Decreasing Performance with Roon Updates (ref#YMGRUM)

Affected Product

Roon

Roon Core Platform

Roon Optimized Core Kit (ROCK)

Roon Core Specifications

Intel NUC BOXNUC7i7BNH, 8GB RAM, most recent version Rock, music library on WD NAS connected via gigabit-LAN, 6 yrs. old system running 24/7

Connected Audio Devices

Cambridge Audio EVO 150 (Roon Ready - TCP/IP, Gigabit-LAN), KEF LSX (Roon Tested - TCP/IP and KEF streaming), several Sonos Devices connected via TCP/IP and Sonos streaming and several old school AV Amps (Denon, Pioneer) connected via TCP/IP and Apple AirPlay

Home Network Details

Switched Gigabit-LAN all over the house. WLAN Mesh Network für wireless devices (IEEE 802.11 ac + n)

Roon Issue Category

Performance

Description of Issue

With each new version, Roon seems to need more and more power

To be expected as more and more metadata and features get added to Roon as time goes on, I guess.
Do you have any specific issue(s) anyone might be able to help you with?

2 Likes

Has your library remained static in six years? My own has at least doubled, so I would expect a change due to that.

1 Like

Thanks for bringing this up, @BlackJack. Basically possible… although I think that Roon uses intelligent caching strategies that do not permanently load the processor.
I’m afraid the problem is more in the area of digital filters, which may be based on more computationally intensive algorithms today than 5 years ago. However, I only use PCM, volume leveling and sample rate conversion up to 384kHz (plus MQA if the end device supports it).

Well, good point. My library has almost remained static regarding my local audio files on the NAS. But I’ve had a Tidal subscription for about 2 years, which I use a lot. About 3000 of 7200 albums come from Tidal. Maybe that and the fact that almost all Tidal albums are MQA encoded is the reason for the higher CPU usage.

There is not enough information here to do anything than blindly guess. How do you measure this, is there any data?

Right, there is no detailed data nor measurement. Over the years of using Roon, I noticed that Roon now shows 34x processing speed, while in the beginning (5-6 years ago) it showed 50-70x. While fiddling with the parameter settings, I noticed that there is a new (?) module called MUSE that handles conversions in the digital domain. So I suspect that more complex algorithms lead to higher processor requirements even with the same parameter settings.
I think I can live with that :sweat_smile:

Ah ok, the processing speed indicator, that helps.

The MUSE thing is just a new name for Roon DSP - a branding they added when they added DSP to ARC recently. Apart from the name, it’s completely unchanged and the same as it has been since Roon 1.8 or longer, i.e. in any case quite a long time. The only change I remember since then was a note in the release notes once that they made some DSP things more efficient.

DSP/MUSE only comes into play when using it, but of course your 384 upsampling is quite computationally expensive. I bet if you turned that off, the speed indicator would disappear because it would be higher than 100x.

Volume leveling is quite cheap and I don’t know about MQA, but it will add up a bit.

The 34x you see is still about 30 times faster than what you need (the recommended minimum with ROCK is about 1.2x), so I agree that it’s better to stop worrying and to enjoy what you have. :slight_smile:

1 Like

LOL yeah, you bet I enjoy Roon! It was the second best investment I took when I purchased the Roon license 6 yrs. ago. So you want to know what was the best investment of my life? Marrying my longtime girlfriend (right before Roon came into my life) :innocent: :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

2 Likes

Enjoy that as well :slight_smile: Congrats on both

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 36 hours after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.