From some of the roon marketing stuff:
The audio pipeline in the Roon Core has been optimized to reduce memory traffic and CPU usage. We have also improved the efficiency and mathematical accuracy of the dithering algorithm used for DSP.
Whether that directly relates to improved sound quality, I cannot know, but there is lots of chatter about it.
It does sound better on my modest system, but i have no way to quantify/measure it.
Ditto on my modest system.
Programmers usually have zero input to look and feel on a product, itāll be the product manager with influence from the designers. Having run a design department myself I know designers can get carried away (and not in a good way) and PMs sometimes want to change things for illogical reasons. 
Thanks.
These are the types of things which can make a difference.
Of course. I should have typed ādesigners,ā āmarketing,ā or something similar.
I was just correcting you to show off what little knowledgeable I have. 
The search engine was frustrating and is now super-brilliant. It was so badly needed. It is certainly faster and the new look is certainly more pleasing to the eye, and easier to use on a mobile.
Having used 3 or 4 systems as theyāve developed over the years (Linn Kinsky, Qobuz desktop, Auralic Lightning, Roon), given that so much audio equipment sounds much the same or fundamentally does the same thing, an improved user experience is a MAJOR factor and often a deal-maker or deal-breaker in whether or not someone choses to pay for it.
I wasnāt aware that there was a problem with the sound quality in the first place.
If Iām a fee-paying āRoonieā, does that make you and others a āPaulieā? In case people have forgotten, the reference is of course to the Moonies, a religious cult accused of brain-washing people. I wish we could get away from this inference that if anyone likes a product or service that is not PS Audio they are a member of some cult, and deserve a cult name, and have been brainwashed to boot. Itās pretty pathetic.
I think Roon is a great piece of software. Iāll happily say so, and 1.8 has removed what to me was itās biggest flaw. Personally, Iām delighted. But Iām not a member of a cult (except when I put on a white dress and worship the sun).
for what itās worth, the interface/design is getting panned, for the most part.
some like it, but many hate it.
I think it looks cleaner and āhipperā as there is more white space and more interesting design callouts/sections, but as far as UI and usability goes, Iām not convinced. Some things I used regularly seem to be missing/hidden.
Iāll have to use the search more to see how thatās improved.
But in a few weeks this will be old hat, and we will forget what 1.7 looked like.
My son is part of a team of about 25, designing a new audio product/concept. I understand about half the team are programmers. For the last 10 months itās been by Zoom. The feeling I get is that it is very collaborative, but like any project you have to have a structure to get anything done.
The problem with user interfaces is that for some there is too much information, for others too little. A difficult balancing act. Sometimes the oneās who like it just use it and keep quiet, leaving others to moan and complain.
For example, the focus feature for format only gives a choice between āCD Qualityā or āHigh resā. In Qobuz you could filter for any format in your library, perhaps a dozen to choose from. So in 1.8 you canāt search for all 1960ās Jazz in 24/192 format.
Definitely wait - I should have known better as I would never update a MacOS in the first 6 months. Personally, 1.8 is a hot mess. Too much open wasted screen space. Disparate font sizes, circles for everything - Iām sure it will get sorted, but may take some time.
Iām not sure iād go that far!
I will tell you, though. I think the SQ improvements are worth the minor aches and pains of adjusting to the new interface. We adapt. We will survive. (First I was afraid, i was petrified!)
Iāve had a jump start on it for a couple of months, Iām still warming up to the circles and purple and red and mixed fonts and smaller fonts for text and larger fonts for albumsā¦oh boy.
On the home page, as you scroll down, in each section you will see that the icons alternate between circles and rectangles. The change tells your brain you are looking at a different section. There is a good reason for it, even if you donāt realise it. All the same, you are fully entitled to hate it.
If you delineated with colour, a la Matisse (itās the same thing), people with colour blindness would complain.
ā¦ you will survive.
The auto-updating prohibits any A/B testing, unless you have two identical systems on different networks. But itās great to believe it sounds better.
Iāve only had it working since early this morning, and Iāve been working since then, so volume has by necessity been dialed back. Consequently I canāt make any judgment about SQ. I have had a couple of interesting things happen so far. It stopped playing as it was about to begin the 12th song in a playlist of mine. No idea why, and when I hit play on the song it began right away, so itās not like it was having access issues.
The other thing it did was actually kind of fun, as a curiosity - not sure how useful it is - and thatās on one specific song in the playlist, the lyrics scrolled by in time with the music, with the currently sung line highlighted by boldface type. I have no idea if thatās a 1.8 thing or earlier, and I donāt know what drives it, as I saw several other cuts go by with static lyrics.
Yes, this is true, the devs do share their opinions and do have some influence, mostly related their ability to actually implement the design rather than opinions about the UX itself.
Lyrics were in 1.7 because in the past Iāve accidentally triggered them. Still donāt know how to do it consciously.
You click on the little microphone. (If there is one, it means there are lyrics.)
