Sorry, posted in the wrong topic
1 Like
I really have to take a step back and wonder with some of the comments here. My whole thing is that it’s the low freqs that we’re most affected in my system with last roon update and you tell me that your transients were improved which are higher frequencies and that can give the impression of more top end (somewhat plausible) but then continue that you don’t have a sub so don’t get the low freq transients anyway which is exactly what I’m talking about and therefore disqualifies you having a system which would be comparable enough to even hear what I’m talking about. I have also already stated adjusting the sub level wasn’t an acceptable solution.
The whole original comment is how the roon software update affected the sound… Nothing else… Another guy then proceeds to say it’s room acoustics?! When I said nothing else changed in my system.
Others are claiming that unless you have things side by side to A B switch you can’t tell… How often is this possible? Seriously an av receiver? PC audio, streaming, changing amps, speakers… How often can you just flick back and forwards and compare and then what, if you can’t, you aren’t hearing a difference because how would you know? Seriously? How do you think us audio engineers tune a room if we don’t have a well tuned room sitting next door to A B compare to? 
Another guy wants to know my whole system configuration? Even though I stated the only thing that changed is the software. How is this in anyway relevant.
Please try and step back before commenting and actually think am I being helpful or am I just commenting for the sake of it. I know there’s a lot of ego in Audio I’ve worked in the field for a long time now. But actually try and apply a little logic and common sense to what you say.
2 Likes
Hi Micheal,
I asked about upsampling as without some Roon signal processing it’s tricky to imagine audible changes. As you point out, they claim efficiency changes and specifically improvements to the accuracy of dithering. I’d only expect the second of these to be potentially audible. If you believe this
can adversely change sound quality why go down a heavy horsepower up sampling route and invite the issue? That leaves dithering accuracy. It’s not usually necessary for PCM up sampling but I’ll admit that the additional DSD conversion means I’ve no idea if dithering’s employed during your conversion. I’d be surprised if minor dithering alg changes were audible. I’ll admit that if they’re making changes one would hope that they’re aiming for improvements that can be heard so that’s a rational argument to counter my “feeling”. I know that you don’t feel that the sound’s improved, but changes can be like that. It may technically be an improvement, i.e. more accurate, that’s not to say you or I will like it.
Anyway, that’s as far as my ideas run. I do think that genuine blind testing can be useful in these circumstances. It forces a bit of honest self reflection before we start making physical changes chasing what might be an imaginary issue. Put another way, if you can’t reliably identify an issue by ear fixing it/having confidence it’s fixed is going to be tricky. I also agree it’s rarely a practical possibility, particularly with home setups and rolling software.
8 Likes
Over a week of dedicated listening, I can with confidence state that there is a subtle improvement in sound quality with Version 1.8.
We are using a Roon Nucleus+ (Rev 2) with several Linn systems (Klimax, Akurate, Selekt, Majik, Series 3) and a couple of Pi/Hat players.
Version 1.8 also sounds great with the Apple iPhone/iPad output to the new Apple AirPods Max.
Version 1.8 also seems to be more responsive. There are some “bugs”, but I know will be worked out.
We love the new interface and features.
1 Like
Finally something constructive. One thing I always try and do in audio is to trust my ears. I will always try and do things side by side wherever possible, changing crossover components in a speaker for instance. However this isn’t always possible. But I see 2 sides in audio. There are the ones who use their ears and trust what they hear and those who merely look at the specs and use their eyes as to why a change is impossible. It’s good to have a healthy mix of the two. I remember reading a white paper about blind testing (I wish I kept the link) in it they were comparing power cords. There were like 10 random people 2 of whom were dealers for this particular cable and knew it well. No one could accurately pick the swap although most claimed they could hear a difference. Except the 2 dealers who picked it everytime (cue the disbelievers, where is the paper etc. Seriously why would I make it up I don’t sell anything) The point is, it takes time to really tune in to sound sometimes and get to know it well. There will be many more times a change is something else you have done or changed, the settings you mention… These variables must be eliminated first.
I know my system well. There have been many times I have been testing something new and thought my system sounded a bit off over the next week or… Sometimes as little as it just sound as good/resolving (quite hard to quantify) only to realise I hadn’t returned it to its original state, changing a setting or swapping a cable or something. Could I pick it in a blind test… Probably not (maybe though) but ultimately did I know… Yes. I speak from having done this countless times over many years.
There are so many variable in audio and the computer world has just made that 10 fold, drivers, architecture, power supplies, Usb etc. I know many people in the audio world that swear many things don’t by make a difference… It is almost always because they have read it and never actually bothered to take the time to try it for themselves.
6 Likes
I have yet to listen since the upgrade, as my audio room is being painted, but reading these comments, my thoughs are that folks are simply hearing better accuracy. A fuller bass might sound more exciting, but is it closer to the truth? Just a thought. I will reserve further comments, until I have listened to my system.
Michael,
I wrote my own comment that you criticized, trying merely to reconcile various points of view, noting that, like you, I found a somehow similar imbalance from 1.7, only that our interpretation is different: I claim the upper end of the spectrum has better transients, you claim there is less bass.
About A/B I agree it is a powerful tool but potentially misleading too, if not done really rigorously, like sound engineers can or should be, Audiophiles are not always as rigorous, neither are they usually as well equipped for anything that can be straightforwardly measured to narrow in the debate. I have directly witnessed several counter examples that were not so intuitive.
But for 1.7/1.8, none of us can do it practically, so we rely entirely on musical memory. It tends to become a useful habit with software changes… Mine is not bad, I have used it at several occasions, including in digital audio, with reliability.
When I suggest slightly modifying very low frequencies, and comment I use a sub whose transients are not as good as I would like to, you used my fairly commonplace argument, as a specific argument for denial, while not having a clue about my current system and expectations, or my experience of how good reproduced bass (transients) can be.I object to this denial.
Rather, and to go back to the main point made, it should be a consensual point between experienced sound engineers and at least some audiophiles: once common bass problems such as obvious room resonances or dragging, monotonous bass, are addressed, and on an already balanced musical system, there has to be a fine balance of energy between both ends and if one end changes even subtly, the other end must be adjusted. Let’s say it starts with the well known “law of 400 000” but ventures in more details of the response.
Regards,
CD
PS; I actually enjoyed your other comment in response to killdozer and his.
For me it is clear that CPU load of music servers can have an adverse effect on sound quality, at least beyond some threshold, and via indirect means. On the A/B discussion we agree, indeed I was writing my above remarks about A/B tricks before I saw it.
I also fully believe in our “self-tuning” to our familiar system or system’s sounds, there is a good side - we detect very subtle changes, and a flip side - we tend to build a reference, that we don’t like to destabilize easily. This now occurs almost ‘in our back’ with irreversible software changes, not necessarily accepted initially even when positive. Fortunately we can if needed perform some adjustments to finely retune the tonal balance in the digital domain, using clean tools.
Finally, a side general remark: I expect reactions to the talk of Claude Ceiller that I posted two days ago, while it actually illustrates very well and nails down several of the points debated in this thread. It is long but well put through.
1 Like
Just because other people don’t have your “thin bass” and “unbalanced midrange” issues doesn’t mean they don’t have “a true reference system”.
This whole thing is so typical of “audiophiles”. Whenever Amarra, Audirvana, Auralic, JRiver, Linn, Naim, Roon etc. release a software update, their forums are flooded with countless posts written by people who are absolutely sure that
a) the update sounds definitely better or
b) the update sounds definitely worse
c) the update sounds exactly the same as before.
Just saying…
22 Likes
What the heck is “helpful” or “constructive” about telling other users that if they don’t have the same problems you do, that’s only because their system isn’t good enough?
15 Likes
I don’t doubt it. It’s the first time I’ve noticed any real change in sound with Roon and I’ve had it for about 3 years now. Which is why I was quite annoyed. I would even go so far as to say I notice little change between the different upsampling filters, only upsampling itself I really notice an improvement. I don’t usually post on these forums because I always find it unconstructuve. Why do I find it unconstructuve? … Because people always make comments along the line of your imagining it, or something about a b testing or it becomes a comparison with systems and how much they cost. Or the qualifications of the listener and it goes back and forth and just ends up being the same the drivel that gets spouted over and over and is a complete waste of time. Bottom line I know my system very well… I have spent about 2 or 3 years on this particular system upgrading and tweaking and changing components, software, etc. It’s in a room In a house I have lived in for 8 years and have done a bunch of different things to improve acoustics (a long list of things) and the last 6 months I stopped because I had it all sounding right. Everytime I turned it on I was incredibly happy with it and everytime it sounded the same… Until this last update.
1 Like
Other users (including myself) have done these things too and do NOT hear a difference. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to comment on your posts? Why are you assuming we don’t have “well trained ears” or a “true reference system”? Why are you equating critical feedback with unconstructive feedback? What’s the point in taking part in this discussion if you only expect others to say Amen to whatever you post?
16 Likes
I am trying to understand a difference in my system. Trying to pinpoint it. Hoping someone else hears the same and finds a solution. Something along the lines of yes, they changed or added xyz and switching xyz I have found helped me. Your not being critical of the issue, your being critical that there even is an issue and therefore it is unconstructuve.
2 Likes
There IS no issue here. No “thin bass”. No “unbalanced midrange”. There’s a question mark behind the title of this thread. For me personally, the answer to the question raised by the OP is a clear “NO”! How is that any less constructive than your claim that “the bottom end has been destroyed by this update”. Nothing has been destroyed here.
13 Likes
No, I definitely didn’t. This is what I wrote in my other post:
You still haven’t answered this question. I think it’s a perfectly legitimate one.
No, it isn’t. It’s called “Roon 1.8. sound quality change?” The question mark is there for a good reason.
8 Likes
Nobody has called you an idiot or treated you like one. This is a discussion about whether or not people have noticed SQ changes after updating to 1.8. Why does it surprise or annoy you that other people’s experiences differ from yours?
12 Likes
A lot of people tried to be helpful mentioning DSP and that was proved to be right. It took you a while to check that, if you had done so when it was first brought up it may have prevented a lot of this further ‘misunderstandings’.
You mean like where I wrote this “It’s lost a lot of fullness particularly in the lower registers 50hz and down. The midrange as a consequence is unbalanced now.” about 20 comments ago?
You mean like when I said “I’d imagine the upsampling filters are different and that’s what’s caused it.” in my 3rd or 4th comment on this thread? [Moderated]. I said on a true reference system… A pair of ND10s in a well treated studio is a true reference system… You’d get some change from your $50k 
That’s it for me guys… As I said ages ago the issue I had I have tracked down to a likely change in the upsampling filters. I got Hqplayer and am back at point where I’m happy (in fact I think it sounds a bit better). Thanks for everyone’s constructive input but this has just turned into a he said she said [Moderated] … I’ve got better things to do.