During the 1990’s and 2000’s, I listened only to vinyl as I found digital to be difficult to enjoy. During that period, it was rare to see reviewers mention that their observations were based on anything but CD playback except of course if analog gear was under review. It was even difficult back then to walk into an high end audio shop and assess gear using vinyl as most rooms had only CD players. I didn’t get that as my much more modest system was far more musical than what I heard in most audio showrooms when I played my best vinyl.
Ultimately I figured out that I was in the minority and that most folks were building systems centered around CD playback. I think a similar thing is at play now where most people are building systems centered around Roon. This is true about reviewers too.
Trends do change, as is evident in vinyl’s resurgence. The first time I attended an audio show, I think I could count on two hands the number of rooms that could spin vinyl. The opposite was the case at the show I attended last year.
I like your watching film analogy. I can really relate to that. To me it 's also a bit like putting a Carravaggio in a sub optimally lit viewing space. But hey, beauty i guess is always in the eye of the beholder. Squeeze + squeeze lets me marvel about just how sonically awesome my K50 is. I never come close to marvelling like that with Roon.
However, the general sentiment suggests a preference for GUI over SQ, emphasizing the simplicity of that choice (also see Christiaans’ ‘justification’ below). In the pursuit of optimal sound quality, and especially for a broader audience, the responsibility to make Squeeze future-proof on their servers seems to rest with Antipodes. Even if a better Squeeze to Squeeze GUI will not happen, kudos to Antipodes to keep that option available on their servers!
Hi Paul,
Naturally, I am aware that any Antipodes server can be used as a full Squeeze solution. Having reviewed nearly every Antipodes server that existed, I have also tested this in the past. But these days, I feel that Squeeze is a thing of the past, even if it still works very well and can indeed sound very good. And I applaud having compatibility built in so that the server caters to every possible required solution out there. Although I do not use Squeeze personally, I would not go as far as referring to it as a “Squeeze Allergy”. Please note that I am not really willing to compromise on SQ to favor a nice user interface. Although I like the Roon interface a lot, I am actually on the fence about this. Roon SQ wavers and currently sounds very good again. All that said, since I already know what Squeeze and MPD can do and have written about this countless times, and I think that most users will prefer the higher level of sophistication of Roon, I left it at that and made note of both methods so users can decide for themselves.
I completely understand your decision, and I always appreciate your openness and reading here about your past challenges. I’ve had my share of trials as well. As a Squeeze + Squeeze user, I value not only the excellent sound quality but also the optimal performance it brings to Antipodes devices. Despite its less convenient interface, I advocate for a better GUI – perhaps a possibility in the future? Up to now, ROON hasn’t surpassed the SQ of Squeeze, and although it may seem like a thing of the past, I find using it remains the most rewarding for achieving the best listening sessions. It’s reassuring to see that you share a similar awareness. Happy listening!
Hi Paul, Nice feedback:-) Indeed, although Roon has had a large dip and currently sounds great again, it does not sound the same as Squeeze or MPD or UPnP, for that matter. It’s always had a different sonic perspective, even when it was still Sooloos. I most definitely understand why people would opt out of Roon, either for the reassuring comfort of the software never changing, or for the specific sound properties, or both. In the end, the beauty of the Antipodes servers is that all options are on the table!
Yes, it would be nice if a reviewer tested every possible option for a component. What if both reviewers mentioned here did that and came to the conclusion that HQ player was best- would you then try that? Or have you?
Personally I would prefer to read a comparison review of server A vs. server B using Roon, into a couple of different DAC’s, keeping that app variable constant. (assuming Roon is constant between servers, which may be a big assumption). We both know the sound comparisons between Roon and squeeze, so our brains can plug that gap and still make good conclusions on the servers being reviewed.
I don’t know how relevant a comparison of server A using conductor going USB into DAC G , vs. server B using squeeze via AES into DAC H really is.
I thought sharing Christiaan’s point of view on this could be interesting for you as well. I just updated the information above.
Regarding your reflection; Antipodes, as highlighted by Christiaan (HFA), demonstrates a preference for Squeeze to Squeeze.
‘’ Squeezebox Server is license-free and Antipodes is committed to its on-going development as the best souding playback solution available on Antipodes music servers.‘’
Christiaan himself also tends towards it, though he is satisfied with a compromise. In my setup, having experimented with various (also non-Antipodes) server and player combinations, including Roon to Squeeze, most music sounds notably different—less engaging or less natural—compared to what I perceive as the optimal setting with exclusively Squeeze to Squeeze.
It’s crucial to emphasize that this statement is specific to my setup and excludes other variables in someone else’s configuration ¹. The focus is solely on the combination of a particular server with a server and player app, without considering upstream and downstream connections ². Crucial to me is that this experience is shared by myself, it is repeatable on different servers running a player and server app and it is shared by many other users in this context.
Hard to tell how many Squeeze to Squeeze users we are, probably much less than the estimated 400K Roon subscribers, which still is a niche (in both scenarios actually).
¹ In numerous setups, sound quality can witness enhancement when exclusively playing music files from a local SSD, coupled with an isolated audio-only Ethernet connection or no Ethernet connection at all.*
² The sole exception that comes to mind pertains to the selection of an Ethernet cable for the EX and CX combination, or similar dual setup. All other Antipodes servers have a separate player and server board with an internal connection.*
Speaking to ones configuration, the problem with this music streaming is we are chasing a moving target. We set up a preference with components running in a particular configuration, with a particular app, adjust some cabling to fine tune, and then the app changes its sonic signature. I am not sure how squeeze or the others have changed in sound over the years, but its gotta be annoying for manufacturers. Kind of like a parts shortage and having to reconfigure a component; hey @MarkCole?
Similarly, let’s see what AMSV5.0 brings to the table.
One factor that may account for the stability and improved sound quality in applications like Squeeze, MPD, and Minimserver is that (apps like) ROON can not operate in a contained environment, it relies on feedback. And the continuous updates and revisions in ROON might contribute to the observed differences and fluctuations in sound quality over time. Additionally, the interference from the local network, with all connected devices influencing the music server’s performance can play a role, but that is regardless of the app used.
As mentioned earlier, I belief that sustaining a permanent internet and Ethernet connection for file streaming, and particularly for ROON, maintaining a continuous link between ROON main servers and home servers, presents a notable challenge in achieving optimal sound quality. In its simplest setup, Squeeze can play music almost independently of the network—a Solution (pun intended) worth exploring, and remarkably stable for many years now.
Absolutely! For me material is completely unusable despite trying many times. I dont see why we - ie those who spend the most time and money on this hobby in order to achieve the very best - have to choose either great interface/user experience or great sound. Surely we deserve both
@tommytwotimes it is not impossible that the two objectives are mutually incompatible. Perhaps the complexity of the Roon interface is the cause of its SQ issues and perhaps the simplicity of the Squeeze interface is why it sounds so good?
What we deserve is usually dictated by what we paid for. If one purchases a car that gets 26 miles to the gallon, it would be odd for them to later just declare that they deserve to get 50 miles to the gallon and expect the car manufacturer to wave their magic wand and suddenly make that happen. The buyer needs to be smart about how they will spend their dollars before they actually spend them.
Software doesn’t just develop magically. An investment needs to be made to cover the cost of salaries. Roon did that, but they chose to not dedicate those resources to achieving the best sound quality. Someone else then needs to put up the dollars to make a user -friendly application that sounds as good as Squeeze. I suspect it would take an investment of at least a million dollars to develop something better than Squeeze and yet it still won’t be as user-friendly as Roon.
So, we invested in these pricey Antipodes servers that are all set up for playing squeeze to squeeze, which actually meshes quite nicely with the idea of having distinct player and server boards. And I’m really grateful for that setup; there’s nothing negative about it, and I’m getting rewarded with top-notch sound quality.
But here’s the thing: if I decide to go for a ROON subscription, I’ll have to deal with a drop in sound quality on my Antipodes server. That’s just how things stand as of now.
I’m not particularly keen on ROON myself, but I’d be willing to pay for a Squeeze subscription if it means getting a better interface.
People are being told roon is inferior sound quality. It is different not inferior but so is mpd, hqplayer, plex etc. If one wants the gold standard in gui then roon is it. Roon then gives you three transport protocols to use… raat, naa or squeeze. Different flavours for different systems. I use all three to my various streamer/dac/amps as synergy is a thing.
I am just 2 weeks into my K50 G2, so I am still playing around with everything, but I did listen to one track last night where I came to the conclusion that Roon was more enjoyable than squeeze/squeeze. Was Roon less resolving than squeeze? Yes. Was the bass rounder and less defined? Yes. But I don’t know if it is because every cable I own has silver in it, or 12 feet of ribbon tweeters, but squeeze got a little “hot” and unforgiving on this track, and for the first time since I got this K50 I turned down the volume.
I think it’s more the case that folks are sharing what their own ears have told them. Everyone’s ears and systems are different so it’s understandable that we wouldn’t all have the same opinions on things. The reason we hear more about Roon is that some who perceive it as having inferior sound quality are craving an alternative that provides a better user experience than what’s offered by the current alternatives while still being the best sounding option on Antipodes.
I have found that Squeeze can be better at telling the truth about recordings - and sometimes the truth isn’t easy to handle. There are plenty of recordings that have a tendency to be hot in the treble. A tradeoff must sometimes be accepted when we pursue transparency as being able to hear more of what’s in the recording can mean that we also notice more of the warts.
I mentioned before using PGGB to offline upscale my music. This actually helps to tame some of the harm that the warts cause. I’ve been able to play even my poor recordings at a higher volume because of this.
Yes, I believe you are onto what it may be. It wasn’t a Patricia Barber track, let’s put it that way. Well then, it is nice to have options- maybe going forward squeeze for the best recordings, and Roon for most of the others, and non-critical browsing. I have alot going on at the moment re-balancing my system due to a number of changes lately, but I plan to check out some other options in time, like HQplayer and this PGGB.
It makes alot of sense that Roon is more forgiving to appeal to more people and systems, whether that is intentional or a necessary side effect of all the additional processing.
Thinking more about this, I believe I have read my Weiss does enjoy an over/upsampled input resolution, it does internally convert to 195khz for the chips anyway, so maybe it would like to be fed a 176.4 khz signal, if that lightens its load? I don’t know much about digital audio to be honest, but a couple of most likely rookie questions come to mind:
Anyone know why Antipodes didn’t offer this as an option, like the Grimm?
I wonder if they could embed this PGGB into the options, like HQ player?
I completely understand and respect that there are numerous configurations that may sound appealing to different individuals. Each person’s perception of good and bad sound quality is subjective and can’t be judged by others.
It’s worth noting that my preference aligns with a few, including Antipodes. I recognize that ROON is widely regarded as the standard, and while Squeeze may not meet everyone’s expectations, it still offers a satisfying listening experience for many. Let’s appreciate the diversity in preferences and continue enjoying our own unique setups for our listening sessions.
PAUL
