I really like the new search, but the result list would be smaller and thus clearer, if the track appeares only once per artist and the different versions/albums are on a second level.
I would prefer something like this:
I agree with you @Frank_Klaeren. I think Roon missed a bet by not performing a triage first. Say you entered āBlue Skies Over Beethovenā or something similarly obtuse. Rather than give a ātop resultā, it would give: a top artist guess, a top song guess, maybe a top album guess, etc. Then user selects the appropriate category.
What would then follow is just such a concise presentation as you want.
I always thought the TIDAL search was particularly well done, and follows this model.
I think your complaint is unreasonable ā¦ search āborderā or āthe borderā and the result is in the All Track Search Results. Search āborder americaā or āthe border americaā and itās the Top Result.
Iāve thrown lots of search queries at Roon at I think it is doing a very good job, especially when most of the queries were for tracks and albums outside my library. Search is significantly better than in 1.5 and that should be acknowledged.
Interesting. When I search āThe Borderā, Roon doesnāt return āOn The Borderā at all and Americaās āThe Borderā is the second result:
Also, when I search āOn The Borderā, Roon does return the Eagles album and song as a first result, plus Americaās āThe Borderā is nowhere to be found:
So it seems to work perfectly here. Which does raise the question: why different results with users using the same Search (and both albums in their library)?
I donāt have these albums/tracks in my library; that may be affecting how the results are ranked?
Iāve launched a new thread here to discuss what is and especially what isnāt working with the new search.
Iāve noticed and read it. Do you still experience issues with Search speed? I havenāt had any. Must say I donāt stream any music, I only play local files from my HDDās.
1 Like
The first half-day or so of 1.6 release, search was terribly slow (20+ seconds to return a result). Seems they fixed it (more servers? I donāt know) and I havenāt had any complaints since.
Iād be curious to know if thereās a local-only search as well, which could explain why since you donāt stream then you didnāt see any slowdown.
Yup - more servers. Someone from the Roon team posted this somewhere in the forum in the past few days (sorry I canāt be more specific, but thereās been rather a lot of posts recentlyā¦).
I guess skynet is learning based of all your searches for the same thing. The more itās searched for and then subsequently chosen the search in general will give the result wanted. Isnāt that the whole point of the new engine?
I never heard of The Border or America, so I tested.
Took too long, as usual for the new search.
But I then got several results relevant to me, but not including the track you guys are talking about, or America. Excellent.
When I searched for The Border America I got your results.
As expected, ātheā did not affect the result.
So, this morning SWMBO showed me a top 40 from 1971 and talking about the first single she bought. Then she said, she couldnāt remember CCS. Game on, and within seconds I was playing this.
No MQA in sight but there are some great recordings. Titanic playing Sultana is a gemā¦
Game on
2 Likes
How long did you wait to get those search results?
This release and slowness is about to end my appreciation for Roon.
Looking for CSS took less than 2 seconds (just tried).
In these last days my Roon is significantly faster w.r.t. days immediately after 1.6 release
Thanks for sending those result times back. Clearly something was different between your times and mine. Mine was consistently 30+ seconds and slow to queue up songs. Soā¦ reboot and clear all cache. Same thing we tell our business community when they have problems 
. Now 4 seconds back on searches. 
Happy Days!
1 Like
I am sure im not the only one, but the search function in 1.6 is really unacceptable. All the work done to make Roon a quick and smooth experience, and then this happens.
A simple artist search in my library takes anywhere between 5 and 55 secondsā¦ 
(I have both Tidal and Qobuz)
I can accept that itās not Roons fault but then i must be able to limit my search to my own library first! Having the ālocal onlyā as a filter AFTER is useless and frankly stupid.
Iād like to know when this is remedied, as of right now Roon sucks and makes me use alternative software instead.
Whats the priority on this @support?
@Mikael_Ollars Just an idea: the new search (and Roon 1.6 overall) requires more frequent accesses to the internet, maybe it can be better switching DNS for Googleās 8.8.8.8 for example ?
After the initial slowdowns 3 weeks ago when Roon 1.6 kicked in, my searches have been fast, max 3-4 seconds.
Thanks Alec,
But i havenāt got an Internet issue, i have an issue with Roon! 
No, i will not change to Googles DNS, i have excellent response and speed on my Internet access.
Response within 7ms and transfer speeds of somewhere between 65 and 95Mbps.
Besides, i cannot have an application that is dependant upon internet access? Iād never buy in to that.
I have the same experience as Alec - search was slow at the introduction of 1.6, but now it is as fast as he is reporting. I also have my DNS changed from that of my ISP to Cloudflare (1.1.1.1), and that has helped with Hi-Res streaming from Qobuz.
Just a thought, could you try temporarily changing your DNS to Google or Cloudflare, just to see whether that has any effect on search performance? It would be a useful data point I think.