I started on USB but my MDAC only does 24 96 on USB so i added an Allo Digione to use the Coax input at 24 192
My apologies if I misread your post. Fact remains, a Pi and Roon does sound remarkably good, and would be preferable if the alternative is something via Airplay, as it supports Hi Res.
Pi’s are very adaptable. Check out how Bryston are using them in there products and are open about them being built into there streamers and digital players
Brytons BDA-3 with a built in Pi (v3 or 4 IIRC) now aptly called the 3.14
I think that’s likely due to the fact that really a streamer with dac is just a few small chips. We only need to look at some of those small thumb drive dacs to get some sort of an idea.
Marketing would have the world believe there is some magic underneath large hoods, but that’s not the case. Hence RPi/Allo combo that looks so DIY & primitive doesn’t scream out: Quality audio streamer & dac right here.
I split the difference. I have an RPi 4 feeding a Mutec MC-3.
The RPi is strictly for transport.
The Mutec does the heavy lifting, i.e. re-clocking, format conversion from USB to SP/DIF, etc.
The CXN can also use various digital inputs. If you require networking, a low cost network bridge or even something running RoonBridge can help you out.
Not at all… but you may have to do some workarounds to get older gear working. Also, as time goes on, this problem gets smaller and smaller.
We have solutions for the aging products of the past, but we are looking at the future.
I would hope they do. Our experience shows that people have far more loyalty towards products that create the user experience. It’s one of the reasons we made Roon and not audio products.
Not if we get the industry as a whole to switch to RAAT – which we have been quite successful at doing (just check the evergrowing Roon Ready/RoonTested partners list).
You keep saying this, but you don’t say WHY it matters.
I cover here, in this very old post of mine, why UPnP is bad. Some of it comes from openness and a lack of hard certification requirements for implementation:
I think that users care about the functional experience; they just want it to work and not have to futz with anything. Whether that is brought to them via an open standard or a closed garden doesn’t matter to them; as long as the experience is clean and easy.
If users cared about openess they wouldn’t be buying Sonos, heos, etc.
Pretty much but I think some users also (at least think) they like control as well and this is where open source is perceived to be better. Because it’s ‘open’ no one ‘owns’ it and that to some people is an attractive principle but often without any thought as to what difference it actually makes.
Bit like Android and Apple - Apple just works ™ but there are certain things you cannot do. Android can require a bit of faffing but is more versatile.
Where open falls apart is as already eluded to; it is very difficult to maintain standard protocols as someone can just side load their implementation in. Again this can be seen in the vast number of UI’s mobile operators and device manufacturers foist on Android devices and the problems app developers have in getting an app to work on the myriad of different spec phones and tablets out there. It just becomes a mess.
For a commercial project like Roon closed absolutely makes more sense and things like uPNP via Roon would not give people the control they perceive open source brings in any event. Because yes, the vast majority of paying users just want it to work.
Consumers generally want to buy a package, techies want to fiddle.
Linux on the desktop tiny % , Linux in the data centre huge %
If users care about openness, why are there so many MQA advocates out there? Sorry, I’ll duck my head and leave in shame.
Not even close. The big boys of mid-fi aren’t touching Roon with a bargepole. Marantz, Denon, Yamaha, anyone?
@Sallah_48, sorry to see you go, David.
Same with much of the super high-end manufacturers.
MQA is on its way out. It was doomed from the off
… and attached to it are (almost always) support contracts. Because, in DCs, nobody really wants to fiddle and prefers RHEL or something like this.
So far i found roon is the only multi zone solution that is stable.I have been trying jriver but its unstable with dlna.
Mike, this is a great pity, I think it is worth the time to send an email to CA lauding their kit and Roon connectivity updates and general support, but emphasising how sad it is that CXNv1 owners have been left behind and requesting a sparkling trade-in deal for a CNXv2. As I discovered with requesting Roon support for the 851N, it is no real use asking CA Support, but targeting the MD had a dramatically different outcome.
Just a thought, might be worth trying it on? Good luck.
+1 from me.
I’ve found RAAT to be by far the most stable solution. I experimented with going back to JRiver last year when I had an Internet outage. I lasted about a week and went back to using Roon.
Tony, I think Frank’s point is that Denon & Marantz products are announced as “Roon Tested”, rather than “Roon Ready”. The latter would mean that the RAAT protocol is implemented directly in the Denon & Marantz products. As I understand it, Roon is using Airplay to connect to these products instead, and this delivers basic audio streaming, but not the enhanced experience that would come with a full RAAT implementation.