Just purchased a WD Black P10 5TB USB 3.0, hold a lot of songs, USB3.0 speed and no need external power, just getting power from ROCK, and save another copy on NAS, if I just playing music, the NAS goes sleeping and saved a lot of operation hours and less wear. and not hurting the wallet so deep just USD120 each, metal top also helps cooling the HDD down.
I just want to point out that a NAS is not a proper backup.
Some DAS require software to be installed in the computer attached. Just something to be aware of if contemplating using with a ROCK system.
Sure it is. Backing up a music library from a local drive to a NAS is certainly a backup. A NAS is certainly not a complete backup strategy in this case, but it is indeed a proper backup.
2 Likes
We have obviously different definitions of âproperâ.
Any important set of data copied from one storage device to another is a âproperâ backup. That cannot be successfully disputed. What is still open for discussion is what constitutes a âproperâ backup strategy. That depends on more factors than have been discussed here.
2 Likes
Wow⌠I was looking for the laugh emoji by the like button, but no joy. 
It would be fun to keep beating a dead horse on this issue, but why bother.
However, this point above I will comment on, since it is a common misconception. Many people think that SSDs are far more reliable than HDDs, but that is not always the case. it is true that SSDs are a far better traveling companion, as they are mostly resistant to shock damage (to a point, of course). However, the transistors have a life span - in particular with the number of allowed writes. In real life, it turns out that SSDs and HDDs have similar failure rates, though the industry tends to measure each to a different standard. Here is one of many articles that tell the taleâŚ
2 Likes
Thank you.
True, but since we are talking about storage for the music library, it turns out that this load is particularly well suited to SSD because it is essentially write-once-read-many. SSDs wear out from the writes, and that includes updates (changes) because you canât modify data on an SSD, you have to read a block, modify what you want, and write the entire block back. All this writing fries the drive, although we shouldnât exaggerate â a 1 TB Samsung SSD is listed at 600 TB writes, I.e. you can rewrite the entire drive 600 times. But in any case, we donât do that for music, we write it and then just read. (The page level chunking adds a little churn but other than that, we would write the entire drive only once.) So for the music library, we will not wear out the drive until long after music has been outlawed.
(The database is different, it is a more conventional read-write load with high churn rate, but it needs to be in SSD anyway because of speed.)
Funny enough, that applies to my other computer-based hobby as well, photography, where the RAW files (the ânegativesâ) are never modified, and all churn is in a metadata database.
4 Likes
SSDâs will typically fail with no warnings, unlike HDDâs that will typically show signs of early failures with read and write errors, normally picked up by SMART details over time. Modern OSâs will use this info to flag pending demise.
Note I said âtypicallyâ. Of course YMMV
1 Like
Well, I have all of my ripped music on the following:
- 256gb USB stick
- Laptop hard disk
- RAID NAS (in humidity and temperature controlled storage room)
- 1TB SSD in Nucleus+
- 2TB external Back up drive stored in a âfireproofâ safe, ANDâŚ
âŚthe original freaking CDs.
Yes, any or all of those various storage media could failâŚand even all fail at the same time in a nuclear holocaust.
If all of those options fail, Iâll likely have bigger fish to fry, or Iâll be radioactive free-floating energy and simply wonât care.
Perhaps we can avoid further pedantry on this topic? Just a suggestion 
3 Likes
Lol. This. Perspective!
(We lived thru the Cuban missile crisis and the cold war. Our plan was to coat ourselves in cooking oil and Shake n Bake and go stand on the roof. That way we could contribute at least something to survivors, if any.)
1 Like
I. Love. This! Still chuckling! Thanks for that!
1 Like
I recently made the NAS to USB SSD transition myself. There was a fabulous Black Friday sale on 4TB SanDisk SSDs, so I was able to consolidate into one drive. Itâs just one fewer thing to go wrong and prevent me from listening to music. Itâs also somewhat faster, as a nice side benefit.
First, I donât see anyone claiming a RAID NAS is a replacement for a backup. If a drive on your NAS fails (and it will, someday) thereâs a good chance all you need to do is pop another in and and let the system automatically rebuild the array. If your USB drive fails (and it will, someday) then you will do a restore from your backup, assuming you have one. It doesnât mean if you use a NAS you donât need backups though.
Second, itâs often pointed out most NASes have borderline enough processing power to handle Roon. The heavy lifting, though , is in the database management, not streaming the music files, even high bit rate files. So if you were running Roon on a NAS and changed to a high powered NUC running ROCK and gave it access to the music files on your NAS you would undoubtedly see a major performance increase. But itâs hard for me to see how changing from the NUC accessing the NAS to the NUC accessing the USB drive is going to change anything much. People do recommend storing the database on a SSD, but it doesnât have to be where you store your music. In other words, whether you run your core on a NAS or a powerful computer makes a difference, but where you store your music shouldnât make much. The two situations should not be conflated.
Speaking personally I have no performance issues with Roon. When I add new music files they get found. But I have a modest collection, still listen to lots of CDâs and vinyl, and am in no big hurry to get my entire CD collection ripped. When I do rip a CD the amount of time it takes for Roon to find it is trivial compared to the amount of time it takes me to massage the tags in such a way they get organized by Roon in such a way that it makes sense to me (I have a mostly classical collection). Which is the biggest reason Iâm in no hurry to do it. So I expect the Synology DS415+ running my core and storing my music files will suit my needs for a while.
When starting to use Roon for the first time this is where the local USB connected music drive will shine on the initial database population and music analysis tasks.
I have a good deal of experience with the time it takes from NAS to a NUC with ROCK on i7 and higher spec i7 with windows 10 core. All with larger 8+TB music shares on a NAS vrs a local drive (spinning) and local trumps NAS connection every time. Maybe if you have a 10Gbe connection on both ends and a powerful enough NAS to get the highest thruput you might get closer, but most home based NAS wonât compete in this space better than a USB3 drive locally attached.
I run 2 NAS setups one backs up the otherâŚ36TB one and 24TB one and yes my 14TB+ music is accessed via the NAS - but I will be moving to a local music drive when I get time to source an affordable 16TB USB or internal drive.
For those with only one NAS I suggest you put your music primary on a USB direct attached drive and keep a backup on the NAS
For those without a NAS I suggest you have 2 USB drives one primary and backup - updated regularly and add on your Roon database backups too.
1 Like
Iâm running the Roon Core on a MacBook Pro, Core I9 processor, maxed out on SSD storage and RAM. I am in the process of ripping my old CD collection to the hard drive on the MacBook Pro. MacBook Pro connected to NAD 765 home theatre via HDMI. Flawless playback of these local files. I also stream using Tidal. Another advantage is that I can take my MacBook Pro on the road and not have to worry about an Internet connectionâŚas I have a tremendous collection of local music on the hard drive. Only issue: quite a few of my CDs are approaching 40 years old (hard to believe) and are so scratched that I canât rip them, even using error correction on CD ripper on dbPowerAmp. This issue partially my fault as I got rid of the CD cases years ago, and moved all over the world with these CDs while in the Navy. Granted, I have a very expensive system, as that MacBook Pro is about $5K. Sort of crazy, but I intend to keep it a long time. Since the MacBook Pro is sitting near my home theatre amp, I control the system mostly through two other Macs in the house or an iPhone. One issue that I canât seem to resolve is that when I start music from the MacBook Pro holding the core, the HDMI display on my 82 inch Samsung TV shows that album⌠But if I go back to a remote Mac or iPhone to control Roon, I can change only the track and album, and the display remains of the original album chosen on the MacBook Pro holding the core. I used to connect to my amp via Apple TV, and I canât recall not being able to change the display via a remote Roon connection. I believe the HDMI connection, though, gives a bit better audio resolution. My work around is to use another remote mouse to control the MacBook Pro Core, but it is not easy to use from my listening chair. I have to get a book to glide the mouse.
CD rot? 
1 Like
I too have CDs that are pushing 35 years old (started collecting while I was in the Army).
Consider one of these:
I got rid of all my records, CDâs, and DVDâs when I started embracing a minimalist lifestyle.
1 Like