Roon is slow (er)

Roon Core Machine

I have ROCK installed on a NUC7I7DNHE, equipped with a western digital black NVMe 250Go for Roon data base. Music is stored on a NAS + Qobuz.

Networking Gear & Setup Details

Here is my network

I use my internet box as a router and an AQvox switch for audio devices. Connection types are specified on the picture (ethernet or wifi).
I have internet over fiber (FTTH).

Connected Audio Devices

Auralic vega g2.1
Google home
Chrome cast
2 rooextend extensions (dial and nuimo)
1 always on display (fire tab to show the music being played)

Number of Tracks in Library

120000 tracks

Description of Issue

I feel my Roon remote app to be slow. For instance, when I launch the app after a long time, and I click on home button, it takes 16 sec to refresh the display on my Samsung gs 10 5G. I want it to be quicker. Then when I scroll below to show “new release for you” and “daily mixes” it can take awhile as well.
Is there anything I can do to accelerate my system?
Is there any setting to put on my android device?
Software issue?
Thanks for your time and recommendations.

Just watched Enno’s video, “Watch our Roon browsing & discovery walkthrough”, his app is quite fast compared to mine…
Any idea anyone?

Hi @Judelow
I am NOT an expert on this, so please take the following as just an idea:

As far as i could find something about it, Read/Write speeds are quite slow
3.100 MB/s / 1.600 MB/s
For my i7 NUC I use a Samsung 970 EVO Plus 250GB M. 2 SSD
3.500 MB/s / 2.300 MB/s
The following thread might be interesting for you:

One more idea:

Could it be that this ISP router is a bit underpowered and overloaded? ISP routers are usually not the most suitable.
Furthermore, your NAS, does it have enough power? I don’t use a NAS myself, but a fast internal SSD in my NUC, which is probably faster.

1 Like

I think his database is on the Rock (on an SSD). Only the music is stored on the NAS. That should be fine.


Are you sure that it has no effect, just on speed, if the music is stored on a NAS or an internal SSD?
I recall reading that internal storage still brings a little more speed than the probably slower route via the local network.
I’ll try to remember more clearly…

When the database is up to date, meaning all music was analysed and meta data was written to the db, all the db indexes are working correctly the user experience should not be spoiled by a slower NAS.


Noticed the same thing last week. 15 to 20 seconds to open home page in remote android app.

Windows server with database on SSD and music files on another SSD. Wired Ethernet to Windows endpoint, android app remote.

Been away home all this week so don’t know if it is still a problem.

A quick search yielded

But I’m quite sure to have read it elsewhere, roonlabs KB …?

Thanks for your answers.
Isnt it reading speed that is the most important? Would that matter much to move from 3000 to 3500 ?
I see some nvme disk that can go up to 7200 reading speed would that make any difference?

I have also read that a slow NAS to store the music would not make a difference. The ssd storing the DB being the most important. I have not tried myself.

If Roon’s response is really extremely sluggish the db could(!) be damaged. Maybe worth to check this with #support.

If you are sure (and have double checked(!)) that your backups are ok you also could try to create the Rock from scratch.

EDIT: or, even better, leave your Rock as it is and create a temporary new Roon Core on your MacBook/laptop. Then test if performance has improved

As I said, I’m not an expert on different hardware.
I hope someone else chimes in.
Just another thought:

If your NUC has a fan, have you ever checked if your machine is getting hot during use?
If Roon used to be snappier and faster for you, overheating could also be a reason. CPU thermal throttling can invertedly slow an applications response-time.

My NUC runs fanless in an Akasa PLATO case.

Thanks I am also on akasa plato

Thanks for your suggestion, do you know how to check if DB is healthy?

AFAIK there are no tools that Roon would offer to end users. Hence I would contact support.

Re setting up the temporary core - this could be a non destructive way (re your current core and db) to test performance from another machine. Simply create a new Roon Core on a MacBook or Windows laptop and import your db from backup. If that is more responsive than your Rock, it’s either a hardware issue or a db corruption.


If I were you, I would start here first:

  • Stop RoonServer from running in ROCK’s WebUI

  • Navigate to your ROCK’s Database Location

  • Find the folder that says “RoonServer”

  • Rename the “RoonServer” folder to “RoonServer_old”

  • Restart the RoonServer in the WebUI to generate a new Roon database folder

  • On the Roon Remotes, press “Use another Core” and connect to the new database

  • Restore a backup

That doesn’t seem logical to me, could you kindly explain?
If the core on another machine would be more responsive than the core on the NUC Rock, I would assume it’s a hardware issue. Because the database would be just the same, imported from a backup.
Or am I misunderstanding and the database on a new core machine would NOT be identical to the old one on the NUC Rock?

Almost. The db content would be the same. Not necessarily the integrity or the db’s indexes.

Roon has indeed slowed significantly, recently. Home page takes up to a minute to fully load. Pictures of an album or artist sometime never show up. Reduces the usability of Roon for quite a bit.

Not here, no such issues at all … strange.
Just tried it, quite snappy, taking just a second to change pages and load content.

A lot of the content on the home page, particularly if you have one or more linked services (e.g. Qobuz and Tidal) can take a while to fetch, especially if you’re not based in the US. Try disabling Tidal and/or Qobuz (Settings → Services → Edit). If this makes a difference the delays you’re experiencing are probably down to the latency between you and the relevant servers. If Roon remains sluggish then the cause lies elsewhere.

Same for me, except the NAS