Pity this thread got de-railed. I love threads with users hearing improved sound in Roon - it’s like a free upgrade 
.sjb
6 Likes
Touché… 
I understand your position.
I previously had similar views, many years ago.
But my views have changed over the years as I tried numerous streamers, sources, PC’s and DAC’s.
I’m out… Enjoy the music.
4 Likes
Yeah, I can see the temptation to ascribe perceived differences in sound, to actual differences in hardware - it’s a natural thing to do.
You too.
1 Like
Which nearly always restores the original data bit-perfect. If it doesn’t because the CD is too damaged, you usually hear clicks
Decent players are very stable so as to get the maximum quality, because there is little time to re-read data. So they are not bit-perfect.
Yes they are. Even cheap ones are, otherwise AccurateRip would not work because everyone would get different data all the time. But they don’t
Networked data is moved from cache to cache. But part of the transport is also analog and will include error, which will be corrected but also affects the data.
No it does not. If it did, online banking, software downloads, and networking in general would not work
Data following different structures is bound to differ.
Yes, you can encode the same data differently, but eventually you decode it again and then it’s the same regardless, if the codec is lossless. Because if not - see above
6 Likes
Decent players are very stable because there is little time to re-read data. But when you rip, the software re-reads, because it is not time critical. For error correction Reed-Salomon coding is used which according to wikipedia does the following:
- High random error correctability
- Long burst error correctability
- In case the burst correction capability is exceeded, interpolation may provide concealment by approximation
So interpolation IS used in case of errors. Above that, newer CD’s are not produced according to the red book and therefore add errors (thinner layer and also side effects from copy protection etc.)
As for correctness of data I more or less agree. In so far it is bit-perfect. As to timing I do not. And yes I do notice sonical differences in network components.
1 Like
Yes, in case of uncorrectable errors. This case is rare with decent CDs. And when it occurs, concealment can occur, but if the CD is bad it tends to click, anyway. With reasonable CDs, it is nearly always bit-perfect
True, but most rips of decent CDs happen in real time without repeated/long re-reads, and a CDP would not have an issue either. I any case, the shortcomings of real-time CDPs are of little relevance for streaming and Roon.
Timing in a buffered TCP network is irrelevant except for the last feed into the DAC. (As long as it arrives in time, which large buffers usually provide; and if it does not, it does not degrade SQ but stops playing)
Then I don’t know why you wrote:
Networked data is moved from cache to cache. But part of the transport is also analog and will include error, which will be corrected but also affects the data.
Which was my main reason for replying
2 Likes
When theory and experience conflict it seems to me that both are cast into doubt. These arguments persist because, on the one hand, the theorists maintain that the theory is incontrovertible, and, on the other hand, those who claim to hear subjective differences are convinced that they are not imagining things. There is no answer unless both sides are willing to admit that they could be wrong, and, even then, I think it would be hard to find common ground.
Meanwhile, since listening to music (and hi-fi) involves a purely personal experience, we could say that whatever makes you happy is OK.
5 Likes
I don’t see where theory and experience conflict.
1 Like
I agree. The whole discussion is pointless when you are happy with YOUR result
1 Like
I’ve been trialing HQP here and there over the past 2 weeks. I’ve found a set-up I really like. To describe why I like…
It cuts a much finer and accurate edge around instruments and voices. More articulate with better separation, especially in the upper mids, there is a slight but pleasant sparkle in dynamics in the upper mids as well. However, it never does this to a fault of making anything sound “digital”. It does bring the clarity and transparency of my system up a notch.
However, removing HQP and going back to Roon I notice…
A more heftier low end providing a fuller and weightier sound. Kicks have a little more impact, bass (electric or upright) is more present and forward.
Now, what’s better? Honestly, it would depend on my mood. Some days I want weight. Some days I’m hypercritical to articulation and clarity. None is right or wrong or sounds “better” to me. They just sound different. Both, as you described and I’ll describe as “great”. Over time my ears want “different” and I’m physically rewarded for different (chemicals in the brain thing). We have to be careful to say that it “sounds better” because we’re being rewarded for different. It just sounds different. Of course, unless, it was truly awful and we’re just figured that out 
I’ve heard some truly awful. But, Roon, has always sounded good, or I should say accurate, to me. It’s just not an accurate everyone translates to “good”.
3 Likes
Isn’t that because, for you, experience accords with the theory? What about those of us who hear differences in configurations when the theory tells us we shouldn’t? I know that you will say that the differences are imagined, but it’s just possible that you are wrong.
1 Like
This would become relevant if those of you ruled out other, more likely causes for perceiving a difference.
2 Likes
Whether mine or others’, experience is relevant only if it’s unbiased and repeatable. Based on relevant experience, the theory has been validated and is thus scientifically valid.
You want me to cast doubt on a scientifically established theory based on your subjective, sighted and thus potentially biased experience. Does that sound reasonable?
The burden is not to prove ALL other possibilities are wrong (i.e. teapot orbiting Sun between Earth and Mars), but to prove specific claims are true. If you don’t, I don’t believe it.
2 Likes
I have to agree with Protyreus. I have found Roon to sound a bit compressed, but the latest version definitely sounds better on my setup. I should note that I generally don’t hear sonic improvements with most of Roon’s updates.
1 Like
The objective hoard should express their opinions once…then stop harping on them. That is against forum rules!
LOL. What is this rule?
2 Likes
The same one that says the subjectivist horde should spell things properly.
4 Likes
You must see why this is problematic. Who gets to decide who’s in the “hoard” and needs to be silenced. I’m not sure a one strike and your out for people whose opinion you don’t like is the way to go here…
5 Likes
It falls under “Endless Contrarianism” and/or “Axe-grinding”.
See here:
Where does it say that it applies only to “objectivists” while “subjectivists” are allowed to go on and on in the face of science and evidence?
1 Like