PNCD1

According to an earlier post by Jesus, 2.1mm.

Thank you for the pointer to AQvox. I placed my order with you yesterday and with AQvox today. If all goes well, there will be two additional orders. I have been engaged in computer audio for 15 years but this is the first time using a USB interface. I trust that Sonore has evolved a good interface over the years. Looking forward to putting all this together...

Jesus I understand why you do not include a linear PS for the 220-260v version. Do you know of any compatible units that I could buy? I do not have the competence to search through to find a good solution, albeit at a price point higher than Sonore would wish for. Thank you, Peter

I agree that this is what is needed, Danny, I would note that you may be surprised at just how many fields users will want to have control over: all! That control may be to use #2 if #1 is not available or to use #2 even if #1 is available. You may also find that this preference is conditional: on obvious example might be field preferences for classical/opera versus pop. I appreciate your keen sense of pride in your accomplishment with Roon but you may have misjudged the needs of the "audiophile" community versus the mass market. We have used our primitive tools for years to get what we needed and one thing we do not need is someone scrambling everything we are familiar with. Your Meridian credentials give you great credibility but I would understand if your first priorities were to focus on the broader market. Why not? You will also find that there is no consensus on SQ. It is the reason that the audiophile community is not dominated by one computer platform, one player, one network standard, one DAC etc. Some feel passionate about their ability to master the audio replay chain. I am keen to see how this story will play out.

I think our reactions to Roon are partly based on our current environment: how much music we have, what formats, what software we use now to manage and to play, how much attention we have given to curating our collections. In my case I use JRiver/JRemote for playback, some 5,000 albums of which only some 260 are classical and opera (not so much complex metadata) but some 2,000 are Italian, Brasilian, African, French, Middle Eastern and Indian (inconsistent spelling and accepts) all in FLAC ripped by dbPowerAmp or HiRes downloads (just 320 albums) and these have been managed by MP3 Tag. I have been doing this since 2003 and I have invested a significant amount of time on a regular basis to ensuring that I have consistency in the metadata that I consider key and that foreign language names and titles are correct. So my first experience of Roon is disappointing. To see that it has blown away my Genres is astonishing - the first law is to do no harm! I really cannot imagine how my enjoyment of my music collection is enhanced by Gustavo Santaolalla's Ronroco is officially considered the one album it defines as "Rock en Espanol". Why is there no option to build the library with no replacement of existing tags? It is not like the early adopter scenario for Roon are people with iTunes collections that have never been groomed. Is it? The second show-stopper is no importing of M3U playlists along with the library. Radio may be great, but playlists got here first. Bottom line for me is that until Roon can give me back what I have already worked so hard for, I cannot get to the point of appreciating all the lyrics and artist art and reviews. Add to that no clear program for how Roon cores will interoperate with existing client end-points and I am happy to let my trial lapse, keep reading the blogs and see if anything significant changes. See you in six months?

I may have used the wrong terms. I used Network DAC to refer to the piece of hardware, connected to Ethernet that acts as a DNLA renderer and includes an integrated DAC. Linn Klimax DSM pr PS Audio PWDII for example. I used Network Server to refer to the piece of hardware, connected to Ethernet that as a DNLA renderer but has no integrated DAC. Instead it provides interfaces (S/PDIF, 12S, USB) that are used to connect a DAC that has no network capability. I think Auraliti, SOTM, Aurender. Some of these also act as DNLA servers, including the disk storage. Auraliti is the most bare-bones.

That makes sense to me. I have see the Stream Unlimited interface being the common factor for many of the current network players. I have also seen the chaos at PS Audio with software development for the PWD 2. I understand that software requires skills and processes that is completely different from hardware. On the other hand it is pretty central to computer-based audio of any and all kinds. I had expected ARC to grow their own with the joint resources of Wadia and its Intuition. Devialet have made it a strategic strength. There has been no dissenting voices on the issue of network DAC versus tethered DAC. If the network approach is indeed the better long-run solution, then I will keep waiting until a destination DAC shows up with solid software controlled by the company. Perhaps another 3-5 years, I would guess. Sigh.

network Then perhaps I should preface every sentence with "IMO"? Similar issue to "expensive" - everyone draws the line where they want, just easier if people declare where that line is for them, which I did. Perhaps I should distinguish those companies that are specialist enough to have proprietary technology from those that buy in chips, many of which are very good. Another proprietary vendor who has added USB but not network is MSB. My basic question is why the network DAC is still a rarity compared with tethered DACs using USB. A priori, IMO, it would appeal to the more sophisticated/affluent audiophile who is into digital: scalable library management, multiple formats including CD, hi-res and DSD, ease of use with iPad, etc. So why does the 'proprietary' DAC market ignore the network. Is it that networking is so tricky that it is best avoided? Is a direct server link using USB technically better?

I am a believer in the use of Ethernet network distribution of music. Primarily for convenience, but also because the large bandwidth of 1GB Ethernet coupled with the absence of source-based timing signals, IMO, simplify the problem set. I started with Weiss Firewire systems because they were network solutions unlike USB. USB has work-arounds that, I expect, are great by why work around? If the benefit of network-based server-client is true, then why are there so few high-end solutions from the more specialist DAC companies? I see plenty of network servers that then feed your DAC of choice through SPDIF or USB (!). For network DACs there is Linn, which seems more mid-market in terms of bought in DAC chips, along with PS Audio and Lumin. Otherwise only Chord has a high-end network DAC. Not EMM, Playback, Lightspeed or even DCS, which specifically implemented a network server going to a DAC. TotalDAC did the same. Does anyone have an insight into why the high-end DAC market has not adopted the network DAC?