I go back and read it slowly, marketing speak to the maximum extent. Bit over the top imo.
“Unparalleled Premium “ 
That’s the petrol I run in my truck.
Can’t be significantly different from any other current hardware, so this won’t happen. Besides, Roon’s performance with large libraries seems hamstrung by software architecture and tool chain, rather than by hardware performance.
The announcement’s wording, though, is testimony for a world-class marketing department. The balance between engineering and marketing has slightly shifted. Here’s hope it may again find its balance…
4 Likes
What could happen is less people running massive libraries on underpowered hardware, though.
I would argue it’s always both
You do, not everyone does or can. I feel like we had this conversation before 
1 Like
You could also have 2 million tracks from Qobuz in the library
And I have no doubt whatsoever that with Roon’s current architecture you wouldn’t get acceptable performance nor with a Nucleus Titan, nor with any other hardware.
1 Like
Glad you know the code
1 Like
And there I was thinking that by now you had a better grasp of user experience with big libraries, no matter the hardware used…
The main point that you missed was that the size of the internal HD says nothing about my question of expected maximum library size, which was the thread of discussion in which I made this post.
As for the experience, I’ve seen several users on the forum who seem to have acceptable performance with 750K track libraries, provided apparently that they don’t cross the 100 albums per artist / 100 tracks per album thresholds.
And those thresholds are not necessarily architecture limits but could be fixable. I don’t know because I don’t know the code. You are in a better position because you apparently know it, at least if I am to believe that you speak from knowledge.
Oh I got that and didn’t miss your point at all. All the same, to me it seems that Roon doesn’t scale up very well to very large libraries. You are entitled to think different, but that was my point anyway.
This slight is uncalled for, and we both know that I don’t know the code, nor is it necessary to know the code to get a grasp on user experience with big libraries.
Lastly, there have been many posts by Roon staff in the past with the gist that they don’t test with very large libraries, and one might understand from these that in the end, Roon may not care all that much for a tiny fraction of their user base with very big libraries.
1 Like
An issue that probably does not get discussed enough is the larger the number of files in the library, almost assuredly the greater the amount unidentifiable content. And therein lies the rub.
This should be required reading for those who want Roon to import and manage unusually large libraries filled with unofficial or non music content. It is one of the best Support responses. Ever. Because it is unapologetically direct as to what Roon is and is not designed to do.
AJ
6 Likes
Ok, it’s just that I spoke about something specific and your reply took it in a different direction that had little to do with it
Is necessary to know the code to state that the cause for poor experiences is specifically the architecture.
It is very helpful. This should be stated in the documentation where it speaks about specs and library sizes. I’d also imagine that the app could show helpful hints in this case instead of letting the user hanging. This would cut down on support time as well. (Edit: and there might be different solutions than repeating the unsuccessful re-identification every time)
I’m not sure I agree with the statement that such a library is outside the scope of consumer software. With digital availability and artists such as Phish and Grateful Dead to Giant Sand and Sonic Youth, who all offer vast live concert libraries, it seems very much a consumer case. It may not be possible currently to properly support them on consumer hardware, or it might need special care in setup, but I do believe that it’s in principle a consumer case.
Sorry this needs to be upfront and centre not hidden in the docs as they are selling a pup to classical or any other source of music that doesn’t have good metadata coverage that’s a lot of music not covered well by Roon. No mention of any caveats anywhere but I guess that doesn’t sell subscriptions.
As for the Titan can’t say we need another overpriced computer in a fancy coat when more important areas of Roon need serious investment. So many quick to jump on Audioquest for their stuff but this is equally as bad if you ask me.
4 Likes
In any case it shouldn’t be hidden in a forum post. I happen to think the place where the technical requirements are defined would be the appropriate one.
Come on people, they just made an announcement. I’m sure details will be forthcoming soon. Do we need to argue about every thing here?
9 Likes
I’ll have to disagree. They are not saying that it sounds better, just that it’s faster and has a fancy case. That’s IMHO significantly different even if it’s expensive. AQ would get much less flack if they advertised „pricy cables, they look nice“
1 Like
Given the amount of “technical details” officially provided for the current Nucleus, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Gotta wonder if RoonOS 2.0 is far behind…
And now the ■■ starts. Didn’t take long.
6 Likes
Unfortunately yes , it’s a forum it’s what people and will (unfortunately) continue to do. Until some one gets fed up or backs down
1 Like
Why is it unfortunate when people debate in a forum?
1 Like