(23-Feb-2019, 13:40)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]…
The results are interesting though, with the fairly high percentage of people reporting that they are similar or the same, you would expect the final preference between AIR and RAAT to be reasonably even, but it is not, there is a clear preference for RAAT. For me, I had a theory that AIR might be best, simply because AIR is specifically designed for use with a Devialet Expert, whereas RAAT is "universal" for many products. Perhaps RAAT did sound better, but that thought biased me towards AIR, making me think they are similar? Maybe RAAT received more votes because it is a new Devialet feature, Roon has a fine reputation with software, Devialet do not, and we are all an optimistic bunch who tend to think the new sounds better than the old?
Anyway, it's all good fun to speculate, and for the record, I was using a Windows 10 PC when I tried the comparison.
I wasn't really expecting a difference in sound quality however I thought it was possible that there may be a difference of some kind for 2 possible reasons:
- Devialet have said previously that they don't recommend streaming DSD over AIR because AIR couldn't handle it reliably. I didn't try streaming DSD at all until after I started using Roon AIR, wasn't aware of that statement from Devialet, and just started streaming DSD64 with Roon AIR and no problems. RAAT is supposed to be able to handle all current high res sources so I wondered whether RAAT would make a difference with DSD64;
- Roon say RAAT gives control of the buffer to the end point whereas it's not clear what part Roon plays in controlling the buffer with Roon AIR. There's a buffer setting in the device setup options for Roon AIR but not for RAAT. I wondered whether there might be a difference as a result of different buffer handling but I had no idea, and still have no idea, what kind of a difference one would expect to hear if a change in how the buffer was controlled could make an audible difference.
So, while I didn't have any firmly held expectation of hearing a difference, I was aware of 2 areas where a difference might occur and where RAAT may have a theoretical advantage over AIR. I don't know if I could be said to have been predisposed to hear a difference based on no real expectations but just wondering whether one or both of those 2 things might cause a difference but if I did have a predisposition to believe that one might be better than the other I'd have to say that my predisposition would have been in favour of RAAT. In the end, however, I didn't hear any difference I could contribute to either of those possibilities but what I heard were some differences in tonal balance and the music just seemed to be "presented" better overall for me with RAAT though I also think Devialet AIR itself sounded a little better with the new upgrade than it did with the previous firmware.
On the other hand I've made changes in the past with a clear and firm expectation of actually hearing an improvement and either heard no change or I've actually disliked the change. Having an expectation may influence what you hear but it doesn't guarantee that you will hear what you expect so dismissing someone's report purely because they were predisposed to hear what they're reporting because of a pre-held belief or expectation isn't always appropriate. I know @
Confused didn't do that in the post I quoted, I'm simply stating that there is never a guarantee that you will hear what you believe or expect to hear and that reports should never be dismissed purely for that reason.
For the record, I fully expected Raat to sound better, it didn't!
(24-Feb-2019, 19:09)douglas Wrote: [ -> ]For the record, I fully expected Raat to sound better, it didn't!
Which proves my point that we don't always hear what we expect to hear :-)
Me too, fully expected to prefer RAAT, but I am listening to Air. However, given the speed of Roon updates this may change in the future. It'll be fun going backwards and forwards.
(24-Feb-2019, 21:22)David A Wrote: [ -> ] (24-Feb-2019, 19:09)douglas Wrote: [ -> ]For the record, I fully expected Raat to sound better, it didn't!
Which proves my point that we don't always hear what we expect to hear :-)
That´s absolutely true. I could not agree more.
From time to time I make a comparison between the two (Roon/RAAT and Roon/AIR) and i´m almost convinced that the sound inproved since i have Roon Ready without the "unlicenced" note in the settings, but when i switch to AIR there is still a subtly more detailed sound, i must say.
Perhaps David A is right, about the influence of speakers from the same "family". It´s all so subjective...
Congratulations to Devialet. Roon RAAT sounds superb ( better than Air on my kit). Re listening to many faves. Also super stable and responsive for me. A great update IMHO.
A tip for those that haven't disable Devialet AIR app and allow Roon to control.
T
Hmmm, originally I voted for Roon RAAT, because the initial impression smarted of more detail and sound reality. Apologies but after extensive listening I have changed my mind and I now prefer Roon intergrated AIR. On many recordings, Roon RAAT is harsh and glassy edged sound wise in the treble. Air is more subtle and balanced and certainly does not have any courseness to the sound. Because of this finding I did a simple blind test with three of my friends and they unanimously favoured AIR. Furthermore, my personal comparisons have concluded that using AIR does not lose any detail.
IMHO, Roon needs to do some work on RAAT to make it listenable. At the moment, it doesn’t make the standard. Bizarre that their previous software for Roon AIR works better than their latest version With Roon RAAT, an expected flagship.
(17-Mar-2019, 21:55)Greg Wrote: [ -> ]Hmmm, originally I voted for Roon RAAT, because the initial impression smarted of more detail and sound reality. Apologies but after extensive listening I have changed my mind and I now prefer Roon intergrated AIR. On many recordings, Roon RAAT is harsh and glassy edged sound wise in the treble. Air is more subtle and balanced and certainly does not have any courseness to the sound. Because of this finding I did a simple blind test with three of my friends and they unanimously favoured AIR. Furthermore, my personal comparisons have concluded that using AIR does not lose any detail.
IMHO, Roon needs to do some work on RAAT to make it listenable. At the moment, it doesn’t make the standard. Bizarre that their previous software for Roon AIR works better than their latest version With Roon RAAT, an expected flagship.
Hi, your experience exactly echo mine with RAAT and it's the glassy edge that made RAAT unlistenable, however, I wonder if ROON did make an update of sorts, as I made another comparison last night and that edge was gone, with great bass definition. I need to do a detailed comparison all over again.
(18-Mar-2019, 07:04)douglas Wrote: [ -> ] (17-Mar-2019, 21:55)Greg Wrote: [ -> ]Hmmm, originally I voted for Roon RAAT, because the initial impression smarted of more detail and sound reality. Apologies but after extensive listening I have changed my mind and I now prefer Roon intergrated AIR. On many recordings, Roon RAAT is harsh and glassy edged sound wise in the treble. Air is more subtle and balanced and certainly does not have any courseness to the sound. Because of this finding I did a simple blind test with three of my friends and they unanimously favoured AIR. Furthermore, my personal comparisons have concluded that using AIR does not lose any detail.
IMHO, Roon needs to do some work on RAAT to make it listenable. At the moment, it doesn’t make the standard. Bizarre that their previous software for Roon AIR works better than their latest version With Roon RAAT, an expected flagship.
Hi, your experience exactly echo mine with RAAT and it's the glassy edge that made RAAT unlistenable, however, I wonder if ROON did make an update of sorts, as I made another comparison last night and that edge was gone, with great bass definition. I need to do a detailed comparison all over again.
Both of you have just solidified my initial finding that there is no difference between RAAT and AIR.
(18-Mar-2019, 07:29)Pim Wrote: [ -> ] (18-Mar-2019, 07:04)douglas Wrote: [ -> ] (17-Mar-2019, 21:55)Greg Wrote: [ -> ]Hmmm, originally I voted for Roon RAAT, because the initial impression smarted of more detail and sound reality. Apologies but after extensive listening I have changed my mind and I now prefer Roon intergrated AIR. On many recordings, Roon RAAT is harsh and glassy edged sound wise in the treble. Air is more subtle and balanced and certainly does not have any courseness to the sound. Because of this finding I did a simple blind test with three of my friends and they unanimously favoured AIR. Furthermore, my personal comparisons have concluded that using AIR does not lose any detail.
IMHO, Roon needs to do some work on RAAT to make it listenable. At the moment, it doesn’t make the standard. Bizarre that their previous software for Roon AIR works better than their latest version With Roon RAAT, an expected flagship.
Hi, your experience exactly echo mine with RAAT and it's the glassy edge that made RAAT unlistenable, however, I wonder if ROON did make an update of sorts, as I made another comparison last night and that edge was gone, with great bass definition. I need to do a detailed comparison all over again.
Both of you have just solidified my initial finding that there is no difference between RAAT and AIR.
There is a difference between the 2 at any point in time. There may be a variation, but AIR and RAAT sounds different. It's of course not night and day.