Best setup for Roon

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by 2fastdriving

People seem to think so, but I don't get it. That approach has more devices in the signal path.

I'm referring to the micro rendu, bridge, whatever... As opposed to simply going usb out to the dac.

Going out of the dirty, grungy, hash USB port of the computer directly to the DAC IS the problem...that's exactly what you don't want to be doing. Having the computer in your audio rack is sub-optimal as well.

[2fastdriving]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Going out of the dirty, grungy, hash USB port of the computer IS directly to the DAC the problem...that's exactly what you don't want to be doing. Having the computer in your audio rack is sub-optimal as well.

Rendu type devices still have the same interface. I guess if you have a network native dac, that might be superior if USB is so bad. I'm not convinced that it is.

[CGabriel]

Roon sonic performance is superior when you run it on a server.
Then, of course you need a second computer or Roon compatible DAC as an end point.

This in comparison to running Roon core on a PC or Mac and connecting it to a DAC.
So, in this configuration the computer is the server and endpoint.
Apparently, the dual task of acting as the server and the client degrades the sound quality.

In the beginning I started with a highly modified (Core Audio) Mac mini running Roon core on it and connected to a DAC. This worked fine and sounded comparable to the Mac running Audirvana or JRiver.

Our current setup running Roon Rock on a NUC and the HP as the client definitely sounds best of all the configurations we have tried. And this is independent of which DAC we use.

You can stream directly to a Roon (RAAT) compatible DAC but you loose the “Sooloos like” interface and touch screen convenience. You can use an iPad to control the DAC which is nice but I prefer to have a dedicated touch screen sitting on a rack. It is also nice for guests that may come to visit, so they can browse your library for music they like. It makes your high end music system much more accessible and friendly for non-techie people.

[Ventoux]

Originally Posted by 2fastdriving

Rendu type devices still have the same interface. I guess if you have a network native dac, that might be superior if USB is so bad. I'm not convinced that it is.

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Going out of the dirty, grungy, hash USB port of the computer directly to the DAC IS the problem...that's exactly what you don't want to be doing. Having the computer in your audio rack is sub-optimal as well.

Paul McGowan makes a good argument as to why it's best to avoid the usb interface all together, in this interview with John Darko 18 months ago. It's what sold me on the DS Jr. Less is more in my opinion.

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by 2fastdriving

Rendu type devices still have the same interface. I guess if you have a network native dac, that might be superior if USB is so bad. I'm not convinced that it is.

The Rendu has a USB output port, yes, but the "USB" signal is regenerated, reclocked and is output asa a considerably cleaner source to the DAC than a computer's USB port, which is notoriously grungy and dirty. The Rendu is purpose-built to drive noise levels down coming out of the USB port as far as possible, as well as providing a superior clock to reduce jitter. These improvements result in a clearly noticeable improvement in sound quality.

[Puma Cat]

Originally Posted by Ventoux

Paul McGowan makes a good argument as to why it's best to avoid the usb interface all together, in this interview with John Darko 18 months ago. It's what sold me on the DS Jr. Less is more in my opinion.

For the most part, he is absolutely correct. This is one of the reason why Schiit implemented their new "Gen 5 USB" interface; to deal with these problems. All the years they have been making USB DACs, they also been of the view, and very vocal about it, I might add, that SPDIF was a superior interface. Until I got my Schiit Eitr USB/SPDIF convertor, and ran via SPDIF into my Schiit Gungnir D/S DAC, I didn't realize that they were correct, as Paul McGowan is, all along.

Schiit's new Gen 5 USB interface cleans up the sigal so well that it is now indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from the SPDIF interface on their DACs.

[antipop]

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

For the most part, he is absolutely correct. This is one of the reason why Schiit implemented their new "Gen 5 USB" interface; to deal with these problems. All the years they have been making USB DACs, they also been of the view, and very vocal about it, I might add, that SPDIF was a superior interface. Until I got my Schiit Eitr USB/SPDIF convertor, and ran via SPDIF into my Schiit Gungnir D/S DAC, I didn't realize that they were correct, as Paul McGowan is, all along.

Schiit's new Gen 5 USB interface cleans up the sigal so well that it is now indistinguishable, for all practical purposes, from the SPDIF interface on their DACs.

So SPDIF is the best unless you have a DAC with the right implementation of USB, is that correct?

I couldn't find much difference in my system between the various input so I picked the simplest.

[antipop]

Originally Posted by CGabriel

Roon sonic performance is superior when you run it on a server.
Then, of course you need a second computer or Roon compatible DAC as an end point.

This in comparison to running Roon core on a PC or Mac and connecting it to a DAC.
So, in this configuration the computer is the server and endpoint.
Apparently, the dual task of acting as the server and the client degrades the sound quality.

I'm going the same way but with a mac mini instead of the HP. Roon is using 25% CPU now so I believe there is some gains to have going separate.

However, I still don't know if I should use wifi or not. The NUC would be connected (via ethernet) to a wifi router and the mini would be connected (via ethernet) to a wifi bridge. It shouldn't have any impact on sound unless I'm mistaken.

[Family Progtitioner]

Again, why not just have the roon server in one room connected to the network while your directstream sits in the audio rack in a different room with the ethernet bridge II? It's a very simple, elegant solution. No middleman (in your case the mac mini) needed. No micro rendu smendus, no usb, just streaming over the network using ethernet.

[antipop]

Originally Posted by Family Progtitioner

Again, why not just have the roon server in one room connected to the network while your directstream sits in the audio rack in a different room with the ethernet bridge II? It's a very simple, elegant solution. No middleman (in your case the mac mini) needed. No micro rendu smendus, no usb, just streaming over the network using ethernet.

Because I don't own a bridge II but I have the mini...