Well, “extort” was a bad choice, and I apologize, but a system of paid “plugins”, “extensions”, or “in-app purchases” to extend and/or enable additional features within the Roon app is not something I’d welcome. But the idea is certainly a way to increase revenue - might be a pain to maintain though.
1 Like
The idea is to increase revenue and value. Doing one without the other will leave us with neither.
5 Likes
I think this would be a good way to offer special features. They aren’t part of the basic structure of Roon, but they are “special features” that a user can decide to buy or not (even Roon Mobile could be a special feature as well as the possibility of playing music videos…)
I really believe the way Roon & HQPlayer are integrating and working together as a key example how extra value is created, to the benefits of limited part of Roon’s customer base.
Disclaimer: I am a huge fan of what HQplayer is bringing to the table on the level of Sound Quality, BUT in most cases HQplayer is used to benefit from upsampling in combination with filters & modulators. This also requires a lot of extra processing power.
The way integration is done now, allows HQplayer to be developed in its niche area, coming up with new developments, new supported platforms at a speed that Roon would not be able to follow and deliver. It is also so specific demanding on the user to understand and play with HQplayer configuration, that Roon would be killed by support questions if it would be a ‘basic’ function of Roon.
There is a lot of value brought to HQplayer by Roon - without Roon I would not be using it, how much I
do like it.
Also businesswise, each company can follow its own direction and set its own pricing. This enables customers to decide if they choose to use Roon exclusive for great sound quality, or that they go one step further to optimize the whole music chain using HQplayer.
So please, do not change anything in this collaboration and setup. It brings great value for those who have invested in it, without impacting the bigger part of Roon’s customers.
At the contrary, do not hesitate to find and build collaborations with companies that bring value in certain specific areas that are not the core competence of Roon.
Dirk
1 Like
Kind of hoping roon mobile is a base package when/if it’s released. Think they’re going to want this as a feature set if they want to stay competitive.
Can’t really see if people pay more for video add-on. Doesn’t seem to go with the original idea of roon. For me adding more discovery features was most important. After mobile, I’d like more artwork built in like Qobuz has links to. Maybe more review sources. Build up that record store experience.
1 Like
Roon merch!
2 Likes
Sadly, money does not keep a business going, customers do. I think the manner in which Roon made this move shows no loyalty to those customers who have been loyal to Roon, especially when Roon was having challenges with quality upgrades.
2 Likes
@danny went straight into Lifetime after a couple days of trial. I’d be prepared to pay up for something like Apple Watch functionality on top of a new iOS package; also integration with Siri. I bet a lot of users would happily pay for these kinds of features if it meant they arrived sooner, or at all.
1 Like
I think it will depend on how they want to set the mobile option (today we can only speculate because we have no information).
Today, in addition to Plex, who offers a service of this type? Nobody. And the Plex mobile …
Roon can create something really innovative like Roon himself was at the beginning. In this case i don’t see why it shouldn’t be a plus that a user (even lifer like me) should buy
For video i know Roon position. But dreaming doesn’t involve an annual subscription or an increase in the lifetime price 
we were having challenge with quality upgrades?
1 Like
Well Synology offers DS Audio package for their servers which works well. I am using is one the go since it was introduced.
I hope Roon will not start fragmenting their software.
The issue is they are now charging $699 for lifetime subscription and lets say the next big upgrade is mobile support but they charge an add on fee of $199, you’re going to have even more unhappy people. Or they only offer an annual mobile server fee. I’d just stick with the free streaming apps.
I am reminded of the Bill Gates quote “Life’s not fair - get used to it” The immediate pressing of the ‘not fair - I’m entitled’ button is really wearing nowadays. Good stuff costs money - rubbish doesn’t, make your choice and stop moaning.
1 Like
Qobuz recent price reduction addressed that. Roon could do the same if it chose to.
That’s not a Bill Gates quote, my dad said it for years when I was growing up.
2 Likes
Maybe a multi-year annual with a slight reduction in the annual rate would be useful. Offer extra months of the subscription with the longer terms. Price certainty, and a little break to the consumer. Subscriber certainty for you.
Now if you plan to drop prices, that could create an issue unless you offered term credit to the users.
For example, 2 year term gets 2 extra months free, 3 year term get four extra months free.
Buy one and get one free. Haha, that is quite British.
Make Roon free with a donation button 
3 Likes
… with an upsell option. I would love to do this.
1 Like
Here’s where i’d look @danny, i wouldn’t want to pay a lot extra, but i regularly buy the music i favorited in Qobuz.
To me, they have made it really easy to select, and buy the albums i want. However, there’s always some handiwork needed for extracting the tar-ball, correcting names and metadata, then copying the albums to the correct place for Roon to pick them up.
To me Roon is all about content and the experience of listening, augmented by the availability of song/album suggestion, reviews, doscovery etc. I would most likely not pay for enhanced DSP functionality, either in the vein of Dirac or HQ Player.
I might consider paying for making my Roon setup self sufficient and/ or portable though. (No need for Internet after initial setup and cataloguing)
2 Likes