Network Traffic with Roon and Melco

I’ve been using Roon on a Mac Mini for a few years, and love it. I’ve got a large music library, and use the usual streaming services to augment that. That’s why Roon works so well for me.

I’ve got a high end system - all Naim - and am in pursuit of the best sound I can get.

I’ve borrowed a Melco Server - and connected it directly to the Naim 555 streamer - fully expecting to hear improvements in sound quality (I did) and fully expecting to find operating it and finding music really clunky (I also did!) - so I’ve realised that I can add that library to Roon via the share - and I’ve done that - all the music on the Melco integrated into my Roon library, best of both worlds? …well that’s the question….

So if I stream a track - will it go via Roon? …or is Roon just a control point?

Ideally the answer is that the music data goes directly from the Melco device, and into the Naim.

The scenario I worry about is that it’s going from the Melco, through multiple network switches to the Mac Mini where Roon will then serve it back out (via the same series of network switches in reverse) to the Melco and into the Naim Streamer. I’m thinking that scenario will negate all the positives that the Melco brings, and I may as well stick to the USB connected storage on the Mac Mini.

So - any network wizzes able to put my mind at rest either way?

Yes imo your wasting your time using the Melco but then I don’t honestly believe in them at all All its doing is acting as a a very expensive switch and Nas between the streamer and the network and so seems an unnecessary expensive step. Try it and see, only you will make the decision if it’s better or not. In this config all traffic from and to Roon goes through the core and Melco as I said it’s acting as a switch as it does in just direct to the ND555. Music is stored on the Melco, Roon pulls all music through the core, music gets sent to ND555 that’s attached to Melco so it has to go through rest of network, to Melco and on to ND555. Network hops should not change anything it’s reclocked at every stage of the way and remember it’s just data at all these points not audio . Some believe the last stage is where noise gets in so in theory if the Melco is supposed to stop this it will continue to so in this environment.


When using Roon, all files are directed through the Roon Core. Files on the Melco will be pulled off then sent back. It is unnecessary network traffic but it is the way Roon works. I employ a closely integrated system. Roon core with files, and an internet feed into one side of an isolating switch. Streamer on the isolated side. That works well for me.


Thanks for both replies.

I wonder if I’ll get better sound (and save quite a bit of money over the Melco) by getting a Nucleus Plus, buying myself an 8TB SSD and putting it into the RN+, and then sticking that into the same English Electric Switch that feeds the ND555…

It does seem like a waste of the Melco storage to use it “just” as a file store - when everything is going all over the house to the Roon Mac Mini and back. Keeping that network path short - and all within a good “audio grade” switch feels like it might be more elegant and sound better (or the same)

It’s your wallet only you can decide if it warrants the expense but that seems a better choice of money spending than a Melco.


Hi all,

just traded in my Synology (415+ I think) and Lumin T1 combo for a (6TB) Melco N-1800.
Using the Synology as external back-up now.
The N-1800 software was updated last week to make it a Roon endpoint.
The difference is absolutely staggering. Imaging is other-wordly. Much cleaner as well. I can easily play 8-10dB louder than i used to on most tracks before the stress kicks in.

1 Like