Sound quality of Roon

@jji666 wrote: 

I definitely agree that trouble-shooting Roon is a highly complex process. But it’s just not fair to say that nearly all problems with Roon are the user’s fault and usually due to their crappy network. True: many users that complain of problems have crappy networks (many are powerline! Yuck!). False: Roon is stable if your network is.

There are many ways in the way of ordinary use of Roon that cause it to tax itself to the point it piddles. Just do 15-20 searches in a row, adding tags to your search findings in between, then bring up a large tag and try to use focus on some of the tag results. It’s gonna choke.

Someone mentioned that having many open remotes also seemed to tax Roon. I’ve had my eye on that as a potential cause as well and there does seem to be some correlation.

I’m definitely not kicking Roon from a software design standpoint. I couldn’t do what I do with my music room without Roon. It’s brilliant in many respects. But that doesn’t make it stable.

AND, if it were the case that a restart of the core software temporarily refreshes IPs and other data that were causing problems, why doesn’t Roon just do that every so often?

I agree mostly.  I didn't mean to imply that Roon is 100% reliable if you know what you're doing.  Every situation is different.  But I also disagree that users without issues are just 'lucky'.  Your point on several open remotes as a potential cause could have merit.  I use a single tablet and always close Roon out whenever I turn off my DAC.  I don't even do it for Roon purposes.  It eats up my Samsung's battery when left open/running!

A restart should definitely not be an automated process.  Not everyone has IP conflicts.  In fact, I would bet the vast majority do not.

It seems to me reading all of this that the computational power required for full Roon implementation is per se detrimental to good sound quality. Hence the need for separating the (noisy) core and the clean end point. Other than the associated cost and cable dependency the question arises why going with the slimmed down processing power of say an InnuOS server wouldn’t be the more elegant solution from a sound quality perspective, fully acknowledging Roon’s superior customer interface.

Again, Roon has no inherent reliability issues, seamless streaming requires some network and computer knowledge.

I agree with the second independent clause in this sentence.  But, Roon definitely has inherent reliability issues. Some may not experience them.  I have found that most Roon users that say they don't have issues don't press Roon too hard.  They turn it off every night, don't use more than 1-2 remotes, and have a pretty simple endpoint setup.  The one thing Roon does seem to be pretty robust with is supporting multiple endpoints, albeit it may still just stop and wait for play to be pressed again.  Roon likes positive reinforcement!  Good Roon.  Good Roon!

@jji666  Doesn't your admittance that some may not experience reliability issues,  and many testaments from those who also don't experience these issues prove there is no inherent reliability issues with Roon?

Now, I have no doubt we may see more cases of issues with Roon, but this due to it's high volume of users vs other players. The problem isn't one is pressing Roon too hard, it''s that Roon is pressing the server beyond it's capabilities. Roon can be both processing heavy or not, be prepared to have more processing ability with server for users maxing out Roon processing.

IMO Roon gets a bad name by providing many conveniences without more clearly stating the need for more processing power with these convieniences. Roon, with it's complex interface already more process intensive than some of the other players, many servers simply don't have the engine to provide much more than elemental Roon settings.

@sns,

more computer power means more digital artefacts and more noise. There is a school of thought that in digital less is more.