I admit I have a large library, but iTunes copes OK. Roon is very slow - the whirling top right circle is always going and simple requests take time.
My library is 130k tracks, 1.1TB.
I choose a track to play…pause…pause…10 secs?
Would I be better just using Roon for my Hi-Res music (about 100 GB)?
Also, is there a simple way to provide a view that is just non-MP3? ie FLAC WAV etc?
forgive my , but that is hardly a large library for Roon. As Greg says, your library may well still be going through Roon’s initial ingestion process, which can affect performance if your hardware isn’t up to scratch. I’m sitting on just shy of 25k albums and Roon’s response is instantaneous. FWIW here’s the hardware I have Roon Server running on.
Can you post a screenshot of your Settings > Library tab?
If it’s still analyzing, you might want to keep the computer running all the time until it finishes. Also, there are settings in Background Audio Analysis speed that can use more resources and speed it up, but it may be even less responsive.
Under Background Audio Analysis Speed, you have it set to ‘throttled’. Tell it to use more cores to speed up the process. Please note that more cores you devote to the process, the slower the machine might be doing other things and that playback of music might be impacted.
I would, set it to use all the cores when you are done listening for the day or night, and then throttle it back or turn it off when you want to listen. It can take days even using all cores on a large library depending on environment. That process is not just looking at your tags and matching up the metadata, but actually, evaluating the waveform and determining Dynamic Range for every track. If Waveforms and DR and not important to you, especially if all you are doing is an evaluation, then turn it off.
For me when I first tried out the new analysis process, with 10k tracks, using 8 cores of an i7 and my music on a local SSD, it took somewhere around 6 - 8 hours. To give you a baseline of comparison.
Your Fusion drive is essentially working as a spinning disk; the SSD part is unlikely to hold the Roon database, and with a fusion drive, you cannot choose what goes where. (The MacOS will decide which parts to keep in the SSD portion, and switch them around according to what it thinks will give the best performance)
Hopefully you will find that when the audio analysis is complete the system will speed up, but I rather suspect that trying to run the Roon database on a spinning disk will leave you with a disappointing experience.
Roon does not need the analysis to function, it only uses it for waveform, DR values and volumn leveling. Plus, it would be much faster for you, to run the analysis when you are not using the machine for anything else.
And as @evand pointed out, the audio analysis is a one time process for the whole library. Once it is done, it only runs it for any new music added.
I would not say that - it is the question of SSD vs spinning disk. At various points in the forum and knowledge base, you will find the recommendation that the database should be on SSD, to speed up the access when searching etc. I also have a Mac with Fusion drive (not used for Roon) and the Fusion drive is great at doing what is was designed to do, namely, speeding up access to frequently-used files such as parts of the OS. However, the bulk of the storage is still spinning disk. Whether that is fast enough to give you a decent response with your library, only you can say. What I can tell you is that using an SSD-based system (in my case, a ROCK) then access to the library for searching, selecting tracks and so on is just about instantaneous - even when using an iPad as the remote controller over WiFi - so even the smallest latency would be very obvious. Note that the music files themselves (AIFF, FLAC or whatever) can still reside on spinners - it is the Roon database that matters the most. I am quite sure that Roon on a Windows machine would perform at about the same speed as on a Mac if using the same hardware (although I understand that for really huge libraries, the Mac does run into limitations, but neither you or I are in that situation right now)