Hi everybody,
I am wondering for years why the most expensive app in the world of hifi and high end only has a sound quality which is only ok.If you compare Roon with JPLAY i think JPLAY has only a few people to develope software and improve sound quality. But here the difference. What is Roon doing to improve sound quality and do they compare with JPLAY or not?
When discussing audio quality in software like Roon vs. JPLAY, itâs important to recognize that sound quality isnât determined by the app alone. There are several factors involved
1. Audio Chain Complexity
The audio chain is more than just the playback app. It includes your digital-to-analog converter (DAC), network setup, operating system, power supply, cables, speakers, and even the type of files youâre playing. Any weak link can affect what you actually hear.
2. Design Philosophy
Roon is designed to be a comprehensive music management and streaming platform with advanced library, DSP, and network features, and an emphasis on user experience and multi-room audio.
JPLAY, on the other hand, is designed with a minimalist approach, focusing almost exclusively on audio playback with as little software overhead as possible to reduce system noise and jitter.
3. Software Priorities
Roonâs team puts more focus on features, usability, metadata, and integration with many devices and services. They do offer bit-perfect playback, but audio tweaks for âaudiophileâ sound (such as specialized driver bypass, RAM playback, or process isolation) are not their top priority.
JPLAY (and similar niche software) focus purely on audio output optimization, often at the expense of convenience or features.
4. User Environment
The same app can sound different depending on your operating system, the hardware itâs running on, network configuration, and background system noise. JPLAY, for example, requires specific Windows setups and tweaks to get the advertised improvements.
5. Subjectivity
Perception of audio quality is subjective and can be influenced by expectations, placebo, or even system synergy. For some users, the differences may be inaudible, for others, very noticeable.
To your specific question:
What is Roon doing to improve sound quality and do they compare with JPLAY or not?
The differences you hear may come from the technical focus of each software, but also from the sum of your systemâs components and settings. Thereâs no single answer or âapp-onlyâ reason sound quality is always the result of the whole chain.
Please be aware there are already numerous threads in this forum dealing with so called âsound qualityâ of roon or other systems. Really no need to open another thread for this. Just give the forumâs search a try. Youâll find a lot to read 
To make a long story short, for roon and other similar systems as well thereâs nothing like a âsound qualityâ. Per default they transmit the original digital audio signal unchanged 1:1 to any rendering device that is compatible. 1:1 is the golden standard in this area. In case you donât prefer this sound wise with the rest of your gear youâre free to use e.g. roonâs internal MUSE/DSP with lots of options to adjust the sound to your liking. But again, this is not about improving the technical audio quality, itâs about adapting the output to your liking, using your own gear in your very own room 
Thus, what you in your own situation tweak in your gear may deliver your own preferred sound profile but may be exactly the opposite for others
You could start by reading this ongoing thread about the same topic, just another name for a bit-perfect data stream.
Or this:
Having used both JPlay and Roon I can say they donât sound any different at all in any of my setups I tried it on. Infact didnât sound any different to any other UPnP app I tried.
JPLAY makes unsubstantiated claims about improved SQ due to less polling of network, but has no real evidence to claim this other than claims it does. But people will believe what is written and make assumptions based on this. As is the nature of things .
Roon on the other hand donât claim anything about SQ other than itâs bit perfect and your shown a supposed full signal path (albeit this is defeatable as some donât show all processes such as DSP). So Roon on backfoot as it makes no claims of improved SQ for its software because it doesnât need to as itâs passing unaltered bits to the DAC.
I am not able to remember that Roon is talking about improving sound quality. They are talking about new features for searching for new content or artists. Thatâs ok for me. But people who are using Roon spent thousands of dollars for cables and other equipment⌠But Roon is only adding other features and is not talking about sound quality. I canât understand this.
How do you define âsound qualityâ? What else could you which for than getting 1:1 unchanged digital audio signal from your source to your renderer plus being able to adapt the sound to your liking by e.g. roonâs integrated MUSE/EQ plus even making use of FIR filters?
I believe sometimes people mix up digital âsound qualityâ with personal preferences in individual rooms.
Please keep in mind that roon (server) is a digital computer application and in no way an analogue audio device .
Itâs always interesting how often âsound quality improvementsâ are reported after swapping software, cables, or even network switches â especially when all components are supposed to be handling bit-perfect digital data.
In the absence of controlled, blind testing, itâs far more likely that people are hearing what they expect to hear rather than any actual sonic difference. The human brain is incredibly good at filling in perceived improvements once money, effort, or audiophile language has been invested.
If nothing in the signal path is altering the audio data or introducing measurable noise/distortion, then the rest is placebo â not performance. And thereâs no shame in admitting that; it just means youâre human.
You canât improve on bit perfect thatâs the reason. You canât fix what isnât broke.
I fully agree.
And in digital this means not a bit if noise, it is dropouts or very loud crackles. Believe me, you donât need a revolving system or a golden ear to easily hear it.
You can do so much if using MUSE/DSP to adapt the sound to your liking. You just have to try it. Itâs that simple.
Properly created FIR filters are going even further, beyond pure frequency EQing.
roon delivers a very powerful set of tools. You just have to try them.
Some people somehow fear or deny changing the signal on purpose. Alright, then think about proper speaker placement and room treatment. Or look after some other amplifier or speakers.
There are lots of possibilities to change the sound to your liking, very different ones.
I do feel like any time some one talks about Roon (or any software) that it should include the full signal path including core, endpoint/streamer, outputs, DAC connections etc⌠hard to have any reasonable discussion without at least that much baseline information
What more can Roon do other than send an âuncorruptedâ bit perfect stream over the network.
They recommend an split Server / End Point (preferably over ethernet) topology so as to keep any noise from the server from passing. What next
The Streamer / DAC does the rest
If you choose to use USB then you are in no mans land (outside of Roonâs control) with the USB implementation of the DAC, it should be up to the job BUT âŚ
The DAC does the rest
Just as adding an aspect If you are using roon in a normal PC the transmission via usb to streamer or directly a DAC incorporates the usb noise which is significant. It is not quality problem of roon but bad protocol of transmision I have incorporated the Intona usb cleaner which work very well.
As well a network optical galvanic isolator before input of network data into your roon , gives you much cleaner signals
Above without entering in the reproduction quality of DAC and following elements in the chain.
Hope to be helpful
USB galvanic isolators are a proven remedy if unrelated to the music noise is audible or measurable, but do not improve the sound in audiophile terms 
Ethernet is galvanically isolated by design, so one could just stop there âŚ
⌠unless the audiophile uses shielded to the plugs ethernet cables, but the fix is to just use lesser (=worse?!) CAT-numbered cables 
Optical ethernet transceivers do not improve the sound in audiophile terms
Measured proof is easily found in the net.
No opponent has come forward with comprehensible falsifications, but anecdotal evidence seems overwhelmingly present 
USB Isolators:
Torben
Interesting @Torben_Rick 
Without starting an off topic discussion on USB isolators, but to my eyes the noise that seemed present prior to these two being used was below audible limits. But cleaner in use.
Thanks for sharing 
Well it is not improving quality of the source.
It is avoiding electrical noises coming with flow signal in usb transmission afecting the signal and as well the unit receiving it. It is accepted by main Hifi designers that USB protocol and transmision is the worst. So today designers have introduce the I2S through dhmi. I have in a group clearly check sound improvement of for example sreamers with optical isolation, and as well usb cleaner. If you have a great dac, it incorporates ways to get galvanic isiloation and as well noise coming with usb signal. Bit are bit but they are analog shaped signal and its shape affect hte way clocks works with it.
For sure you do not hear at all that so called ânoiseâ below the audible level.But with those cleaners you get better sound definition.
