I’m wondering about the reasons and intentions why this version has been developed and released at all.
We all read tons of feedback to this release, so many that I cannot recall any topic about Roon creating so much feedback.
It seems to me that Roon released something new driven mainly from marketing people’s arguments, may they be internally or externally in charge.
I cannot comprehend this approach of building a magazine about MY library. I read magazines exploring something quite new to me to get a first insight if interested. But I don’t want to read a magazine about MY library.
In first instance I want to have a player that is technically solid and gives me features handling, searching and playing my library as good as it gets, combined with exploring as Roon has made a great job in doing so since the start. But now a lot of users complain about important and useful functions and information going away for the sake of a magazine look that lacks focus on what we need at first stage, me included.
From all what I have scanned the last months what users want to see improved or added in a new release, there was nothing like what has been released now with 1.8.
I believe it is a way to take Roon forward, to prepare for a future where locally stored libraries are more or less redundant and most subscribers only stream. The move to ‘discover’ elements being prioritised over the functionality of your library indicates this.
To my view, even if you only stream music, the library is as important. All of the streaming services do a good job of encouraging exploring. However all of the streaming services to a poor job of allowing you to categorise and sort your library. Even for a 100% streaming consumer this would be a USP for Roon. Hence, in my view, they should be developing the library role. They should be developing ‘tags’ and ‘focus’. Instead, with the reduced ease of use of tags, they seem to be diminishing the library function. Most strange.
I really like Roon 1.8 - runs much better on my android devices and streaming to the endpoints is still great. I also prefer the new looks and ux but I do not have a own library, just using it for Webradio and tidal.
I hope Roon will return to functionality and usability at first priority VS the try of having something looking great (very subjective…) at first glance but lacking inner quality in detail.
Yes, it must be at all.
Is that not a good thing?
I feel that lots of vocal protests are from a tiny minority of users, and most of so-called issues are not really justified.
Could you explain WHY it must be at all in your opinion, before you question those people who are having problems with this new release? This would be helpful, thanks.
I think the question of WHY AT ALL is muddy. Maybe you should clarify what it is in the first place?
I half-jokingly said muddy “WHY AT ALL” because I feel the question is amusing to me. Roon 1.8 to me is just an incremental release, the changes / enhancements in this release far and few in between, they are not aggressive enough IMO.
It’s a good question. If it was a fundamental change to ensure the longevity of Roon then I am for the change.
I imagine there are a lot of Roon users who probably only use the basic functions, so the change wasn’t that big a deal. I am one of those users, my main concern is the change in sound.
1.7 was a good, stable release and with a few calibrated mods like vertical scrolling, a modernized color scheme etc. it would have been a solid 1.8. Instead of that Roon created a lot hoopla around the release of 1.8 and raised expectations to the max. No wonder, that there is a lot of noise right now from the audience. That unfulfilled expectation is what backfires right now. Self-inflicted gun shot if you ask me.
By the way:
My question is just a question with no intention to shout out loud.
I also notice that the Roon team is hearing the feedback and also starting with replies to get some things on their todos.
It’s really to hear what you think why 1.8 has been released with this content and at that time, because this keeps me wondering.
I think they maybe want to create a more personal GUI showing that they understand what you listen to.
However for me I feel the direction needs enhancing to make Roon current.
If you look a Qobuz it’s a very vanilla poor mans service, seen by its price drop to attract customers, but it can’t afford to develop.
However look at Spotify, Apple Music, and more so Tidal with ‘Connect’, if your streamer supports it would you need Roon?
I’m hoping what 1.8 is leading to is Roon content creation, because if it’s becoming more streaming focused, it must deliver content otherwise it just becomes a music player, and people will look at Tidal and say the app provides more than Roon, they really need to employ content creators or they will fade into the past.
I’m hoping 1.8 is the first step in that direction.
Wondering if Roon is able to get the right balance between local library and streaming right as time evolves, and keep a USP.
I’m an older guy and loving to have my own library still. Seems this is not the future, but it still has worth to me. Maybe new generations are different, and Roon needs a strategy to survive for sure.
Thank you! Im not the only one wonderering about this update!!
I thought they made a big hype around this update and when i tried it, i didnt like it at all! I think that it is mostly ui updates and that things hav been moved or added. NOTHING that many users wished for.
I like roon. But it feels sometimes very simple and could most likely be much better if they listened more what people want.
I hope that roon learns something about this and gives us a really big update next time
