Yes, but its not a binary “either have it or don’t” problem, its a problem that exists for everyone (no matter hardware or software) and it can be subtle and always with a gradual impact. All we can do is to try and minimize the problem.
I have compared NAA with Roon bridge (endpoint) without using any DSP in HQPlayer, and there is a difference. Its not big, but there is an increased clarity and transparency in NAA (setup was otherwise same of course).
I also once compared Audirvana with Roon, both playing directly to USB, and there the difference was a little bigger, but that’s to be expected considering how heavy Roon is compared to Audirvana.
You never comment on what I write, but always come up with new partially irrelevant aspects. Can’t we never meet?
So you say everyone have problems, but for some it’s not a problem? If the problem is so small, is it really a problem - and then what is it to solve? This is going more in a philosophical direction than a technical. Roon software cant solve the former.
So you are saying that your computer sends more noise over USB that affects your DAC because of Roon software is heavy, when playing music? That’s ok. I don’t have those problems at all, comparing Audirvana, JRiver and Roon. But what we are hearing is not really answering anything about Roon software being so heavy that it affects any given or a specific DAC.
Roon software influences how the hardware is used (just like all software does) which in turn affects electronic noise and eventually produce clock-jitter in the DAC. This is true for all software, and based on my testing Roon software (both as standalone and as an endpoint) could be improved upon.
Its ok if you or others feel different, we are on a forum discussing our various opinions after all.
As an Innuos zen mk3 owner I was shocked when I learned about that when using Roon (and that’s what I do) I don’t get RAM cached playback.
This was a strong selling point of that music server. Innuos didn’t, and not a single reviewer, literally no one did point at this before, except Forums I did not use. Maybe the difference won‘t be audible to me, But that’s a different point.
I wonder why you didn’t ask me if I compared my Aurenders N100H performance to the Innuos Zen. Well I did. Aurender is connected via USB to my Linn Selekt and the Innuos via Ethernet (directly as it has a second port).
I compared three songs, one of jazz, pop, classic.
If I heard a difference I could source it to the different hardware or the different cables used and even the different connections, but then, I could hardly hear any difference. It seems like the Linn Selekt (Streamer/DAC/Preamp) is pretty immune to such things or my hearing is just not good enough.
I’m way out of my depth in this thread, so my apologies in advance if I’ve misunderstood your point, but are you saying that even the most expensive DACs, connected via the very quietest Roon bridges, are so badly overwhelmed by Roon’s ‘noisiness’ (for want of a better word) that they can’t control clock jitter?
What I would like to understand is what this supposed extra load is in a Roon bridge?
Roon does all its processing on the core, the bridge doesn’t even unpack the compressed audio data as it does in other systems. Roon sends uncompressed PCM data.
So specifically what additional processing is it that Roon bridge is doing to cause this apparent ‘noise’? And how can that manifest on all Roon bridges irrespective of their hardware platform?
No DAC is immune to noise from outside, and every DAC generates some noise internally. And clock-jitter is caused by inaccuracies in the oscillator and it can’t be detected by the DAC (from the DACs point of view there is no jitter since it can only compare to its own clock).
How much of this is audible (and in what system/room its audible) and to what extent it affects the various DACs out there is another matter. As usual in this business, its best to use your own ears in your own setup.
Personally I feel that Roon endpoint can be improved upon, but its not a big deal. Roons DSP engine is in much worse shape (PEQ, convolution, volume, etc).
Again, I’m out of my depth, but I suspect that the very minimal noise from a very quiet Roon bridge will - by design - have absolutely no effect on even a halfway decent DAC’s clock. I’m happy to see some evidence to the contrary, but I really can’t see how this could possibly be an issue.
This is the exact question anyone that claims Roon doesn’t sound as good as “X” needs to answer. Because I have tested other software using different protocols with my hardware (sonicTransporter i9, ultraRendu, and DirectStream DAC) and it does not sound better than Roon. Well, using HQPlayer sounds better than Roon but that has to do with the filters…
Fair point, but the word ‘absolute’ was redundant - ‘have no effect’, ‘have absolutely no effect’ amount to much the same thing. My point in much the same as @Speed_Racer’s and @Tim_Rhodes’ - what is that Roon (or RAAT) is doing such that it can overwhelm a DAC to the point where there is an audible difference in SQ?
Hi @Ken_Bauernfreund,
[Moderated] I doubt you will change their minds although I appreciate your efforts.
It’s also pretty funny how most on here believe the Innuos is an inferior product and the reason we hear these Roon issues equates to bad equipment
IMHO the Roon UI is the best there is. But there are issues (both in sound quality, reliability & support responsiveness). But I’m still hopeful it will evolve/improve (especially since I’m a lifetime subscriber)
Perhaps as version 1.8 will improve as you hope the “quality of sound”, you and I will also improve the “quality of our hearing”. The 2 go hand in hand…
I just want an answer to a question. The only answer I get is another version of the hypothesis I wrote, that Roon endpoint software is under par so it affects sound quality in a negative way.
That all software induce problems that affects the rest of the chain is not a fact. It is also very dependent on the hardware used in the chain. An OK DAC will not be bothered. Bad hardware exist, but that is another topic.
