When I tried 3.5 on my PC and finally got it to work over uPnP, it did not come close to Roon running on ROCK with the same sources. Perhaps it has better USB performance but network ROCK sounded much better to me.
1 Like
Audirvana sounds spectacular to my ears, superior to Roon. However, I’m not willing to give up the Roon ecosystem.
3 Likes
Audirvana may sound a tad better than Roon. The difference is not huge and certainly not worth giving up Roon for that horrible Audirvana interface.
Now, HQPLayer sounds better than both Audirvana AND Roon so I use HQPlayer with Roon to get the best of both worlds.
1 Like
Audirvana sounds a touch better at my desktop, but using remotely throughout the house, Roon still interfaces better in my setup. I’m sure Roon will catch up on the sound quality.
@Jeremy_Jones are you using your media player Roon/A+ directly in your audio chain? (USB configured to an endpoint). If so I understand why A+ might sound better then Roon. Considering A+ tries to kill all other computer related processes which could have a noteworthy effect on the SQ.
IMO Roon as a stand alone server, only connected to the endpoint by Ethernet or WiFi, is SQ wise a killer platform.
No I play both players through a microRendu. The difference is that A+ is streaming from a Mac while my Roon core is based on my ST5, situated in another room. So all the more advantage to Roon, in theory. In practice A+ wins.
That’s interesting. It again confirms that every ones mileage may vary.
Friends,
Audirvana 3.2, 3.5 and Roon has absolutely identical sound quality.
They all do their job equally. Including boring math fact – they all are bit to bit… yes. But – with no upsampling!
The difference that some of you may hear is related to… upsampling!
Did you note that A+ has iZotope SRC, while Roon has its’ own, or by HQ Player? Many of you prefer to do upsampling (and then yet another mandatory upsampling inside your delta-sigma DACs), doing sonical destroy. So both (iZotope attached and licensed for A+, and Roon) compete here just in a “who destroy it… less”.
P.S. I heard it many times in different systems and setups, — any upsampling touch do destroy music breathe. I prefer not to touch the source, using R2R multibit DACs in non-oversampling mode. But if you prefer to do resample twice!!! (see above), what you get?..
3 Likes
I agreed, I’ve found that upsampling sounds worse for my streamer, which is the Linn Klimax DSM.
Thanks for the long and informative answer. Unfortunately my experience is quite different to yours.
I found a stark improvement with Audirvana 3.5, as I’ve stated a number of times now on this thread. I clearly preferred the sound of Roon compared to earlier versions of A+ and was very surprised to find that 3.5 had turned the tables.
As I’ve also stated a few times, I listen to music bit perfect. No filters. So all your information about iSotope settings etc doesn’t apply in my case.
2 Likes
Welcome to the forums.
1 Like
I agree. I use Audirvana for A/Bing different versions or rips of albums, because I prefer to do it that way than add stuff to my Roon library that I may not really want to hear again. But my library is in Roon and 99.9% of my listening is done in Roon. Roon and Audirvana 3.5 sound the same to me, assuming no upsampling/EQ etc. I have licences for both, and would use Audirvana more if I thought it sounded better.
Hi Jeremy,
Your Roon also had straight way, right? No upsampling?
I have both Audirvana 3.5 and Roon and play with no EQ or upsampling and I prefer Roon,
Once again, the interesting thing that comes out is that many of us hear things quite differently. I’ll continue to use Roon for convenience and for its excellent radio function. Hoping that future versions eliminate any other reason to use A+. Switching back and forth is a nuisance.
roon has a sound? Hope not.
1 Like
Yes it sounds different to Audirvana. And before you or anyone asks again - my findings are using no filters or upsampling. Roon RAAT via ST5 vs MacBook Pro wireless. In my assessment A+ provides a significantly deeper view into the performance - but others on this site seem to prefer Roon. It’s a personal view.
2 Likes
Are they both running on the same MBP? What is ST5? Thanks.
A+ on the MBP.
Roon core is on a Sonic Transporter
Both systems through a microRendu 1.4.
As mentioned before - the advantage should clearly be for the Roon setup. As I’ve a lifetime subscription for Roon, it kind of bothers me that I do actually hear a difference - and have a preference - for A+.
My hope is that Roon are able to close the difference with future releases.
1 Like
I wish, just once, we could see the results of a blind test on topics like these. Computer Audiophile ('er, I mean Audiophile Style) is lit-up with comments like these, with every minor release of A+.
Roon and A+ are capable of delivering bit-perfect packets of PCM data, probably to an async interface like Ethernet or USB, so no “jitter” to fret about, which is likely also isolated from “electrical noise”.
How can one delivery system offer a “deeper view”? Drop-outs (clicks and pops, et al.), I can understand.
Yes, I am asking a rhetorical question, but commentary like the above serves to do nothing but confuse and intimidate people that are getting started with streaming audio. I imagine my father reading something like this and then calling me… thankfully, he refuses to give up flipping optical plastic.
5 Likes