Okay I’m perplexed on how everyone can consider the Roon nucleus has better sound quality than an equally configured NUC/PC; unless there is difference in the Roon Nucleus softwares audio processing vs Roon ROCK audio processing.
When the audio is 1’s and 0’s on the Roon Appliance until it hits the DAC end point. If there is loss in quality then there was either packet loss on the ethernet which is measurable or data loss/corruption between the storage, to memory, to cpu, to ethernet and a that is major defect in the system and most likely cause additional stability issues. Think about it we’d have a lot of financial transactions with issues if there was error correction built into the transmission, storage of data.
Could there be noise added by NUC to end point? My belief is not by NUC as the packet is retransmitted via a switch and any noise via ethernet would be from the ethernet switch and should be filtered upon input to ethernet as it’s stored within the memory via the bus transport also through error corrections.
Also if you want you could run via fiber it’s still a packet and 10 which is sent with error correction.
Love to hear this. As well don’t see reason why Roon is limiting Control4 and Crestron drivers you nucleus only and not including ROCK at minimum. I can understand Mac/Windows core as nobody can be sure if workload on desktop shared platform. With ROCK one could measure and insure it meets min specs and call it good. The cost of nucleus is to high in my book for what you get in return for a simple PC.
In the end it is the DAC that creates the music from 1’s and 0’s