Serious question: Can anyone give a case why I should pay $9.99 for 2TB to backup my FLAC’s instead of putting that money toward an all you can eat lossless streaming service?
Mike that depends, for me only a portion of my money goes to music backup, it really provides cloud storage for my extended family for the year at an annual cost of £79.99 (or whatever it was for 2TB) so that’s music, photos, videos and documents for 6 people. So I look at it as being a bargain (and a reduction in technical support queries if everything is already stored in the cloud).
If you don’t need it you don’t pay. Google gives you 15GB as opposed to Apple’s 5GB, but we are heading into a world where you pretty much have to pay at least one ferryman
Because they have gaping holes in their catalogues, constantly loose albums and move them about. Also you get to choose what version and quality it is and not have to put up with what your given , which with Tidal is becoming a very contentious issue if your not in a Qobuz zone. It also allows you access to your files anywhere and without having to open up security holes in your own network to get access to them remotely.
1 Like
You backup the content that you can’t get streaming. Many of my favorite artists and albums do not exist on TIDAL or Qobuz. I am beholden to the rips of the CDs until they show up. Unfortunately, many of these artists lack the knowledge and gusto to get modern with their old content, so I’ll be stuck for a while.
It depends on the content you own and are backing up. That question’s answer is unique to the individual. And in some ways, it really is a matter of what is more important to you, SQ or convenience.
IMHO, the mastering of an album is one of the, if not the, most important factors in the SQ of an album. The mastering of many of the CDs I own is NOT what is available on the streaming services. As such, I will use the version which sounds better to me, the CD rip.
And, then again, even if it sounds good NOW on streaming, that is no guarantee that the next remaster might not kill the SQ. So, I would argue if you HAVE any kind of CD library that you enjoy the SQ of, to keep it. Maybe not online, hard drives are wicked cheap and easily stored.
I remember the drive to divest albums when CDs came around, some people came to regret doing so. The same has started with CDs. Several people I know who divested themselves of their CD collections in favor of a streaming only, both of the CDs and the rips, have now come to regret that decision.
As for performance, I use bubbleupnp with my music in Google drive as 44/16 FLAC, it works pretty well even when I am on mobile data ( on the road in my car playing to Android auto)
One of the wrongs of the backup implementation. It should be data only. My tags, my bookmarks, my favorites and so on are what i mostly need to preserve, not the artwork which already I have both in the music files/folders and over the internet…
It gets even better for the family plan, you get up to 6TB, though you need a little bit of imagination to access everything under one account.
1 Like
It is the family Microsoft365 we have, so I think my wife and I have 1TB each, and that’s plenty. When we originally signed up, it was unlimited. I dare say if I need more storage I can invent some children. I’m very pleased with the service now, though years ago it was a bit slow at syncing compared to drop box.
Just wondered if there are plans to add other cloud storage backup options natively within Roon like Dropbox (iCloud, onedrive or Livedrive as examples).
Dropbox is expensive and while I know there are drive mapping options for cloud storage, just think adding this would be a good addition.
1 Like
Oh please, yes. S3 support! Cheap fast storage!
Will roon support plans to mount network disks in the future?
For example, support similar WebDAV protocol to mount cloud disk.
I think it would be better to support the network protocol webdav than to only support a specific network hard disk service provider (such as onedrive).