Aurender to Roon Core?

@lalitk

you are a longtime, established contributor here, i am not prolonging an argument, but i don’t quite agree with what you expressed in this case

1) roon is a software overlay, it does not have a sound... if someone feels roon sounds inferior to x, they haven’t implemented roon properly compared to x offering a one box solution they may have chosen - yes it may take more work, and lumin, innuos, pink faun, hifi rose, grimm, or aurender may have done that system integration for the consumer, and this indeed is good, it is a market alternative for those preferring to pay for that one-box-done-well convenience

2) there is nothing friendly about streamer companies trying to diminish roon, despite its superior functionality in cataloging, suggesting and managing digital music, be it from local or streamed sources.... it’s all about a battle for customer control, and the revenue streams associated with it... to say anything is done in this case is ’philosophical’ is rather bleary eyed and naive in my view - this is all about hardcore business and making money from customers

3) to be fair and symmetrical, roon isn’t being friendly to hardware makers either... having claimed an ample segment of digital oriented audiophiles, they have wielded a heavy hand in presenting hardware makers with a suite of requirements they must build into their gear... while at the same time offering software based functions (dsp, upsampling etc etc) that hardware makers justifiably see as infringing on their turf, what they seek to offer to customers as part of their own value proposition -- but that is my point -- this is business, an old fashioned power game, hardcore turf war... nothing friendly or philisophical about it

4) as such, it is undeniable that hardware makers would love it if roon did not exist, it is a pain in the ass to them, complicates their world, diminishes their market and income... but why does roon have so many customers? are they stupid, paying up for bad sound and me-too functionality? according to @lalitk roon is also a late comer to the game compared to aurender -- we should ponder this? perhaps roon allows users to manage and play their music more enjoyably? i do agree in that the presence of roon, its success to this point, has indeed prompted others (especially hardware makers) to up their game in developing competitive user interfaces...

some here have paid up for aurender, auralic, innuos, and roon too, and get understandably ’protective’ of their purchasse because they have paid handsomely, but it is still important to step back and see the landscape for what it is

@jjss49 

The respect is mutual as I always appreciated your point of view and contributions here. But I must disagree with you on couple of things, 

1) roon is a software overlay, it does not have a sound - If you think ROON algorithm does not impact the data stream and final sound then you’re living in a bubble my friend. Let’s leave aside the fancy interface and its library management capabilities for a moment and focus on its impact on sound. Each of these software apps, ROON, XDMS, Sense and Conductor have a sound or sonic signature. There has been ongoing discussions about XDMS and Sense sounding better than ROON using the same hardware and implementation. I never said ROON sounds bad but as others have confirmed and what I’ve found by comparing ROON with Conductor, ROON is manipulating (altering) the data stream to a point where both Qobuz and local files sounds bit glossy or unnatural to my ears. This has been my conclusion after listening through ROON over 18 months now. In my system, both ROON and Aurender are implemented meticulously as far as hardware and cost goes, both connected to a very good DAC over Ethernet. 

2) to say anything is done in this case is ’philosophical’ is rather bleary eyed and naive in my view - I suggest you read up on why Aurender chose to implement low-power high-efficiency Intel CPUs and what their software engineers are doing to specifically optimize playback performance. 

3) Agreed

4) but why does roon have so many customers? -  Let’s toss this into personal preferences, budget constraints, hardware options and biases. 

The landscape of streaming looks pretty darn good for everyone involved in developing hardware, software, streaming services and end users. It’s a perfect time to embrace streaming based on our budget and personal preferences. 

Latik is correct in that Roon and the other music players each have unique sound qualities. I have multiple choices available to me at present, Stylus which is Euphony's proprietary player, HQPLayer and Roon, each has unique settings and sound quality.

Some contend Roon sound inferior to various proprietary music players, that may be true for their own individual setup. Roon's great interface may negatively affect SQ in some cases in that it's complex interface may require greater use of available processor capacity, which may result in more noise generated by streamer. Proprietary music player apps may have advantage in that manufacturer has optimized player for the specific hardware used in streamer, I presume this is what Aurender Conductor users are hearing.

I'd suggest Roon SQ is highly variable since it can interface with wide variety of streamers. Because of this judgments of SQ highly subjective.  With my present streamer Roon core is using less than 1% of processor resources, Roon SQ wonderful, at least on par with Stylus and HQPlayer although still have multiple configuration to experiment with.

@lalitk 

+1

If I wanted to produce the best streamers possible I would not consider letting anyone in. I would want to control every aspect. It is not a negative that Roon isn’t supported, as far as I am concerned it is a positive. Aurender is not criticizing, simply controlling their environment. Apple vs open systems. With 40 years of experience in IT, I would choose closed every time.