No, it’s not the question being debated in several threads on why and what if…
I would like a clear statement from Roon on the requirements when it comes to bandwidth and response times, for a satisfying Roon experience.
The question was left unadressed in one of the previous threads regarding the demand for Internet access for playing local content. Since Internet is clearly required for Roon to operate since 2.0 it is vital to adress the specifics of that access…
As of right now, it seems that moving essential parts to the cloud has only worsened the Roon experience. So is my 100Mbps/100Mbps fibre optic WAN access, with general response times less than 10ms, inadequate for Roon 2.0? Then what are the requirements?
There seems to be something that’s not obvious, because with my 300/30 and ~17 ms I am not seeing any issues whatsoever (nor did I with a previous slower connection at 50/5)
I’m not sure that transport and routing layer protocol performance is really the limiting factor. Maybe for many, it has never been.
Roon seems to place a lot of stress on server performance much further up the stack in the application layer where even for the simplest interaction large data sets are being mapped, indexed, filtered etc. etc. I suspect we are in for a rocky ride as functionality is moved from local subscriber servers to centralized cloud servers. I hope it is feasible and that roon do not consider legacy subscribers with largish heavily groomed local libraries edge cases during this process.
I pay for 100/10, which mostly measures just short of that and I have much higher latency, and I’m fine. Issues I’ve encountered have been mostly due to my (admittedly somewhat complex) local network configuration and reliance on WiFi endpoints, which I’ve mostly addressed. Do have episodic periods where gapless playback is not gapless, wish there was more buffering, etc. but mostly I’m stable.
Parenthetically, where are you? 100mbps for fiber sounds awfully slow. I’m on the lowest plan that my cable company offers and I get the same download speed (which is all I ever needed even with 4 people occasionally on simultaneously for video in height of pandemic).
Yes, @Suedkiez is correct, mid Sweden.
If i need more than 100Mbps up/down to run Roon they are doing something drastically wrong
And ISP’s can sell you whatever bandwidth you desire/require up to about 3Gbps on the fiber i’m on. But i dont stream much, as stated, i mostly play my local files. But i don’t want the Roon-blimp everytime i visit the Home view or some other view utilising cloud based functions.
But still, this a request for Roon to clearly state what bandwidth and response times are necessary for a nice Roon experience. (Mine isn’t as nice as it once was)
The slow network with 4.32 Mbps is just enough to stream CD Quality 44.1kHz via Roon. I have tried it.
With the second fast network, everything usually works like a charm. There are no dropouts, no delays, gapless also works perfectly all the time.
However… there was something:
Is it possible that performance, not bandwidth, sometimes just is not enough?
Router performance, core machine, in my case probably not enough RAM (I didn’t do a RAM test, I just think it’s possible that the single 8 GB RAM stick no longer works 100%)
? @support ?
A relevant question, but i don’t have a particular issue, it’s just a worsened experience. Meaning i have access to my library and all, but Search is less than exemplary and every view that contain cloud based data such as Roon recommendations, and Discovery etc shows lag.
I work around this by using the funnel filters and such but that really shouldn’t be needed imo.
Small troubles in the big picture? Surely, but i’m not requesting the whole kingdom here, just a statement.
Because Internet acces is not a binary value, it varies.
I have a paltry 30Mbps down and maybe 8 up, and it doesn’t seem to be an issue for Roon. What is an issue for Roon performance is my awful, awful Google Wifi mesh network, but I know that a vast investment in cabling/enterprise-grade wifi could fix that.
I have seen a drop in performance for search returns and any of the valence populated areas and the new wiki stuff is embarrassingly slow. This sort of issues has been raised many times before and it doesn’t always affect each user in the same way as it’s intermittent and varies with Roons server load and the local CDN being used. Every time it’s always come back as being their servers when their has been prolonged issues. We go through all the it’s fine for me must be your network scenarios over and over again but it hasn’t been in any of these cases so far it’s a Roon thing.
Now with search fully in the cloud it’s putting more load on them and all the arc activity is likely adding to this as well to some degree and lots of unoptimised early access code. I have 350/36 and latency is fine I don’t have any issues streaming of other apps taking time to populate their cloud data.
No, Google WiFi – either wireless or wired backhaul – works just fine with Roon. If you are experiencing problems, that suggests other issues. Equipment malfunction, user error, poor RF environment, etc.
I don’t know where everyone is getting “latency” numbers but the only thing that matters is this:
I don’t know where the Roon servers are but I suspect only in the US so focus on those regions.
EDIT: This varies greatly per the application but, essentially, anything under 100 ms can “feel” local to the user. I’ve seen apps closer to 200 ms that still “feel local”. Only when you’re doing things like controlling robots do we look for things to be sub 10 ms.
Those that suggested a local core issue over a cloud issue; you’re probably right!
Latency has been mentioned - are people referring to their “speedtest” latency metric or specifically the latency to a roon cloud server? If the latter, how is this being monitored / tested, e.g. capturing the cloud server name/IP and and simply pinging it?
Absolutely. There are no doubt some wonderful implementations of Google WiFi out there. But mine - through some combination of thick walls, interoperability issues between different generations of Google kit, and that old Google WiFi standby VLAN tagging - is definitely awful.
I am connected via a relatively stable fiber optic line with 100/100, yet it occasionally fails (construction work in the village, etc.). My fallback solution is via cellular – with a grotty connection and slow data transfer, combined with a very low monthly data package.
If I want to listen to my 100% local music, no streaming at all, how much data will be generated if I listen to, say, an hour of music and do a little searching in my database? That’s the question the OP asked resp. that’s how I understand it, and it’s one that I’m burning to know as well.
If the OP requires a definitive answer, then only Roon can provide that. But based upon the anecdotal testimony of the above users, it seems evident that the OP’s internet speed and access times are acceptable.
I have, by comparison, a measly 20 down 10 up fibre line , it invariably measures less say 13-14 this is my providers slowest offering but speeds like discussed above are quite expensive in SA. This costs $50 / month as it is . Once again we suck the proverbial “xxx”.
So far I have never really had a speed issue , most web sites / services I use are probably the weakest link
I don’t notice any slowness in Roon’s response except with search , as is discussed on another thread, but even that could be down to Roon’s infrastructure rather than the Up / Down speed of the connection. I suppose there is no way of telling. The router onwards is 1000 Mbs Ethernet . All of the speeds mentioned above say 100 Mbs should show much better than my 20 if the line speed was limiting but I suspect they don’t.
I must admit that the change from my i7 7700 desktop to the 10i7NUC does seem a little slower but nothing I really notice.
I have just “invested” in a 4k TV and have upped my Netflix sub to the 4k version so we will see if that needs a faster line . Too early to tell
