Not really. With the mR or ZS you have the endpoint separated from the computer running the Roon Core. That’s a good thing.
However there is further benefit to having a computer running just the Roon Core - ie not being used for other tasks, i/o or the Roon GUI. A Nucleus or computer running just Roonserver could achieve this. Control (Roon GUI) is then handled by your phone/ipad/other computer etc.
The level difference you note when using Roon doesn’t sound right. Can you post the signal path graphic from Roon?
If running Roon with HQP then the latter will typically insert some attenuation to avoid intersample overs.
Thanks for this clarification. I think this is the next step. To figure out the Roon Server thing and have the iPad as controller. Is that what the SonicOrbiter and Nucleus inherently do?
I would get one of those, or a NUC - add Roon Server, and run it through the Zen Stream, and use the iPad to control Roon. Is that correct?
My budget is whatever it will cost to least expensively yield a meaningful improvement over the Mac Mini handling everything. If that’s the $1000, so be it. If it’s $3000, so be that. I don’t want to waste money on components I don’t need as I’m very happy with the Marantz SACD 30n.
I read through much of the M1 Mac Mini vs Nucleus thread, but it’s mostly discussion about functionality rather than sound quality. Thus I’m not clear at what threshold there is meaningful sonic improvement over the Mac Mini M1. If the Nucleus and or Sonic Orbiter ($995) are a lateral move, then I’ll set my sights higher.
Thanks for this. I appreciate your steadfast defense of Roon! I must respectfully disagree, at least to this juncture in my Roon journey with the caveat that the coming Roon Server setup may alter my opinion.
Many folks beyond me have lamented Roon’s sound quality. That’s why myself, and others, have bought HQPlayer. That doesn’t mean we are incorrect because you have a different opinion. It simply means we have a different opinion.
I’m confident, beyond the Mac Mini, that my components are not the problem.
If the Roon Server rig proves to right the ship, I’ll be the first one to ring the church bells in the town square.
To clarify, Roon via the Zen Stream does sound quite good. Just listened to it for 2 hours. In my experience, Roon on the Mac Mini doesn’t handle sibilance as well as Tidal sans the Mac Mini. And the soundstage is a tad more fleshed out with better weight. The difference are not major, but just enough to cause an audiophile to fret
It could be the Mac Mini’s fault. In my 4 years with Roon, there’s always been a minor lowering of levels via Roon or HQPlayer. I simply turn the amp up a bit to compensate. When I have a chance, I’ll post the signal path. I don’t view this as a significant issue. More so I’ve responded to it by saying that I know enough about levels to not be fooled into thinking Roon sounds slightly worse because of levels.
Yes. That will work. Take note that the Roons Core should be ethernet connected.
Worth reading the excellent guides provided by @David_Snyder above.
I don’t have first hand experience with the Nucleus but as mentioned I own an M1 Mini.
I can tell you that running Roonserver on a separate headless computer (in my case a 2012 i7 Mini) sounded better than running Roon on my M1 mini used as player/core and also using the M1 for general computing, apps/web browsing/email etc.
The M1 is a really nice, powerful computer - too nice a machine to waste as a dedicated Roon server IMO.
My old Mini has been rock solid as a Roon core server, its still a fast machine and recovers seamlessly from power outages etc. I only need to log into my core when I want to play around with HQP settings. I like the economy/sustainability of repurposing the 2012 Mini.
If I didn’t have the 2012 Mini lying around I would buy a NUC and install Roon ROCK on it.
Thanks for the well written and in-depth guide over at PS Audio. Very helpful. Questions:
Are you saying that a $400 NUC is a more complicated to setup version of the $1500 Nucleus, yet both provide the same audio quality when run as a Roon Server? And that is far as Roon Server goes, these relatively inexpensive devices are as good as it gets sonically?
I assume the Sonic Orbiter is about the same.
Is there something extra special about the NUC/ ROCK track (including Nucleus) vs a dedicated Mac Mini running only Roon Server? M1’s can be found for $650 new, which is much less than the Nucleus. Or is the NUC particularly well suited (ie low powered) for the task as a dedicated Roon Server? If it’s $400 for a NUC arrangement, and $650 for a Mac Mini, I’d rather get a second Mini and use it exclusively for Roon because a) I know Mac, and b) it looks way better on the rack.
Does the Roon Core running on Roon Server do all the full Roon functions, like both of the MQA steps?
What are some examples of more expensive audiophile brand type Roon Servers? Are they all essentially a computer anyway?
My stereo is setup in a small guest cottage. There’s only one wired internet connection, which is by the rack. There’s literally no place I could place a Nucleus that could be wired except on the stereo rack. I’m gathering that the reason to isolate the Roon Core/ Server is because of noise. Is it possible to isolate that noise from the router, and still be physically connected to that same router?
I read this whole thing at the time of writing this and I’m going to give you some, maybe, odd analysis…
Your appreciation of “better” is some filter or upsampling that is not occurring when using Roon. This could be as simple as a linear vs. minimum phase filter.
From what you describe, I do not think changing your core is going to change your perception of Roon. The “reference” is to keep Core, endpoint, and remote separate things and connected over the network and most do this without SQ complaint. I also know plenty who enjoy good sound quality not following that reference and others who continue to struggle to find the magic while following it.
Roon has a flatter sound because its truer to the bits. That also lets me get closer to what the electronics sound like. It took some getting used to but now I find a lot of other players to sound digital and over-processed. Like setting a TV to “vidid”. In your case, you should turn on Roon upsampling and play with filters. See if it makes any difference in your system. Also show us your signal path just to make sure there isn’t something weird there.
You also mention you have access to HQP but you didn’t discuss what your NAA set-up is or what HQP filters you’re using. That might also solve your issue. I’d post those details in the HQP section.
While possible, I’m not sure where that “filter” would be coming from. When I stream Tidal directly to either the Zen Stream, or the Marantz SACD 30n, there is no filter present on the hardware end that would not be present when playing Roon through that same hardware. If anything, removing Roon makes the signal more pure because it removes the computer.
I’m very familiar with HQP and have used it for years. It made using Roon a much more enjoyable experience in terms of sound. As mentioned upstream, the Marantz SACD 30n upsamples everything to DSD 256. Thus far, I prefer the Marantz upsampling over HQPlayer or Roon’s. And given the Marantz upsamples no matter what, I don’t see the need to upsample twice by utilizing upsampling in Roon or HQP.
The Marantz has two filters choices, a lp and mp option. I prefer the mp.
Given I’ve never tried a dedicated Roon server, I think that’s the best next step.
I have used Roon/ HQPlayer extensively on the Mac Mini for 4 years and have a solid grasp on all the upsampling and filter options.
Fair. Then I’d recommend you find something that will run ROCK. Depending on your comfort level of building / tinkering with computers that’s either sourcing all components yourself, sourcing one of the supported NuC models (https://help.roonlabs.com/portal/en/kb/articles/roon-optimized-core-kit#ROCK_For_Small_to_Medium-Sized_Libraries), or buying a Nucleus. Price goes up with convenience and comes down if you’re willing to do some of the work yourself. Also, since you’ll be keeping this in your listening room, I’d stick with one of the fan-less / totally passive cooling set-ups.
I have not read all responsens here (so this might have been mentioned before), but running Roon core on one device (NUC, Nucleus, Windows, macOS or Linux) and output to a separate Roon Ready device/streamer over ethernet is the preferred option for Roon. Also from my experience; I do prefer DAC and streamer in same device - since you then can exclude converting to SPDIF and back again.
If you are simply using the mac as a core i don’t think changing it for a nuc or anything else will make a difference to the sound output, it’s simply acting as a server.
If you connect it directly into the NAD acting as core/end point that could sound different and is not how roon recommends the setup.
I’d concur here that swapping the Mac Mini for another device is highly unlikely to affect sound quality. You’re doing it the right (Roon recommended) way by separating the core and the endpoint. I have no experience of the ifi or Sonore endpoints, but maybe you need to up your transport game? Innuos / Auralic or maybe a dCS Network Bridge? (Try before you buy might be a good idea here if you can.)
It’s possible (if unlikely) that the USB input is something of an afterthought - but I say this is unlikely based on my experiences with both the Marantz HD-DAC1 and NA-11S1 which for me are at their very best over USB, the latter partnered with a Bryston BDP-1USB is one of the finest digital sources I’ve ever experienced. (Again with a Mac Mini M1 as core.)
It sounds to me like it’s a great shame the Marantz itself isn’t Roon Ready (if it can stream Tidal etc. so convincingly). Have you tried using HEOS to access your local content?
There are lots of ways to do Roon and all the suggestions can eliminate a bit of noise, jitter, etc but won’t affect overall sound. the overall sound would be affected by losing bits through a bad cable (unlikely) or by the route to the amplifier using different equipment. I can’t tell from you system description where your DAC is (because I’m not familiar with your equipment). But i think the most likely cause of different sound is you are using a different DAC for roon. The worst case would be that you are using the onboard dac in the computer which is probably a 50c piece of equipment. Make sure the digital cable from your mac with the core on it runs directly to the dac. good luck. Jerry
Yes. Both Nucleus and a ROCK build run Roon OS on an Intel NUC board. The version of Roon OS for Nucleus is optimized for a fanless case, includes support for Control4 integration, disables onboard audio, and has a few other non-audio related tweaks. The USB ports on Nucleus are not optimized in any way for audio use. Besides Control4 integration, Nucleus and ROCK provide the same Roon experience.
Regarding audio quality, Roon Core is not in the audio signal path. It’s a music server. So, it does stuff like respond to requests from controls, library management, connecting to streaming providers, managing Output settings and volume, and passing data between storage, services, and devices. There are no sonic differences among Core implementations just as the music does not sound better when you press “Play” on an iPad Pro vs. a cheap Amazon tablet running Roon Remote.
I imagine the Nucleus / NUC consume less electrical power than an M1. My 7th gen Intel Core i5 NUC, running Roon OS in a ROCK build, consumes only 10 watts of power, so I can leave it on most of the time.
The main advantage of Nucleus / ROCK over running Roon Server on top of a general purpose operating system is that the O/S is highly optimized to run Roon Server. This has the effect of making all Controls more responsive. Because Roon OS takes care of updating itself, you don’t have to bother with macOS updates. Nucleus / ROCK run like an appliance. As I said, the only connections required are power and Ethernet, so they can (and should) be tucked away, out of sight, with your Internet router.
Buying an M1 Mac mini just to run Roon Server is suboptimal, inconvenient, and a waste since you could use the Mac to do all sorts of other useful things.
Minor terminology clarification, but Roon Server is one of the implementations of Core. Roon Server’s functionality is the same on all platforms (except for Control4 features specific to Nucleus). Regarding handling of MQA, Core can perform MQA Core Decoding (the first unfold), but MQA Rendering must be performed by the DAC, if supported. No software solution exists to do “both of the MQA steps.”
That said, Roon is the only solution I’ve seen that can perform DSP, including volume leveling, parametric EQ, Convolution (for room correction) while preserving the ability of a downstream DAC to perform MQA Rendering. Usually, anything other than bit-perfect delivery to the DAC eliminates the possibility of further MQA processing.
Innuos and a few other companies make devices that can run Core. They usually also do lots of other non-Roon things. If you need the extra functionality, they may be worth exploring, but performance for Core is almost always worse than Nucleus or a ROCK build. If you want the best Roon experience and don’t care about other stuff, avoid audiophile brand Roon Servers. They offer no advantages for the pure Roon use case.
Ethernet cables can be up to 100 meters long with no performance loss, and you get galvanic isolation for free as part of the spec. This gives networking more flexibility in placement than audio components. We don’t care about isolating noise from the router. The router, switch and Roon Server are noisy non-audio devices and should be eliminated from the audio rack. This means moving them as far away from the listening room as possible and then running network cables back to the rack for Outputs.
Does the guest cottage have more than one room? Where does the Internet connection from your service provider enter the property? Do you own the cottage, or are you renting? I’m always amazed that audiophiles will spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on cables and interconnects but paying someone $200 to run an Ethernet cable for their audio system is out of the question.
If you own the property or can work with your landlord, hire someone to relocate the internet connection, including your router and switch, to another room…as far away from your audio rack as possible. Have them run Ethernet (or Fiber) network connections from your switch to your audio rack…you may be able to reuse existing wiring. Place your new Core in the other room, next to your router and switch. Leave the ZEN Stream in your rack.
This is almost certainly true, but the M1 consumes relatively little power - 6.8 watts at idle, 39 watts at full load. Given that Roon isn’t overly demanding of the CPU on the M1 it’s not likely to be too far above the 10W of your i5 NUC.
Thanks to all for the thoughtful and helpful replies. At some point in the coming months I’ll do a 30 day trial of the Nucleus or Sonic Orbiter i5 and see if it takes me to the promised land.
This is likely all the Marantz SACD 30n’s fault as it has raised my ceiling in terms of what good sound is. As I’ve written on other forums (and perhaps here, I forget), I’ve been exclusively using computer based audio since 2008. Long story short, last summer I auditioned the SACD 30n because I have the matching Model 30. Physical CD’s, SACD’s, and high res files burned to data discs all sounded obviously better than all my computer audio gymnastics for over a decade. It was 15-20% better, and that became the new standard.
I feverishly transferred all my hard drive based favorites to physical discs and ordered a bunch of SACD’s.
The SACD 30n is Roon Ready, but doesn’t yet have RAAT. Thus far, Roon over the MicroRendu 1.4 and the Zen Stream have not elevated Roon to an acceptable level.
It’s a bit like this:
Roon on the Mac Mini = that sounds really good.
Physical discs and Tidal Connect (16/44) on the Marantz = WOW, that sounds really good.
Tidal 16/44 on the Zen Stream to the Marantz = WOW, that sounds really good.
The Roon rig lacks the “WOW”. It’s either because of the Mac Mini, or because of Roon itself. I’m not sure which, or both.
Marantz’s HEOS is extremely basic. The SACD 30n connects directly to the Tidal server and HEOS is the only way to control Tidal via an ipad in that setup. I have lots of playlists which I like to shuffle. The HEOS version of shuffle is to shuffle the entire Tidal library instead of the currently playing playlist. Very annoying. Got the Zen Stream essentially to have a proper shuffle in the Tidal app and hopefully rescue Roon. Much to my surprise, the Zen Stream in TIdal mode sounds incredible. Even though the ZS hasn’t rescued Roon, I’ll keep it just for the stinkin’ Tidal shuffle and excellent sound quality.
Perhaps computer based audio simply isn’t for me? I’ll give it one more go with the Nucleus or SonicTranporter. A long awaited Decware order is due next month, which will occupy the budget for a bit.
If nothing else, Roon can be a master library archive, thus the lifetime license won’t be a waste. Remain hopeful for Roon’s resurrection, tis the season for resurrections after all
@David_Snyder
Thanks for all your help. To my understanding, in the device setup, Roon has the option to only decode MQA, or to decode and render. Isn’t that the two steps?
I own the property. The guest cottage is essentially a nice size studio. The “other room” would be “the bathroom”. I’ve yet to get too esoteric with power regenerators and high class networking - but it’s on the list!
