Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Has anyone compared sound quality of a Roon ROCK (lightweight Linux) install vs. running Roon Server on an Windows System, with Audiophile Optimizer in Core mode?

 

I’m currently doing the latter on and Intel NUC and it sounds great bit isn’t the most stable.  Have to reboot quite often when the server loses connection to my network- (imagine it’s due to some service I’ve shut off in Windows using AO).

 

Was thinking of seeing if I’d still get the SQ benefits of a minimal OS using ROCK, without the network connectivity issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´d vote for Nucleus (and I have) for the stability and optimization alone. You would be hard pressed to find a difference in sound quality if all within the server is as it should. But it does get to one´s nerves to have an unreliable source ruining all those valuable listening sessions.

 

Food for thought if noting more.


Jussi Arvio

Contributing Editor

Hifimaailma Magazine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dtb300 said:

Server 2012 or 2016 in Core mode is VERY stable with Roon.

I am using Server 2012 r2 in core mode and unfortunately it is not for me.  Loses the network connection once a day or so and I have to reboot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jparvio said:

I´d vote for Nucleus (and I have) for the stability and optimization alone. You would be hard pressed to find a difference in sound quality if all within the server is as it should. But it does get to one´s nerves to have an unreliable source ruining all those valuable listening sessions.

 

Food for thought if noting more.

Thanks for the tip!  Would like to leverage the NUC I already bought if possible, but at some point I may need to buy a new server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, atxkyle said:

I am using Server 2012 r2 in core mode and unfortunately it is not for me.  Loses the network connection once a day or so and I have to reboot. 

That is too bad as it is stable.  Install was the only issue with the NUC and 2012r2 - drivers.  

 

You either have a bad install, or something with the NIC driver.  Did you hack the NIC driver to work with the NUC?  2012r2 was not a supported OS for the NUC a couple years back.  Have not run a NUC in a bit so maybe Intel updated.

 

There is also component store corruption that can occur when switching back and forth between GUI and Core.  Probably why MS decided on Core and GUI only for 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^that really emphasizes my point to some extent at least...


Jussi Arvio

Contributing Editor

Hifimaailma Magazine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, davide256 said:

AO and Windows Server ... "thank you Sir, may I have another". There are less painful ways to manage/serve up your music.

lol ... but i got to brush up on my command line syntax, so there's that!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, davide256 said:

AO and Windows Server ... "thank you Sir, may I have another". There are less painful ways to manage/serve up your music.

If not computer savvy, Win Server (12 or 16) should not be attempted, especially Core Mode.  That is why MS has Win10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original question - has anyone had the chance to compare sound quality of ROON on a light linux install like ROCK vs. on an optimized bare-bones windows server?  (where all else in the hardware is equal)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, atxkyle said:

Back to the original question - has anyone had the chance to compare sound quality of ROON on a light linux install like ROCK vs. on an optimized bare-bones windows server?  (where all else in the hardware is equal) 

Rock is sightly superior IMO due to the small dedicated Linux system, but do try Audiolinux I find it way ahead of both systems mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, atxkyle said:

lol ... but i got to brush up on my command line syntax, so there's that!  

mmm, I had too many issues with Server 2012 configuration changes going off into  la la land or just mysteriously failing without a reboot. Reminded me a lot of IBM OS2


Regards,

Dave

 

Audio system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally had a chance this weekend to try ROCK vs 2012r1 AO (on the same NUC hardware). 

 

I have to agree with @LTG2010 that the SQ is better with ROCK.  Better imaging, realism and dynamics in my system.  (And also stable thus far, which was my main beef with the 2012r2)

 

Going to have to try Audiolinux next when I have time... perhaps the headless version that everyone is raving about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2018 at 8:40 AM, dtb300 said:

If not computer savvy, Win Server (12 or 16) should not be attempted, especially Core Mode.  That is why MS has Win10.

Server 2016 with a gui is no harder than 2007.  My machine is a duel boot with both. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I question whether the stability of any machine is really the server, the NUC or is it really the network topology. The switch and the router.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
honestly for trying both, as well as many other configs (Euphonics, Snakeoil (not bad)) there is no picture. I was under Rock and out of the problems generated by Linux (lack of drivers for some dacs), I formatted everything and I went on a Core Windows 10 pro with Ao + pl + Fide and there great sound.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, JRMC 24 with AO2.2 with Windows Server 2016 Core on a Threadripper 2990W CPU PC sounds consistently superior to ROON Rock on a NUC i7 7th Gen machine.

 

More details, less glare.  If you don't compare, Roon Rock sounds very good ....but once you compares...it's JRMC with AO on Win Server 2016 Core by a long shot. 

 

Roon Rock just takes seconds to setup while the AO takes more efforts and time (At least 2 hours).

 

(Audio)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All, Quick queation in the same direction. i am thinking to either setup an roon rock on a nuc with i7, but i also like the nucleus+ and sonicTransporter i9. the nuc cost still 800, but the second two options cost nearly 3000. i am wondering, if there is really a benefit of a dedicated system like those?

 

in fact, if i work i dont listen to musik, and if i listen i dont work. this brought me to the idea to just take the 3000 and buy an Asus watercooled mini computer with i9 8 core and the ability to permanently deliver maximum power! Here i could setup the roon server, even a plex video server, and also use the performance for working. 

 

if you look on my pictures you can see my microsoft surface book 2 with i7, and how it behaves if i reduce power and/or how it behaves if i start multitasking. power saving brings bad results! multitasking at full power also brings the system to a bad limit. Final conclusion is that more power and/or a dedicated system are the solution. 

 

what do you think about a strong i9 8 core water cooled system to run roon server and other stuff on it?

81AB5CFB-BCFF-4735-B62B-4987AD30DBB4.jpeg

1CEBADBE-361D-4A99-A2EA-0B3D11EE4855.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter Zurich said:

if you look on my pictures you can see my microsoft surface book 2 with i7, and how it behaves if i reduce power and/or how it behaves if i start multitasking.

 

I think your conclusions are wrong. A linear LAN performance can be achieved through optimized settings of the network card adapter and through an audiophile network card such as JCAT NET Card FEMTO.

 

I'm using hyperthreading with 16 threads (8 Cores) and overclocked CPU 4.2GHz:

spacer.png

 

Regardless of this, a majority opinion seems to show that a stronger CPU means better sound. So your goal is right. But I would prefer on passive cooling. Every mechanical part that moves is a disturbing factor. Passiv cooling ist also possible with an Intel Core i9-9900K (95W TDP), 3.6GHz - 5.0GHz OctaCore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...