Keep your NAS with audio files in place. The 7i5 NUC with 8 mb ram and 64 gb m.2 ssd running ROCK. No spinning hard drive in NUC case will yield excellent results. That is how my setup works.
So really i dont need the H version of NUCs which has the section for a HD,i can get the slightly cheaper thinner version
So would be keeping NAS as storage only ?
How is your NAS connected to NUC? Is it USB or direct ? Does it really matter?
So could just use NAS or external HD connected to NUC using the USBs.
If im saving money on the NUC version ,is it worth upping to the i7 NUC.
Sorry about all the questions’ just want to buy the correct gear
Main difference (aside from the security issues with running Core on a NAS) is that the NUC will likely have more CPU power available than a consumer NAS. This will allow for more extensive DSP Engine usage. This mainly affects the ability to upsample to high rates/DSD, and to apply room corrections. If you are not using either of those features, then you don’t need a strong CPU.
As to internal storage… Personally, I would leave the music files on your NAS and connect to them via SMB mount. Make the share read-only to a ‘Roon’ user that you create (and optionally make a read/write share for Roon database backups). If you do go the internal drive route, make sure the drive you purchase will fit – some NUC cases have fairly tight physical restrictions on the drive’s height (e.g., 7mm or less).
8GB RAM should be fine, unless you have an absolutely massive library (think 300k+ tracks). Any SSD 64GB or larger should be fine to run ROCK on. Roon’s internal storage requirements for the database is pretty small…
In terms of general responsiveness, having your files local to your core (beit a NUC, NAS or other system) is highly beneficial. Roon is rather intimate with your files, and not having to deal with SMB load and latency pays off handsomely.
I would echo Rene, and go for storage local to the NUC (internal + external USB drives if necessary). You can continue to use the NAS for backup of your music files (you do have a backup strategy in place?). Not as good as having off-site backup, but better than no backup at all.
My NUC and NAS are connected to the router via wired Ethernet connections.
Ive always backed up my FLACS,spent weeks ripping CDs to external HD.
Brilliant i understand a a lot clearer now.
So really internal NUC storage, connected USB HD or local NAS,doesnt matter.One is not more beneficial than the other.
I strongly suggest trying it just using the music share from your NAS first before buying a storage drive for the NUC. The “internal is better” thinking comes from avoiding network or NAS burps. However, in practice, those burps tend to be pretty rare (assuming you aren’t using Wi-Fi to connect them together). Most likely cause of a burp in the modern era is rebooting the NAS to install an OS security update, and Roon recovers from that just fine automatically.
There is NO sound quality benefit to using internal storage.
I second this suggestion.
“internal is better” do you mean HD in the NUC ?
Really I mean any local storage on the NUC, regardless of installed internally or an external HD connected via USB.
As opposed to accessing your music from a NAS over the network. Just use your NAS for the music library storage, you already own it.
Is there much difference between NUCS eg i5SYK,i5WYK and the i5 BNK
Nah… Not really. Burps are unacceptable in any situation and from a technical point of view, accessing your music over a share is perfectly feasible – and should not make any difference regarding SQ.
Roon Core as a whole however is more responsive when dealing with local files.
I don’t see how, other than perhaps a very tiny difference when starting playback or if you switch to a different track during playback (effectively starting playback from scratch again). Roon pre-buffers ~5 seconds of audio to the endpoint. If you look at the logs, it also starts queuing up and preparing the next track to play before it has to play it, again for the audio pre-buffer. On top of that, most files are much smaller than the resultant audio that Roon generates as Roon sends raw uncompressed audio, possibly upsampled (so it is reading a lot less than it has to send) and the OS does read-ahead buffering on the SMB share. The NAS also has the benefit of multiple spindles and its own OS cache RAM to buffer the reads. (E.g., there is a good chance the NAS is actually faster than the cheap, slow HDDs found in external USB housings or 2.5" laptop drives. Most people can’t afford using a local SSD if their library is measured in TBs…) Under normal usage, I doubt anyone will ever notice a performance difference. All the music browsing (metadata, artwork, etc) is done from the Roon database, which is local to the Core.
(The only time you might see a performance difference is during Roon’s analysis when importing new music. But that’s a one-and-done, not persistent.)
I use Roon with my music library on a NAS and clicking play, changing tracks mid-playback, etc., are “instant”. I cannot detect any lag from the click to playback.
Not in my opinion. I have 6i5SYH 6TH Generation. The 7TH generation was released after I got mine. I have friend with similar setup but newer 7I5 NUC. I’ve heard both and don’t hear difference.
Not talking about playback. Good network = good playback. No discussion about that.
Adding new files is a good example. Apart from analysis, watching file system changes is a pain using a NAS with seperate Core. With local files it is instant.
I nurse a handful of Cores on all kinds of different systems, some of them playing music from a NAS share. The UX of the two Cores with local files is simply better.
Here’s @danny about the subject:
Note: this may or may not be important in different use cases. And as said: no issues with playback and/or SQ.
Would be able to use non powered USB HDs on the NUC ?
Yes, you will. I’ve been using 2 x 2TB LaCie USB3 rugged drives with a NUC6i5 without problems.
Thank you so much to all, for the replies.Im gonna get everything ordered this afternoon.
This is a non-issue for me, personally, but then I’m also old school and follow a fairly ritualistic practice in importing new music (gets placed in temp directory, use mp3tag to clean up/adjust metadata in the files themselves, listen to them via VLC to ensure the files are not somehow corrupt, etc. – only then do I copy them to my music library, and I manually manage the directory structure there as well) and I actually prefer going to the library storage and manually clicking on “rescan now”. New content imports are also a one-and-done as previously stated, and not super frequent for me (and while I think this is probably true for most users, I get that there will be Roon users that are big collectors and import on a daily basis).
(I assume ROCK must increase the sysctl tuneable for watch contexts, as the default in Linux is only 8k objects so anyone with large libraries would easily exceed the available watches otherwise, resulting in watches failing even on local storage.)
To me, the main reason someone would consider local library storage is to have everything self-contained. There is a certain simplicity there, since you don’t need your computer/etc running. But if they already have a NAS, there is a good chance that is left running 24x7 and so availability isn’t an issue.