Where's the RAAT?

[Boomzilla]

Roon software offers its own, proprietary Ethernet transfer protocol called RAAT. It claims to offer more reliable data transmission than the more common DLNA.

So let’s cut to the chase - RAAT seems to be superior to DLNA, technically, but so what? Finding an Ethernet-input, RAAT-compatible DAC (or even a streamer) is virtually IMPOSSIBLE for anything less than megabucks. Yes, you can cobble together some DIY kludge that works, but that is NOT an option for the majority of U.S. consumers. So the majority of us are stuck with DLNA despite having paid for RAAT along with our Roon subscriptions.

So until DAC makers begin to offer Ethernet inputs routinely, which may be years away if it ever happens at all, the consumer is stuck with buying a streamer AND a DAC to get a wired network Roon endpoint. Even when DAC makers DO decide to offer Ethernet inputs, how many will offer RAAT as opposed to DLNA?

These “technical difficulties” may eventually be the difference between whether Roon itself is a commercial success or a failure. The jRiver juggernaut rolls on and even though its DLNA implementation is significantly inferior to Roon’s, the future of Ethernet audio itself lies in the balance.

The ball’s in Roon's court to make RAAT implementation ubiquitous in Ethernet protocols, and also to persuade DAC makers to universally accept and implement Ethernet/RAAT inputs. Will it happen? Go ask an auricle - I've no idea.

Boomzilla

[klinemj]

You don't have to have an ethernet input on a DAC to leverage Roon...as you well know, you can use a Rendu product or several others like the SoTM.

On the DIY kludge, I presume you mean things like the R-Pi. They work well, are dirt cheap, and are extremely easy to "build"...as easy as an old snap-together model kit. If I thought I could make $ off it, I'd offer to assemble them and provide them to people for $50 more than the parts cost...but they are so easy to build I'd likely not get many takers.

And, while none of those products are etherent directly into a DAC, they give USB out to a DAC and are tiny.

If Emotiva makes its thin client streamer, I expect it will be at least R-Pi audio quality and priced between the Pi and the lowest level Rendu.

Mark

[Boomzilla]

For most people, the Rendu and SOtM products are considered "megabucks" (not even counting the fact that they also need a DAC). The R-Pi may be "easy to build" for us, but for the majority of consumers, it might as well be rocket science.

Furthermore, going from Ethernet to USB is yet another conversion that the signal must endure, causing inevitable degradation (and not even counting the variations in quality of USB inputs on DACs).

What's needed is a single-box, reasonably-priced Ethernet to analog music device (streamer+DAC) that supports RAAT. DLNA is unacceptable because many (most?) streaming softwares (and in particular, jRiver) are prone to automatically down-resolution-converting 44.1 content to MP3 in the background and without notification. Not acceptable for high-end audio service... Roon IS better than jRiver (and iTunes?) on this issue, but I don't know if it's perfect.

Boom

[ÈlTwo]

Keep everything proprietary, charge big bucks; it's a proven business model.

[wilburthegoose]

PS - It works - great.

And there are inexpensive RAAT endpoints - Chromecast and AirPlay.

[klinemj]

Mar 16, 2019 7:23:12 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

For most people, the Rendu and SOtM products are considered "megabucks" (not even counting the fact that they also need a DAC). The R-Pi may be "easy to build" for us, but for the majority of consumers, it might as well be rocket science.

Furthermore, going from Ethernet to USB is yet another conversion that the signal must endure, causing inevitable degradation (and not even counting the variations in quality of USB inputs on DACs).

What's needed is a single-box, reasonably-priced Ethernet to analog music device (streamer+DAC) that supports RAAT. DLNA is unacceptable because many (most?) streaming softwares (and in particular, jRiver) are prone to automatically down-resolution-converting 44.1 content to MP3 in the background and without notification. Not acceptable for high-end audio service... Roon IS better than jRiver (and iTunes?) on this issue, but I don't know if it's perfect.

Boom

Then I should be able to make a boatload assembling Roon-ready HifiBerry DAC's for folks!

But seriously, I get your point on "all in one", but there are options that are all in one and not all-in one.

Bluesound makes an affordable option...including the Node 2i, which I understand is now certified...streamer/DAC for $499. Also, you might want to check the Roon Community. There's a guy named Glenn Young seeking answers to the same question over there.



Mark

[klinemj]

There's also an Auralic Aries G1 in your target price range. Never heard one, but it fits your criteria.

Mark

[klinemj]

Or the bel canto e.one? -->CLICK HERE FOR MORE<---

Mark

[klinemj]

Or this...-->CLICK HERE for Auralic Altair<---

Mark

[garbulky]

This is the reason why inbuilt streaming on a dac is a bad idea. It's a setup for disappointment. A separate streamer has a better chance to keep up with changing technology because that's its purpose. The real issue is that the streamers cost more than is reasonable in my opinion. I can accept $100 for a good streamer - one that's not a dongle or HDMI only. But most of the good streamers cost more.

[klinemj]

Mar 16, 2019 10:17:21 GMT -5 garbulky said:

This is the reason why inbuilt streaming on a dac is a bad idea. It's a setup for disappointment. A separate streamer has a better chance to keep up with changing technology because that's its purpose. The real issue is that the streamers cost more than is reasonable in my opinion. I can accept $100 for a good streamer - one that's not a dongle or HDMI only. But most of the good streamers cost more.

While I do agree...I do think there's a big market for people who want it simple...1 line (or wifi signal) in, music out. The benefit of Roon over other options, if what Boom is looking for would be common, is that Roon offers multi-room integration like Sonos. I would personally want the separates for the reason you note.

Mark

[DYohn]

Logic = twisted. Enjoy your life.

[Boomzilla]

Mar 16, 2019 10:17:21 GMT -5 garbulky said:

This is the reason why inbuilt streaming on a dac is a bad idea. It's a setup for disappointment. A separate streamer has a better chance to keep up with changing technology because that's its purpose. The real issue is that the streamers cost more than is reasonable in my opinion. I can accept $100 for a good streamer - one that's not a dongle or HDMI only. But most of the good streamers cost more.

And I'd argue that DAC technology is rapidly changing also. By the time the Streamer's obsolete, so is the DAC - so why not replace them together?

[Creature]

Please don't disparage DLNA. It is incorrect to assert that DLNA is incapable
of bit perfect network transmission of media content. We have been handed an
open standard gift and are instead duped by corporations who want us to pay
licensing and subscription fees for that which is already built into much of
what we currently own.

Granted, the quality of the various implementations of DLNA renderers varies
greatly. Not all DLNA renderers are created equal. The best I've experienced
are the various products produced by OPPO Digital, sadly departing. The
UDP-203 is currently the reigning champion in my household.

Transcoding is an optional feature of DLNA. I specifically suppress
just-in-time transcoding. If I have an esoteric encoding that I want to keep,
I trasncode it via FFMPEG into something more universally accepted. I give
FFMPEG all the CPU time it wants to perform the transcoding, with the objective
of gaining the best possible result. My personal favorite DLNA server at
present is MiniDLNA, now known as ReadyMedia. Not sure about ReadyMedia but
classically MiniDLNA intentionally never performed transcoding.

DLNA includes compatibility with the use of Real-Time Transport Protocol (RTP).
RTP transmission of media from a DLNA server (aka. source or master) to DLNA
renderer (aka. sink or slave) includes QoS with both sequence numbers and time
stamps, for the purpose of detecting packet loss and jitter, respectively.
Note that jitter in this network transmission context is not here the same as
jitter resulting in a DAC's audio output performance. The streaming media
content is buffered in the renderer, a DAC should re-clock. The RTP QoS is
focused on lossless conveyance and the prevention of buffer under run.

I have a sneaky suspicion that many of these relatively new streaming protocols
are really an attempt to dupe us into accepting more DRM, licensing fees, and
vendor lock in. Please demand that our manufacturers play nicely and adhere to
open standards. Especially when perfectly good open standards exist in abundance
in the wild. Yes, there are substandard implementations but that's on us to
vote wisely with our purchasing.

Oh, and on the Raspberry Pi front, there are a number of nice DAC daughter
boards that plug right onto them. A good place to see some very cool Raspberry
Pi and other audio projects is volumio.org.

Apologies for coming across all preachy. It's just that I'm passionate about
open standards and frightened by the prospect of manufacturers using misinformation
for the purpose of sneaking their marketing objectives into our beloved hobby.

Sincerely

[garbulky]

Mar 16, 2019 13:22:15 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Mar 16, 2019 10:17:21 GMT -5 garbulky said:

This is the reason why inbuilt streaming on a dac is a bad idea. It's a setup for disappointment. A separate streamer has a better chance to keep up with changing technology because that's its purpose. The real issue is that the streamers cost more than is reasonable in my opinion. I can accept $100 for a good streamer - one that's not a dongle or HDMI only. But most of the good streamers cost more.

And I'd argue that DAC technology is rapidly changing also. By the time the Streamer's obsolete, so is the DAC - so why not replace them together?

same reason I don’t buy throwaway avr or processors.
Costs more for the same thing, smaller range of choices for ones specific wants. Why narrow your choices? For instance I like multibit dacs, dacs with dual mono configurations, and standalone dacs and high quality dacs at prices I can afford.Right now there are plenty of options. Now add the requirement of an ethernet Port, and regular updating at sane prices you get no choices.

If I want things just the way I like it, the way to do that is to go separate. If I go all in one, chances are I won’t get exactly what I want.

Raat he’s popular for one application and that is a software player that costs a lot of money. So for other manufactures to get in the game and provide variety, they have already narrowed their customers interested to those using roon, those aware of raat and those willing to dump their existing dacs to buy a new one.

[DYohn]

Mar 16, 2019 13:47:42 GMT -5 garbulky said:

If I want things just the way I like it, the way to do that is to go separate. If I go all in one, chances are I won’t get exactly what I want.
.

I'll take that one step further. If you want the best performance, one box for one function is the way to go. Anything else is a compromise.

[novisnick]

Mar 16, 2019 13:55:11 GMT -5 DYohn said:

Mar 16, 2019 13:47:42 GMT -5 garbulky said:

If I want things just the way I like it, the way to do that is to go separate. If I go all in one, chances are I won’t get exactly what I want.
.

I'll take that one step further. If you want the best performance, one box for one function is the way to go. Anything else is a compromise.

Thoroughly agree! 

[tchaik]

Mar 16, 2019 13:22:15 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Mar 16, 2019 10:17:21 GMT -5 garbulky said:

This is the reason why inbuilt streaming on a dac is a bad idea. It's a setup for disappointment. A separate streamer has a better chance to keep up with changing technology because that's its purpose. The real issue is that the streamers cost more than is reasonable in my opinion. I can accept $100 for a good streamer - one that's not a dongle or HDMI only. But most of the good streamers cost more.

And I'd argue that DAC technology is rapidly changing also. By the time the Streamer's obsolete, so is the DAC - so why not replace them together?

hey , yeah and they will be replaced by some kind of 12 inch disc made of vinyl.....

[MusicHead]

What kind of Caat cable do you use for a RAAT ethernet transfer protocol?? 😁😁😁

[Boomzilla]

Mar 16, 2019 22:49:44 GMT -5 MusicHead said:

What kind of Caat cable do you use for a RAAT ethernet transfer protocol?? 😁😁😁

Any Ethernet cable.