No not at all, i use roon via USB out from a NAS directly to my amps USB/DAC input. rooncore has been installed on my QNAP NAS since 2017/2018. I used it in my Devialet system back then. I bought a lifetime licence so its here to stay.
I have learnt there is no need for a streamer, one less box in the chain is always a good thing. Just a USB DAC > analog out into any system. No need for any propitiatory approval.
My point is where is it heading why aim at a closed source?
Surely you want it to take hold of a much wider audience so how do you plan on doing that if its limited by proprietary code?
An open protocol is exactly what caused one of the major downfalls of UPnP. Apple’s Airplay, Google’s Cast, RAAT, and even Spotify Connect all follow a certification-required model. They are killing UPnP/DLNA in both end user satisfication and user experience.
Wider audiences do not come with open protocols. There are a ton of unused open protocols. Being open can help with adoption rates once you take off in popularity, but we don’t have that problem.
Our #1 reason for people not using Roon back in 2015-2016 was device support. It’s a minor issue now and usually fixes itself with time.
You seem to have an ideological bias towards open == better. While it can be true in some cases, it can come with massive penalties as well. UPnP/DLNA is one example, “Linux for the desktop” is another.
Ask yourself, would RAAT better serve Roon if it was open? If so, why?
Alternatively, ask yourself, would UPnP support better serve Roon?
If the answer to the second question is more “yes” than the first, then you aren’t arguing for open, you are arguing for the incumbent.
If the answer is more “yes” to the first, then you are arguing for openness and UPnP is not relevant.
Interesting you referred to old equipment, do you feel roon is only for new kit? maybe worthy of carrying the roonready status on roon approval.
Many people have a found work arounds, so why not embrace potential audiences which are otherwise excluded, do you think they value roon higher than there much loved high-end system?
isn’t that in itself a very limiting factor to prospective end users? i mean look at MQA, SACD, ALAC they are all on the decline now…
RAAT or any other protocol isn’t the issue, the openness is what i suppose really matters from an end users POV
PS, genuine questions, I’m not leading into anything other than having a genuine interest in the future of roon.
Whilst I agree in principal, I AM stuck with old kit , my Cambridge Audio CXN V1 specifically. CA have recently upgrade all their other streamer platforms to Roon Ready but according to their Support Team the CXN V1 has technical limitations
To use Roon to the CXN directly means AirPlay at best which I must admit I don’t find that bad with my aging ears.
It completely writes off Hi Res. (Can I even tell the difference between HR and CD these days , do we kid ourselves)
Somehow I can’t really believe that a RPi / Allo Digione costing $ 100, can be s good as a CXN Costing 10 x that , but as I say I really can’t differentiate these days
After all its all about Music to me not kit these days.
I will keep subscribing to Roon as I believe it is way ahead of anything else I have tried and I believe that to influence the path of Roon you must be a user not a whinger.
My only gripe really with Roon as it stands is in Big Box Set handling which has been highlighted by me and many others over time. To a classical listener it really is a big thing and I have to “manage” my way around it .
I think if you try it, you’ll be amazed at what can be achieved with a Raspberry Pi and just it’s USB output. If your setup doesn’t have a USB input, stick a $30 (or better) S/PDIF HAT on the Pi, and its still extremely good. The extra money for the CXN is for things like a nice box, PSU, display, customer support, warranty, etc, etc.
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
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.
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.
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.
