Considering ROCK

New to Roon, up and running for about a week . I was a long term user of JRiver MC and enjoy Roon for the SQ, features, integration and documentation. So I converted to a lifetime subscription within a few days.

I’m currently running Core on a QNAP TVS-472X, i5, 32gb memory, dual M.2 ssd. This is where my 42TB music library resides. The Roon DB resides on one of the M.2 SSDs. Previously both SSDs were configured for caching, now just one is.

I haven’t seen any obvious downside\with this setup but I’m considering installing ROCK on my NUC7i5BNH, 256gb and 16gb ram. I’ve done a backup of the Windows disk image so it wouldn’t be an issue to restore the current NUC if need be.

My one question is whether I’d see any performance hit consuming the large PGGB remastered 705.6/768KHz files between the NUC and NAS.

I’ve always operated on the belief that if it isn’t broke don’t fix it. But willing to try the ROCK if there isn’t a performance hit.

I’d appreciate hearing this groups perspective on migrating Core to my NUC from my NAS.

I’m a little confused. What’s on your NUC now? You can install ROCK on your NUC and have two Roon cores and switch back and forth to give it a try. You can have multiple Roon cores, but only activate one at a time with just one license.

Thanks Jim_F. As I’ve been setting things up I was using the NUC as an endpoint for playing to my DAVE DAC. I hadn’t considered having two Roon cores that I could evaluate, that does seem like a good way to proceed. I can always roll back to Windows if there’s no a compelling reason to stay with ROCK.

With an i5 based NAS and a 42TB music library, I’d be inclined to leave the Core running on the NAS. I think Roon performs a little smoother when it has a local music library and you’re not going to be able to cram that much storage into a NUC. At least not easily/cheaply.

1 Like

While normally I dislike NASs, I’m going to agree with @Mike_deCock here.

Accessing 42TB over a network is only going to aggravate things. Given that your NAS is fast, and it works, I’d stick with it.


Thanks danny.

Thank you @Mike_deCock for the feedback.

42TB? Whoa, that is one seriously big music library and I understand
with music libraries that large, Roon needs serious horsepower. Are you having any performance issues with Roon running on your NAS? If not, then I’d leave it alone. A 7i5 NUC might not be enough - even if running ROCK. On the other hand, that would be an awesome comparison. Please report back if you do.

Several respondents have reacted similarly. But reread the opening post. Then, take 42 TB and divide by about eight. The music library is not actually that huge – because it has been offline upsampled by an average factor of around 8x. That is its own form of unnecessary silliness, though I am sure that Marc swears by it. Regardless, the number of albums and tracks is large, just not as massive as 42 TB might seem, prima facie. And it is the number of tracks that matters to Roon, not so much the storage size of those tracks.


1 Like

Did run Roon for several years on my QNAP 671 with 16 GByte and i5, I just have appr. 20 TByte with appr. 440.000 tracks, also lifetimer; I always had troubles running the core on my QNAP (security issue with the port of Roon to QNAP, remember this port is done by a guy in his freetime and not officially supported by Roon), refer to Roon stopping randomly, to be honest it might be that those problems were due to the combination of Roon and Linn as these problems continued with my NUC10i7FNK with 32 GByte where I moved the core to, refer to Roon on ROCK crashes due to Linn devices with "CreateHandle: Assertion" error [Ticket In] - #72 by fschmeis; for the last 4 weeks I am SO HAPPY with this combination, didn’t had any issue any more, love running Roon on my NUC and having the library on my QNAP; Running the core on a NUC and having a huge library on QNAP I see only two potential downsides: 1. initial analysis of the library might take some time => connect NUC with 1 GBit Ethernet; 2. adding new albums to the library might need to initiate manually a (fast running) rescan (I don’t mind)

Who am I to recommend something different than Dany from Roon :wink:, but what I would do: test it on your existing NUC and if happy in principle: purchase a brand new (refer to NUC12WSHi7 with 32 GByte and a very fast SSD, install ROCK (supports for some weeks now also UEFI startup), connect your QNAP and NUC via GBit Ethernet and by happy for the rest of your lifetime :smiley:

1 Like

@fschmeis Thanks for sharing your experiences and the links. I will likely try out ROCK on my NUC just for fun. It’s mostly sitting idle so why not right?! At least I’ll have two points to compare before considering other approaches like a newer NUC you mentioned.

1 Like

lack of common sense or judgment; foolishness.


and don’t forget: the snappines of Roon is determined by the speed of a single core, therefore i7 should outperform i5 to some extend

Just curious.

What is a large PGGB (Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster) remastered file?

Would this explain the large library size?


It’s a piece of software that does some type of DSP to upsample your audio. Similar to HQ Player in principle (I have no clue of the sound quality benefits of PGGB). The different lies in how they do the DSP. HQ Player does it in realtime, so you spend CPU /GPU on the problem instead of storage. PGGB does it non-realtime so you have to do it in advance of playback and save the very large output to disk to play it back.

In my personal opinion, the HQ Player approach is far superior, as storage is fragile and HQ Player allows for playing with algorithms at a whim. PGGB strategy seems to just be asking for trouble in so many ways.


More similar to HQPlayer Pro which allows you to upsample.and save to file.

Appreciate the explanation.

I am somewhat familiar with HQ Player from this forum. First time I come across PGGB.

I am correct to assume that HQ Player is made for Roon use and PGGB can be both of a non Roon and Roon use?

– MD

HQPlayer can be used without Roon as well

HQPlayer was not made for Roon, and it predates Roon ( not sure about sooloos)… Early Roon adopters requested Roon to work with HQPlayer.

I guess this PGGB conversion can be saved as a .flac which in turn will be a much bigger file than before the conversion.

Imagine what the file size would be if it saved as a .wav