5 ms·

Roon: a very promising service, but one geared more towards the audiophile audience and with hardware requirements I'm not interested in investing in at this po

by pnw 4y ago

Roon: a very promising service, but one geared more towards the audiophile audience and with hardware requirements I'm not interested in investing in at this point. If you've spent all of the time and effort to put your audio collection on local storage that's also encrypted and mirrored, you are the audiophile audience! Roon is a great option. I don't really understand OP's objection? Roon supports over 800 different playback devices in addition to software so it's pretty unlikely you don't already have something that supports it.

heleninboodler 4y ago
Roon seems very expensive for a service where I provide the actual disk space for the music.
- foolwhofollows 4y ago
  Their main USP IMO is their catalogue and their multi-room support. The catalogue is a work of art - incredibly detailed information about every artist and album, lyrics for most. I know a lot of other streaming services have good info about the things in their catalogue but, as has already been mentioned, these catalogues are volatile where Roon's catalogue doesn't carry the risk of being pruned at any time.
diblasio 4y ago
I also got stuck on that same part. I'm just going to guess they thought there was a requirement to run the Roon server on a Nucleus (the premium hardware they sell to host Roon). I personally run mine on my NAS in a docker container and it's been running great for years.
TeMPOraL 4y ago
> If you've spent all of the time and effort to put your audio collection on local storage that's also encrypted and mirrored, you are the audiophile audience! There are two main meanings of the word "audiophile". It can describe 1) a person whose music playing experience involves more than just the default music player app that shipped with their phone, and/or iTunes, and/or Spotify. It, much more commonly, also describes 2) a person who buys diamond-coated gold CAT-6 Ethernet cables, because they make the zeroes rounder and the ones straighter as the bits travel from their computer to their $2000 preamp, tuned to inject noise that makes the music sound just right. OP is definitely 1), but I think they also want to make sure they're not confused with 2).
- foolwhofollows 4y ago
  Is there room in your paradigm for an audiophile 1.5? Someone who buys the $2000 pre-amp but knows full-well that interconnects are snake-oil; someone who knows that spending more than $1000 per separate will not be worth the money unless you have a dedecated listening room with accoustic panelling.
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    There is definitely a room in my paradigm for this category. There is room in my heart. This is who I aspire to be, if I ever feel like getting more serious about music. What I don't have, however, is the right term for this type of person. I just don't think they'll call themselves audiophile - they wouldn't want others to confuse them with the other "audiophiles" - i.e. the philistines (1) and the crackpots (2).
    - heleninboodler 4y ago
      I agree with this. I consider myself a person who is very interested in a quality music-listening experience in that I want it to sound good (I can't believe how many people listen to music out of their phone's speaker these days) and I want a high degree of control/convenience out of my music player (mostly oriented around playing entire albums and/or dynamically building playlists on the fly based on where the mood takes me). But I really don't want to be called an audiophile, because of the crazy pseudoscientific baggage that word carries. So for a product to label itself "for audiophiles" creates a little "ugh, poor choice" flinch in me.
  - kuschku 4y ago
    Even then, $1000 is very unlikely to be a meaningful investment. The hard upper limit is the equipment the mastering engineer used to listen to the track when mastering it. Even if your equipment can reproduce more detail, that's likely unwanted detail. Something you'll frequently notice when listening to youtube shorts on a big home theater setup – a lot of wind noise below 80Hz which the author couldn’t notice, but which is deafening. The same, though more subtle, happens when listening to professionally mastered audio with an excessive audiophile setup.

by pnw 4y ago

heleninboodler 4y ago

Roon seems very expensive for a service where I provide the actual disk space for the music.

foolwhofollows 4y ago
Their main USP IMO is their catalogue and their multi-room support. The catalogue is a work of art - incredibly detailed information about every artist and album, lyrics for most. I know a lot of other streaming services have good info about the things in their catalogue but, as has already been mentioned, these catalogues are volatile where Roon's catalogue doesn't carry the risk of being pruned at any time.

diblasio 4y ago

I also got stuck on that same part. I'm just going to guess they thought there was a requirement to run the Roon server on a Nucleus (the premium hardware they sell to host Roon). I personally run mine on my NAS in a docker container and it's been running great for years.

TeMPOraL 4y ago

> If you've spent all of the time and effort to put your audio collection on local storage that's also encrypted and mirrored, you are the audiophile audience! There are two main meanings of the word "audiophile". It can describe 1) a person whose music playing experience involves more than just the default music player app that shipped with their phone, and/or iTunes, and/or Spotify. It, much more commonly, also describes 2) a person who buys diamond-coated gold CAT-6 Ethernet cables, because they make the zeroes rounder and the ones straighter as the bits travel from their computer to their $2000 preamp, tuned to inject noise that makes the music sound just right. OP is definitely 1), but I think they also want to make sure they're not confused with 2).

foolwhofollows 4y ago
Is there room in your paradigm for an audiophile 1.5? Someone who buys the $2000 pre-amp but knows full-well that interconnects are snake-oil; someone who knows that spending more than $1000 per separate will not be worth the money unless you have a dedecated listening room with accoustic panelling.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  There is definitely a room in my paradigm for this category. There is room in my heart. This is who I aspire to be, if I ever feel like getting more serious about music. What I don't have, however, is the right term for this type of person. I just don't think they'll call themselves audiophile - they wouldn't want others to confuse them with the other "audiophiles" - i.e. the philistines (1) and the crackpots (2).
  - heleninboodler 4y ago
    I agree with this. I consider myself a person who is very interested in a quality music-listening experience in that I want it to sound good (I can't believe how many people listen to music out of their phone's speaker these days) and I want a high degree of control/convenience out of my music player (mostly oriented around playing entire albums and/or dynamically building playlists on the fly based on where the mood takes me). But I really don't want to be called an audiophile, because of the crazy pseudoscientific baggage that word carries. So for a product to label itself "for audiophiles" creates a little "ugh, poor choice" flinch in me.
- kuschku 4y ago
  Even then, $1000 is very unlikely to be a meaningful investment. The hard upper limit is the equipment the mastering engineer used to listen to the track when mastering it. Even if your equipment can reproduce more detail, that's likely unwanted detail. Something you'll frequently notice when listening to youtube shorts on a big home theater setup – a lot of wind noise below 80Hz which the author couldn’t notice, but which is deafening. The same, though more subtle, happens when listening to professionally mastered audio with an excessive audiophile setup.