Aurender to Roon Core?

Has anyone tried converting an Aurender into a Roon core running ROCk?

if the Aurender is just a nice hifi computer, it seams like this might be possible.

Any ideas?


Aurender seems to me to be very careful to be purposely incompatible with Roon, which they see as a competitor.  Aurender was on my short list until I figured this out.  I went with innuos....

However, I think it is best to have your core on a stand alone NUC.  I have a spare one I'm getting ready to sell if you are interested.  I put ROCK on mine and it works great.

But I don't think your Aurender will work as an endpoint...I haven't tried it.  On several stramers that I have tried, they are "pass thru" to Roon and Roon sees the DAC, rather than the streamer.  Perhaps this might happen with Aurender but based on the frustration I've read from others, I suspect it won't work



Aurender is not designed to work with ROON…two very different operating ecosystems just like Apple and Android. You can either accept Aurender for what it’s designed to do or move on to ROON compatible hardware :-)

“aurender sees roon as the enemy“

Not exactly since Aurender was founded in 2011, four years ahead of ROON’s launch in 2015. 


sorry but i am not following your drift

what does founding dates have to do with how aurender currently views roon? aurender does not want roon to be used on its gear, so they have made no effort to make it useable on its hardware, whereas many other streamer companies have


Aurender has committed considerable resources in developing a robust and intuitive app since their launch. I don’t think it’s fair to label Aurender as enemy of ROON just because they choose not to support ROON for philosophical reasons.

As far as other streamers companies, some of them have already developed their own proprietary music management software which (based on the feedback) proving to be far more superior to ROON in terms of sound quality. Not to mention, majority of the streamers that support ROON can’t operate independently unless you pair them with an external device running a ROON Core.

IMHO, Aurender decision to not support ROON is not only strategic but a wise one too. 

I just bought an Aurender N200.   It is an awesome machine.   Lack of Roon never even factored into my decision.   Sound quality is sublime, I don't think I want a 3rd party software app messing with that....    plus I have enough subscriptions,  thank you 

Rather than subscribing to Roon I spent that money to have both Qoboz and Tidal.   There is enough unique content on each platform t o warrant that for me.   I used Roon when I demoed my DAC.   Just wasn't for me 

@lalitk timeline doesn't affect competition...why would it matter which one is founded first?

@oddiofyl I could say the same about my innous.  Other than it does do roon.  I subscribed to both Tidal and Qobuz before I got roon.  .  didn't enjoy the HMI in either one of them.  Tidal pissed me off daily so I was very happy to get rid of it. YMMV.  BTW, roon isn't a music source so you need Roon + Qobuz which I can afford and I enjoy.  If you are on a budget, the Qobuz HMI will eventually get music played.



My reference to the timeline was to depict Aurender long term commitment to a closed loop robust software app that offers much superior integration with their hardware and cloud based streaming services like Tidal and Qobuz. They were already well positioned in the market when ROON launched so it makes little to no sense to adopt ROON for their streamers. 

My point is simple, why the likes of you see Aurender decision to not adopt ROON in negativity. And why does everything needs to be ROON compatible..what is the fun in that :-) A friendly competition usually leads to a win-win situation for end users.


you are a longtime, established contributor here, i am not prolonging an argument, but i don’t quite agree with what you expressed in this case

1) roon is a software overlay, it does not have a sound... if someone feels roon sounds inferior to x, they haven’t implemented roon properly compared to x offering a one box solution they may have chosen - yes it may take more work, and lumin, innuos, pink faun, hifi rose, grimm, or aurender may have done that system integration for the consumer, and this indeed is good, it is a market alternative for those preferring to pay for that one-box-done-well convenience

2) there is nothing friendly about streamer companies trying to diminish roon, despite its superior functionality in cataloging, suggesting and managing digital music, be it from local or streamed sources.... it’s all about a battle for customer control, and the revenue streams associated with it... to say anything is done in this case is ’philosophical’ is rather bleary eyed and naive in my view - this is all about hardcore business and making money from customers

3) to be fair and symmetrical, roon isn’t being friendly to hardware makers either... having claimed an ample segment of digital oriented audiophiles, they have wielded a heavy hand in presenting hardware makers with a suite of requirements they must build into their gear... while at the same time offering software based functions (dsp, upsampling etc etc) that hardware makers justifiably see as infringing on their turf, what they seek to offer to customers as part of their own value proposition -- but that is my point -- this is business, an old fashioned power game, hardcore turf war... nothing friendly or philisophical about it

4) as such, it is undeniable that hardware makers would love it if roon did not exist, it is a pain in the ass to them, complicates their world, diminishes their market and income... but why does roon have so many customers? are they stupid, paying up for bad sound and me-too functionality? according to @lalitk roon is also a late comer to the game compared to aurender -- we should ponder this? perhaps roon allows users to manage and play their music more enjoyably? i do agree in that the presence of roon, its success to this point, has indeed prompted others (especially hardware makers) to up their game in developing competitive user interfaces...

some here have paid up for aurender, auralic, innuos, and roon too, and get understandably ’protective’ of their purchasse because they have paid handsomely, but it is still important to step back and see the landscape for what it is


Post removed 


The respect is mutual as I always appreciated your point of view and contributions here. But I must disagree with you on couple of things, 

1) roon is a software overlay, it does not have a sound - If you think ROON algorithm does not impact the data stream and final sound then you’re living in a bubble my friend. Let’s leave aside the fancy interface and its library management capabilities for a moment and focus on its impact on sound. Each of these software apps, ROON, XDMS, Sense and Conductor have a sound or sonic signature. There has been ongoing discussions about XDMS and Sense sounding better than ROON using the same hardware and implementation. I never said ROON sounds bad but as others have confirmed and what I’ve found by comparing ROON with Conductor, ROON is manipulating (altering) the data stream to a point where both Qobuz and local files sounds bit glossy or unnatural to my ears. This has been my conclusion after listening through ROON over 18 months now. In my system, both ROON and Aurender are implemented meticulously as far as hardware and cost goes, both connected to a very good DAC over Ethernet. 

2) to say anything is done in this case is ’philosophical’ is rather bleary eyed and naive in my view - I suggest you read up on why Aurender chose to implement low-power high-efficiency Intel CPUs and what their software engineers are doing to specifically optimize playback performance. 

3) Agreed

4) but why does roon have so many customers? -  Let’s toss this into personal preferences, budget constraints, hardware options and biases. 

The landscape of streaming looks pretty darn good for everyone involved in developing hardware, software, streaming services and end users. It’s a perfect time to embrace streaming based on our budget and personal preferences. 

Latik is correct in that Roon and the other music players each have unique sound qualities. I have multiple choices available to me at present, Stylus which is Euphony's proprietary player, HQPLayer and Roon, each has unique settings and sound quality.


Some contend Roon sound inferior to various proprietary music players, that may be true for their own individual setup. Roon's great interface may negatively affect SQ in some cases in that it's complex interface may require greater use of available processor capacity, which may result in more noise generated by streamer. Proprietary music player apps may have advantage in that manufacturer has optimized player for the specific hardware used in streamer, I presume this is what Aurender Conductor users are hearing.


I'd suggest Roon SQ is highly variable since it can interface with wide variety of streamers. Because of this judgments of SQ highly subjective.  With my present streamer Roon core is using less than 1% of processor resources, Roon SQ wonderful, at least on par with Stylus and HQPlayer although still have multiple configuration to experiment with.



If I wanted to produce the best streamers possible I would not consider letting anyone in. I would want to control every aspect. It is not a negative that Roon isn’t supported, as far as I am concerned it is a positive. Aurender is not criticizing, simply controlling their environment. Apple vs open systems. With 40 years of experience in IT, I would choose closed every time.


You’re spot on in your assessment of various players having unique sound characteristics. I have friends who swears by and prefers HQPlayer SQ over ROON by a wide margin where HQPlayer is the final arbiter. IMHO, this is by far probably the best configuration for those who prefer the ROON interface and library management. ROON can be configured to implement HQPlayer into a Zone, where HQPlayer takes the stream of bits from media files from ROON. This allows the end users to enjoy the benefits of HQPlayer SQ and the library management capabilities of Roon at the same time.

​​​As I have said earlier, Aurender or a similar player that are in unique position to optimize the music player (app) and design its own custom hardware are primed to deliver high performance with consistency for the end users. 


appreciate the back and forth

i won’t prolong the discussion with further, as i said the intent is not to argue, i just had difficulty with a few of your assertions (still do), so we will agree to disagree on some of the finer points here

i think the to and fro thus far is useful for other readers who might review this thread and they can treat it as input for their own decisions about streamer selection, roon etc...


your input is helpful here, as usual

happy upcoming turkey/football day to all 🍗🦃

“i think the to and fro thus far is useful for other readers who might review this thread and they can treat it as input for their own decisions about streamer selection, roon etc...”


Agreed! Of course the intent was not to argue but engage in a meaningful dialogue and share our collective experiences. 

Happy Thanksgiving 🍁 

I also recently purchased an Aurender N200, preferring it over the Innuos,  and enjoy it immensely. I did factor Roon into my decision since I'm accustomed to it and have liked the interface since its beginnings. Once I discovered that Aurender is actually working on Roon integration to be released in the "near future", I was sold.  In the meantime I've found that I am enjoying the sound I get using the N200 and really don't miss Ronn since I spend more time listening to entire albums rather than jumping from selection to selection. This surprised me and I now find myself immersed in the music similarly to listening to my vinyl rig,