Roon Vs Audirvana

I've only compared non-Tidal and from the point of view of library not sound quality. I didn't like Roon because I didn't like its social-media-like feel, with no interest in Tidal its integration of Tidal was distracting as well as pointless, and if handling of problem files was better it wasn't obviously so. The negatives for me put me off before comparing sound quality.

That said, there was something slick about Roon, and if links or suggestions to related or similar music are things you want thrust at you, and if you want to seemlessly mix Tidal with your own music, it may well appeal, as those are its obvious strengths.

I assume you're aware that MQA can only be partially reconstructed in software, needing an MQA DAC for the final stage of the process, and that even with full reconstruction it is lossy and so not bit perfect. That is not a reason for not using it if you like it, but don't be surprised if there are differences in sound from original hi res files.

Thanks IB for your very detailed and hugely informative post TBH MQA is only a curiosity not a deal breaker Tidal itself however is a must as after many a minor falling out I have weened my other half off of Apple music and onto Tidal another change at this stage could cause a return to streamer wars!

Not sure why there should be any conflict between streaming from local source and Tidal. They can come-exist quite happily, and do for many people on this forum.  Both Audirvana and Roon facilitate that, just Roon removes the distinction of the location of the music.

Many people find the sound quality of Tidal (and other online streaming) not as good as from a locally stored file, and it seems that problems like dropouts are not uncommon with online streaming, which is unsurprising given the different processes.

I, for one, distrust and dislike the online model, as it makes the availability of music wholly reliant on the service being available, not interrupted for any reason, from  broadband issues to solvency of the supplier, and also relies on them having the music I want, and keeping it in perpetuity. I also have a strong preference for ownership vs renting, not least because regardless of their prices and my finances in the future, the continued availability of my beloved music collection is assured. 

Incidentally,  Ito get your reference to "Apple Music", local streaming of course need not have anything recognisably Apple about it, other than if you have a Mac as a machine: Whilst Audirvana provides an option to use an iTunes interface, that is to accommodate those hooked on it - you can disable iTunes mode, and in fact it is said that removes a limitation to sound quality caused by iTunes. 

Bob the Builder posted:

What are peoples experiences with Audirvana and Roon specifically with MM >> USB ISOLATOR >> DAC. ? I would want to play Tidal MQA if possible. What are the + & - and has anyone trialed both?

If you are playing 16/44 cd rips then no noticeable sound quality difference between roon and audirvana providing bit perfect settings. Same for iTunes. Roon is a superb piece of software for music with superb dsp engine for eq etc but I cannot say it sounds any better than iTunes for 16/44 bit perfect music. Unless you need the software features of roon then just use iTunes.

Intona usb is a superb usb isolator.

If only ‘ones and noughts’ were as simple as only ones and noughts....