Ah, yes, I did say that there. And, yes, that is indeed a subjective opinion, and you are right to call me out. I stand by the claim. And I stand by the claim that RAAT is not part of the equation when NAA is involved.
No axe grinding, just pursuing truths and challenging challenges. But I’m going to mute myself for a bit and reflect.
Yet you are presenting a belief or judgement that is not founded on proof or certainty. If what you say were true, where is the evidence?
As I said earlier, let’s not repeat the same points of discussion, from last summer, in the same thread.
That’s not strictly true, depending on definitions. The certainty here is my own, from my own testing. The evidence is what I hear. But that isn’t proof.
What proof could I practically present that would satisfy?
Do we know that there is no filter or modulator engagement and and is a straight pass through? @jussi_laako
That’s not evidence if it’s biased, and for it not to be biased, it needs to be blind.
I don’t disagree.
If matrix processor is disabled and Direct SDM is enabled, then DSD sources are straight pass through.
But one of the main points of HQPlayer is to replace in-DAC oversampling filters and modulators with better ones. And generally always drive the DAC in a way where it produces best technical performance (typically some of the input formats to a DAC perform better than the others). Plus of course now the DAC corrections which perform DSP corrections for a specific DAC model to make it perform even better (objectively).
It is connected to the LAN, the USB is to my DAC, which my case, is the DA2 module of the McIntosh C55.
I’m sick of people like you willfully misunderstanding technology and psychology. You’re wrong, you’ve been wrong through this entire thread, and I think you’re just trolling.
I’ll put my money where my mouth is: If you can prove to the satisfaction of a mutually-acknowledged expert that the sound quality coming out of RoonServer is objectively technically worse resulting in lower audio quality than any other system, I’ll give you $500. If you don’t take that offer, then please be quiet.
@Andrew_Webb who are you replying to?
It was a direct reply to the original post by @Eric_Pell but it applies to @rDin and anyone on this thread that is claiming something they can’t prove and arguing against facts. Definitely not you.
I’ve had a lousy week, and I figured I’d channel some rage into a productive test of anti-reality dingalings. No one will claim the $500, so I get to make a point on the internet with no risk. Wheeeee! I feel better already.
I’m laughing with you 
Right on. I used to be disgusted; now I try to be amused. 
Uh oh. I think I may have misjudged ny nemeses.
I’ve been a huge fan of Roon for several years. Notwithstanding, I’ve read countless complaints that Roon doesn’t sound as good as Application x. Roon invariably pushes back with arguments that “Roon is bit-perfect, please go away.” Intrigued, by this apparent impass, I decided to invest some time and form my own conclusion. For nine months, I’ve owned an Innuos Stream 3 with their Phoenix DAC board which feeds my Bartok Apex DAC. I decided to switch over to Innuos’ Stream App and hear for myself. I chose one song: Dead Can Dance’s “Nierika” (44/16 Qobuz). The sound was noticeably better. The sound stage was deeper, and I don’t mean that the performers were pulled farther away, rather they remained in the speaker plane, but there was more space behind them. Also, the instrument and vocal images were more sharply defined. I also tried Innuos’ “ Experimental Mode,” in which Roon served as the front-end, with Squeezebox playing the music. The imaging here was less precise, but still slightly better than native Roon.
Now, in fairness, I have to say that the Stream UX was miserable for several reasons, which would be a post in itself.
In conclusion, I encourage Roon to pursue better sound quality. If digital audiophiles have learned anything, it’s that a perfect bit stream does not guarantee perfect sound. We may not understand all the factors at play, but our cutting-edge DAC and streamer manufacturers have evolved a set of best practices which merit consideration. I’ll continue to use Roon for most of my listening, and I’ll look forward to hearing how Roon is addressing its sound quality.
Funny thing, If I sit down in front of my HiFi, and listen intently, and think about the super low distortion equipment that I’ve carefully put together, and how wonderfull the performance sounds, maybe even close my eyes, and think about how far I’ve come in my quest for more life like sound…
Suddenly the music as played from Roon sounds so much better than when I’m just casually listening. It’s such an obvious improvement. The mind is an amazing thing.
This is the thing that interests me about posts like this. Why do users who notice these sound differences keep using Roon if the sound difference is so great? Surely you always want that ‘more space…’ in the music? If not, then it barely seems worth mentioning as it must be so small a difference as to be worthless?
Digital naughts and ones do not have a sound, and the data is really too slow to be influenced by minute timing errors. If you can measure a difference, come back and we’ll talk, otherwise, recognize confirmation bias is real and strong. Don’t ask me how I know, because many of us are embarrassed to admit the money waisted following rabbit holes and dubious advertising claims.
