my reply wasn’t directed at you…
I do indeed read and understand that when you’re using Squeezelite on the Innuos outside of Roon you’re not having issues. That doesn’t preclude Innuos’ implementation from causing issues.
Neither does it preclude Roon from providing a platform for better integration with Squeezelite
Here we go again, define better. It doesn’t break when not used on the Innuos. What exactly do you want Roon to improve? If you can’t answer that you’re wasting everyone’s time, most especially yours.
Read the responses above to get that answer. [Moderated]
[Moderated]
I try to help and get shot down by a chap that has no idea where his problem lies and immediately assumes it lies in Roon because his toy works when bypassing Roon. Wants better integration but has no idea what that means. Wow!
I think simple logic dictates that Innuos should be fixing this by making Squeezelite work to Roon. But why should they if it works to their software. It leaves users with a binary choice. Roon or Innuos. Lobbing grenades at Roon doesn’t change that. In fact it probably just antagonises everyone. But I suspect that is the aim here.
2 Likes
The aim here was to highlight that Roon + Squeezelite sounds better than Roon on it’s own and better than squeezelite on it’s own.
Logic would dictate that the better combined SQ would get more customers, in this case Innuos customers to buy Roon. Therefore Roon should look into that integration.
It does not need to be binary or a 0 sum game. Allowing developers to build on ones platform helps both Roon and Innuos.
[Moderated]
I have contacted Innuos about this. They have told me there is nothing they can do, it is up to Roon. Something they don’t have control on. They have done what they can via the experimental feature released on June 2018: http://www.innuos.com/en/go/release-1-4-1
Their native SqueezeLite implementation (with iPeng app on iOS) works great. No dropouts.
No, logic dictates that Roon ensure their supplied solutions are rock solid stable and work as advertised. If there are sound quality gains to be had, logic dictates that they pursue that on their solutions, and not on an open source third party solution! It may leave a few out in the cold but overall it keeps a majority happy.
Rock solid stable is not equal to best SQ
Not so sure on the latter. With my ZENith MK3, Innuos w/ Roon Squeezelite experimental feature and Innuos’ native playback sounds noticeably better than Roon alone. However, I don’t hear any difference with SqueezeLite either with Roon or Native
For me it’s
Roon+squeezelite > native squeeze > Roon
Specially for streaming.
For local playback Roon experimental and native squeeze sound about the same
That is a misrepresentation. Saying only Roon can fix the issue doesn’t mean they are obliged to. It isn’t ‘up to Roon’ at all. Roon works OK to standard Squeezebox hardware, and as far as I am aware they have no obligation to make it do any more than that. If people want to run unofficial configurations that is up to them. But they are unsupported, and Roon cannot be expected to support their own configurations, and other people’s as well. That is a simple commercial reality. Use at your own risk. And that isn’t Roon’s words. That is Innuos.
The commercial reality is also this
The Innuos costs anywhere from $2000-$13000. Roon for 1 year cost $120. For folks like me who have purchased an Innuos want Roon to better integrate with players like squueze. If they dont want to, no problemo…squeeze on its own sounds better than Roon. Il keep the $400 bucks for the lifetime purchase and wait for the next Roon to come by.
Till then the Innuos would continue to sound divine.
That’s exactly right. And I have resigned to the fact that Roon does not support SqueezeLite. It is what it is. I realize that Roon has no obligation whatsoever to support SqueezeLite, and/ or RAM memory playback for that matter. Fair game
The other commercial reality is that Roon competes with Innuos. With their Nucleus. I am not that naive to simply forget that.
??? Misrepresentation ? A bit harsh, don’t you think?
I think the target that Nucleus is aimed at doesn’t overlap anywhere near as much with Innuos products as you might think.
?? Misrepresentation ? A bit harsh
Maybe it is, but it doesn’t change the fact that Roon have no obligation to make their product work to third party open source software. And Innuos know that! So to suggest Roon have anything to do is strange.
Hi all,
I few flags have been raised, which I’ve dealt (some posts removed and some moderated).
We want the forum to welcoming place to “hangout” … so please abide the forums guidelines … be polite, discuss the topic in hand not the posters themselves.
If you feel someone has crossed the line please flag [and let the mods deal with it] rather then engage as that just adds fuel to the fire.
1 Like
It is not misrepresentation, they simply stated that fixing LMS playback via Roon would require Roon’s intervention. That’s all. They are not “misrepresenting” anything. They are simply stating the fact that they have no control over this.
Roon not having any obligation on this does not make what Innuos said a misrepresentation. Or maybe I don’t know the meaning of “misrepresentation” well. To me is very negative, similar to “lying”. I don’t know.
Oh yes it does. The target is those people that are willing to go the extra mile (read: have the cash) to choose between an Innuos as their Roon server, or a Nucleus. For the rest, there is NUC or their general purpose computer. I should know, I have used them all.