It has been a good while. My impression it is not under PS Audio’s control and they are frustrated/disappointed as well.
To keep things in perspective however, we would not have expected this additional free feature if Paul had not mentioned they were working on it.
Elk said…To keep things in perspective however, we would not have expected this additional free feature if Paul had not mentioned they were working on it.
The DS Jr is sold as “Roon Ready”. Granted, that could mean that it can connect to Roon based on an out of date version of their API. And under that thinking, the DSJ is in deed Roon Ready. But it’s an out date form of Roon Ready.
For myself, I bought a DSJ with the assumption (and no guarantee) that PS Audio was enough of a stand up brand that “once Roon Ready” meant “always Roon Ready”… That Roon connectivity would be supported on an ongoing basis.
It will be quite disappointing if this proves that my faith in the brand was too high.
I understand the difficulties PSA currently has with that and I guess they will sometime achieve it…but I guess the scream will be even louder when it really happens that PSA products like bridge and server loose DLNA support. At least mine.
scolley said The DS Jr is sold as "Roon Ready".I have always dislike the marketing phrase, "____ ready." It implies much more than what it actually means, which is only that a product can be used in some fashion with ____. I have learned to accept these phrases as marketing hyperbole, rather than as a substantive promise.
I’m waiting to try a bridge once Roon is implemented (currently using Bryston BDP in Roon mode).
Not fun for PSA to wait for what appears to be unconcerned third parties to complete their work. I can see why PSA wants to shift to a solution that they have complete control over.
Elk saidElk - I agree with what you have stated. Such phrases can so easily represent marketing marketing hyperbole, vs. actual intentions and commitments. And it will be truly unfortunate if PS Audio throws themselves into the bucket with other vendors that use such phrases to imply a level of support that will not actually be provided. It would diminish the value of the brand.… It implies much more than what it actually means, which is only that a product can be used in some fashion with ____. I have learned to accept these phrases as marketing hyperbole, rather than as a substantive promise.
This whole issue is compounded by people - like myself - that were not deeply knowledgeable of PS Audio products. To those deeply familiar with PS Audio products, the DSJ is seen as two products bundled as one: a lesser DAC to the DS, and a Bridge II bundled with it. Me, I saw one product. It cost about four grand (without trade-ins), and was “Roon Ready”. And the BEST part was… UPGRADES were both committed to, and free! Who could want anything more???
But unbeknownst to me, that whole free upgrades promise (and commitment) appears to have applied ONLY to the DAC side of the two-piece device. We appear to be learning now that any upgrades to the other half of the device don’t have that same commitment, or ability to execute to.
Granted, this whole discussion may be made totally irrelevant soon if PSA announces an upgrade to keep their “Roon Ready” products current with Roon API releases. That is my fervent hope. And not just to I can play MQA music through Roon. As far as I can tell, MQA may not be worth the hoopla. But more importantly - this upgrade would help me (and the audio community at large) understand that PSA puts themselves above “marketing hyperbole”, as you so well put it, and deliver per their implications.
I do not know what PS Audio means by describing the DAC as “Roon Ready.”
My suspicion is “Roon Ready” has a technical sense to Roon aficionados, perhaps that the product can operate as a Roon endpoint/playback device.
For me, an uninitiated, Roon Ready means only that I can separately buy and configure a Roon server and can send the PCM/DoP datastream to the DAC to listen to it.
I think we need to separate Roon from MQA. While PSA have fulfilled their commitment to enable Roon to play through the BII they initially said that they would never allow MQA on their DAC’s. They had a change of heart and now they support MQA so that is a big win for those that want to use it. Just because Roon decides to support whatever the latest format is doesn’t mean that PSA should always follow suit. They will access the need/demand and do what they think is best. For the record I am a Roon/Tidal user but have no real interest in MQA other than an extra feature that I might use once in a while.
Edit: I am curious if once Roon has inbuilt support for MQA that this will “break” the Roon/MQA/BII again (once we get it of course).
Just got a note from the CEO of Converse Digital who make the core module contained within the Bridge II about Roon and MQA.
"We are working on the feature, MQA flag from Roon, and it seems it will take some time.
There is complexity among MQA decoder, Roon client and mconnect firmware, which are developed by different parties."
That’s not what any of us wanted to read but there it is. In the works but not yet ready for prime time and looks like it’ll take a while.
scolley saidI disagree.
The DS Jr is sold as “Roon Ready”. Granted, that could mean that it can connect to Roon based on an out of date version of their API. And under that thinking, the DSJ is in deed Roon Ready. But it’s an out date form of Roon Ready.
For myself, I bought a DSJ with the assumption (and no guarantee) that PS Audio was enough of a stand up brand that “once Roon Ready” meant “always Roon Ready”… That Roon connectivity would be supported on an ongoing basis.
It will be quite disappointing if this proves that my faith in the brand was too high.
That said, we are working on integrating the feature and it will be integrated. Just going to take the slow and arduous path software sometimes (often) does.
How hard is it to understand that PS Audio has not let anybody down, they are waiting for the the Roon firmware to be completed. If, or when they announce that they will no longer provide updates or access to Roon, then you might have a reason to be unhappy. Every time Roon updates their firmware, especially with MQA involved, you have three companies involved, four if you count the manufacturer of the Bridge II. Getting all four of those to work perfectly is not easy. Nowhere did PSA ever promise MQA in their marketing of their DACs, but because they care about their customers, they found a way to implement it.
Ok, raise of hands, how many of you knew there was a 12 day Korean holiday? One, two, maybe three of you? I don’t have a Directstream, only because I can’t afford one, I don’t use Roon either, but I have been following this thread.
A few delays that are out of PSA’s control, and you are all convinced it won’t happen. Until Paul says due to things out of our control it won’t happen, IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN!
You guys are running around like Chicken Little, “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”.
And when the time comes, that it will take a new Bridge, I would bet that PSA, will make sure you get a good deal, probably at close to cost.
Have a little patience, the complaining, and whining won’t get it done any faster.
Elk saidI do not know what PS Audio means by describing the DAC as “Roon Ready.”
So IMO the DSJ was Roon Ready, is Roon Ready, and will remain Roon Ready. What it is not is current with Roon's latest capabilities that let's Roon tell the DSJ (and Bridge II) that Roon's sending it an MQA file.Roon Ready network players from our partners have Roon’s high-resolution streaming technology built right in.
Roon will discover them on your network, deliver the highest possible quality audio, and even allow volume control right from the Roon user interface!
Jumbuck saidEdit: I am curious if once Roon has inbuilt support for MQA that this will “break” the Roon/MQA/BII again (once we get it of course).
Roon was deliberately architected in such a way transport and control protocols that endpoints like Bridge II use to communicate with the Roon “core”, will be needed to be updated very, very infrequently, yet still keep current with the latest Roon capabilities. But sometimes the unexpected happens, and I believe this is one such case. They did not know - until they came on the market - that some DACs need to be told that they are receiving an MQA file, instead of the DAC just self-detecting that the file is MQA.
Again, that’s my understanding. Could be wrong.
Paul McGowan saidNot to be argumentative, but the DSJ is Roon ready. None of that has changed. Roon made a change to include MQA and that is what is not currently available through Roon, though both Roon and MQA are available through DSJ - just not together. So, it is not like you’ve lost something promised.
That said, we are working on integrating the feature and it will be integrated. Just going to take the slow and arduous path software sometimes (often) does.
The “implied promise” may not be deliberate on PSA’s part at all. But from where I - the buyer - sits, seeing a DAC that is readily, easily, and reasonably frequently updated with new firmware makes it appear that the DAC is easily kept current. But as it appears to turn out, it’s only the DAC part in the DSJ box that those benefits apply to. The Bridge II part is clearly more difficult, and in less of PSA’s control than you likely prefer.
And I DO appreciate all your efforts to get this feature - that was not implicitly promised or committed - to the Roon community that uses your Bridge II’s (and DSJs). Thank you.
scolley said From the Roon website…Thanks.
As I expected, for Roonies “Roon Ready” has a specific technical meaning. From the description you provided, I believe Roon Enabled would be a more accurate, fair description.
What a bunch of whiners. I’m playing Roon 16/44 thru my bridge right now.
If you “need” to stream higher quality or you will die, use a USB cable, or Qobuz instead of Roon.
Quality software takes a while. Get over it.
I believe that’s what this is all about… that Bridge II – and some other DACs – need to be told up front that what they’ve received is an MQA file.You are mistaken. The software under development for the bridge is the actual MQA decoder.
EldRick saidI've edited my original reply. I mis-understood EldRick's point, and asked the wrong question. So here's an amended reply...You are mistaken. The software under development for the bridge is the actual MQA decoder.
I don’t think I ever specified exactly what software in the Bridge II was being modified. I would not know. But I DO know that the work being done is being done specifically because of recent changes to the Roon API. And further that those changes involve a timing issue with Roon. As Paul put it, a “handshake”. And that those changes are necessary for DAC’s that do not recognize MQA on the fly, and begin decoding.
PS Audio is doing what it can to get the Roon/MQA Bridge II firmware update to its customers. In the meantime, if you have a Bridge II and want to listen to fully unfolded MQA, use the free mControl app.
By way of comparison, the $8.9K Ayre Acoustics QX-5 Twenty DAC has the same basic ConversDigital network card as the Bridge II. Ayre has acknowledged that it could turn on the MQA feature if it wanted. To date, Ayre has not done so. See:
Hi @bootzilla
I receive page not found when I click on the links, perhaps the comments have been removed?
Frank, I got the same message. I wonder if you have to be signed in? I’m not a member, but I have been able to read linked posts in the past.
It could have been pulled, Ayre’s owner has been posting at the Asylum, a lot and is really anti MQA. I personally think he has been cool about it, sighting facts, and info. But if MQA has any influence over at CA they may have been removed.
Mostly the discussion has been the lack of actual comparisons, of which I believe there may be some over at 2L, but those that claim the MQAs sound better than the 16/44 of albums at Tidal are finding that when they look at the files, they are different versions, with less compression and higher output. The bottom line being that it is not MQA itself, but better masters.
The other concern, which I agree with, is that if MQA becomes the only available version, as opposed to hi-rez downloads, the record companies and Tidal could then raise prices. Maybe make it so you can only rent the music, or buy vinyl, as no one rips that, then resells the disc. It also appears that they are using the archived tape transfers that in Warner’s case were done at 24/192. Some of which we have access to now, at a premium price.
And then there are the usual arguments that it is solving a problem that didn’t exist. That the patents don’t seem to match what they are doing, and how the claims made in the beginning, have changed. I am usually not a fan of Waldrep, but he has made some good points. The most damning being that MQA was going to take some of his recordings, and apply the MQA processing. He sent the files in, and finally gave up asking when they would be sent to him. I think it has been 3 years now. If it would have improved on his 24/96 recordings, he would have been a worthwhile advocate, as he has the anti snake oil faction of the audiophile community. I don’t agree with everything he claims is snake oil, but those people do.
I personally have found Hanson’s posts to be coming from a person who cares about the high end, and is taking a stand, that will cost him some customers. Paul has shared his feelings about MQA, but wants to keep all of his customers happy. And doing it is not going to cost the consumer, but it is costing PSA. That is why I am bothered by the whining, it is not PSA that is the holdup. And don’t get me started on the P20 handles. I wonder how many people told the owners of Levinson, when they went to those vertical amps, “we don’t care if they sound better, they don’t look like the last version”. I think Paul was really proud of the new P20, and no one even considered that, while they were insulting the design. Just get it in black, and appreciate the improved performance.
frank7036 saidHi @bootzilla
I receive page not found when I click on the links, perhaps the comments have been removed?