible. Not disparaging any designer or programmer…this was obviously thought about, discussed, story boarded, presented, etc. by many people. I guess they all (or at least the majority of them it was a democratic vote) leaned a completely different direction than I would have chosen. Yet another of life’s little disappointments. And unfortunately it dampens my enthusiasm for Roon because the only way to use Roon is through the UI and I just am so disappointed every time I open Roon to use it. I just don’t understand why they went this way.

My wife always tells me I don’t NEED to understand everything. She clearly doesn’t understand. :wink:

I’ll get over it, but not without a lot of whining first! :grin:


Heavens forbid if you showed them Roon 1.8.
What would they think of you?
Would you have to carry the weight of shame around for eternity?
No more dinner party invites?


Nothing to do with me. I didn’t design it.

1.8 is pseudo-artistic typography

Roon 1.8’s graphics aren’t pseudo-artistic, it’s just not artistic at all and of course it shouldn’t be - what for would it?
De gustibus non est disputandum…

IMHO it is adequate to the content - simple, clear, intuitive, communicative, etc., etc.

No, using an oversized font for titles and section headings that doesn’t relate in style to the other fonts is trying to be artsy (think David Carson’s Raygun from the nineties). Using well weighted, justified properly, readable, and related to the other elements and overall use of space typography is simple, clear, intuitive, etc etc…

And now just wait the next update, when something that you like will get broke, and maybe, just maybe then you’ll understand what others experienced with 1.8.

Yes, you are right, but there is a way to level the field and make this likable for all user’s tastes (well, almost). But that will never happen first because of this stupid stubbornness from the roon side and second because for the vast majority (at least in this fiasco that we call forum) people are seeing only left or right and nothing in between.