Yes, I agree. That’s how Naim Core is doing it 
I don’t know who adopts this system but it is what happens in data backup storage. I just based it on that. I remain confident in the hope that a solution will be found, in the meantime I enjoy my rs150b which, musically speaking, sounds very good.
1 Like
I have had my 150B for more than 1.5 years and the scanning time have improved marginally. I complained about the scanning time for 1.5 years ago and nothing much has happend so I would not be so confident that ROSE will fix this.
I agree with Flash that if ROSE had some simple knowledge of database structure they would have fixed a incremental scan a long time ago which would have reduced the rescan to minutes instead of 24 hours which is my rescan time. But I think that the problem is a hardware problem in conjuntion with a bad database structure that don’t allow incremental scan.
Once again I would be happy if ROSE would comment on this. Last time they leaved a comment they told me to be patient. After 1.5 year how patient do I have to be. After all this is a product in the high end market (at least regarding to price)
Yes, it needs a rescan and for me (only a bit over 100000 titles on an internal 8TB SSD) it takes 23h with the current firmware.
Hello, we are aware that many people are inquiring about the scanning speed. We are making efforts in various ways to improve it, but due to the limitations and structure of the system, it is not an easy problem to solve. Thank you for your understanding.
Thank you for your reply.
Sadly it doesn’t please me that I was right about the limitations of the system stopping a satisfactory rescan time. The fact is that you (ROSE) will never come around the limitations of the system because it is hardware and database related. So we are stuck with those bad rescanning times.
The way I am solving this problem is by using Folderview when I select music to play and if I want information of artists and albums I use ROON (luckely i have liftetime membership)
I don’t store music on the Rose at all. I’m happy with Roon - and a Rescan of 125000 Tracks takes only minutes (if not seconds) in my Roon Setup. In addition, Roon offers much more information to the music. I had Roon before my Rose 150 came into my setup - its just my Player - and I’m still happy with it.
I can understand people who bought it for just having a standalone player. But hardware is given - and except some optimizations - Rose customers have to live with it.
This is not a good situation, neither for users nor for the reputation of the Brand - because, people these days just talk or write about what’s not so good.
1 Like
I’m not convinced that the hardware is the real limitation (you can also for for example a real old Logitech Touch or older RPIs as LMS server and client with thousands of tracks).
It seems for me more, that (I’m now developing near 40 years hard- and software) there is a limitation in the developer and design resources…
Also I using the Rose primarly as Roon endpoint (otherwise I’d sold it) , but it has to work also as a standalone device (also as backup in the case you’re offline).
Because you can’t use the Rose as gapless UPNP client (no openhome integrated), you’ve to use directly connected sources and so for larger music collections, the search functionallity for which you need a scan, is a must.
I have a Logitech Squeezebox Touch (in my HiFi graveyard). For the Logitech Touch to play from my NAS it has to have a LMS server installed on my PC (the PC is doing the scanning and storing the DB) so that was a bad example of the hardware requirement. Belive me when I say, among other things, it is a hardware limitation .
I fully agree with you that there is a limitation in the developer and design resources or else the problems wouldn’t have excisted.
No, you can use a Logitech Touch (USB HDD connected to it) standalone without any PC and then there runs the LMS and the Touch acts as server and client (in the same way you can configure PicorePlayer on a RPI) and so it’s very good example for showing that also a system with weak hardware can perform much better than Rose do…
Yes, I can use Logitech Touch standalone with a USB HDD. Even if could find a USB HHD with 12TB for my media library I am sure that the Logitech Touch can’t manage it, because it has a poor processor and memory capacity the same way as the 150B has a poor processor and memory capacity.
I understand that for people with small media library the capacity of the 150B:s processor and memory is enough and has acceptable rescan time. But ROSE should issue a warning that the product is not for people with large media librarys.
You don’t get my point:
- Squeezebox touch has 128MB DDR2 and a 533 MHz ARM11
-Rose RS150 4 GB DDR3 RAM and a Hexacore CPU until 1.8 GHz Cortex -A72 - RPI 4 has the same CPU than the RS150 and 1 - 8 GB RAM
My experience is, that the Squeezebox (I’m owning 4 touches and some classics) can handle also in standalone modus large libraries, but it becomes slow.
A RPi 4 with 4GB and PicorePlayer as LMS server and client scans my 10 TB in 0.5 hours and a rescan needs only a few minutes.
Here we’ve nearly the same hardware, but a complete other designed firmware.
Ok, I get your point. If Rose 150B has 4 GB DDR3 RAM and a Hexacore CPU unit 1.8 GHz Cortex -A72, what do you think (we won’t get an answer from ROSE) is the limitations and structure of the system which ROSE says is the cause of the long rescan times?
What do you mean by limitation in the developer and design resources? Lack of resources or knowledge or both.
I still think that the Squeezebox will take 48 hours to scan my library. 
I don’t know anything about Rose Audio internals and so all of this are speculations, but a few points:
- hardware drivers: most brands are using OEM resource kits and they are not always optimized and black boxes.
For me for example the nic drivers have not (try ftp) the best performance - getting and analysing the metadatas must be become much better. Put in a not so famous CD into the optional player and you’ll see, that it can takes multiple minutes until the metadatas are received,
- perhaps no lazy loading and caching mechanism while scanning
- not optimized database statements and/or in general slow database (LMS had changed the used database some years ago and the performance had changed dramatically)
- limitation in the used OS (android 7.1)
- perhaps bad software design and missing (qualified) man power in the software area
For me it seems, that Rose audio can build great hardware, but have a lack in the software development, which is the same with many other smaller (for example primare or emotiva) brands in the audio industry.
4 Likes
Does your scan problem still exists? I have a similar one…would be nice to have a update on this.
Yes, the scanning problem still exists after nearly 1.5 years. HiFi Rose have answerd that it is hard to solve the problem with very long scanning times. We are not getting any answer why from then.
For now I have my music stored on a Synology NAS. The music is stored in folders according to genre. The library consist of 20 TB music. Take days to do a rescan if I added a new ripped CD.
Workaround for shorter scanning times:
My solution to the long scanning times was to create a new folder on my NAS that I called “New Music” and added a new DB in Rose Media Librarary. When I have added a new ripped CD I put it in the folder “New Music”. I then delete the database “New Music” in Roses Media library for that folder and thereafter create a new database that would be scanned. The scanning now takes 15 minutes and the DB-Caching will take 65 minutes.
Nice workaround, functional but very unsatisfying for you.
Probably think about ROON, I can recommend ROON highly (best user experience, best scan times - I estimate around 30sec for your library with 275‘000 tracks).
1 Like
I have Roon (lifetime subscription) and I agree that Roons interface is 100 times better than the Rose app.
Sadly, in my system when playing music the sound from the Rose app sounds better than the sound from Roon. That’s why I still use the Rose app.
I know that there is people that say that it is impossible that there is a difference in the sound, but I hear a difference to Rose apps advantage in many aspects.
That sounds absolutely reasonable for me. I always trust my ears and have optimized my system in every aspect, always trusting my ears.
In my setup (Genelec 8351B Active Monitor with integrated A/D, D/A, DSP, Mutec MC-3+ USB with activated Reclocking, Audioquest Niagra Power Conditioning and power cables, and now the RS130 streamer as a digital source) I have to spend more time for comparing this two sound paths to decide which sound better. There are so many options (e.g. upsampling or native resolution) to try, so it’s really time consuming. Especially because my Genelec has a internal signal path of 24/96kHz, so I experimenting a lot with upsampling to 24/96 (favored within ROON, because I have a dedicated i7 NUC with ROCK installed).
You’d hope that at least technical people would know that ears are the last thing to be trusted.
There is absolutely no technical reason that one bit-perfect software would sound different from another bit-perfect software. That’s like expecting that your bank balance will be higher if you log on to your bank with Mozilla instead of Edge… Don’t get me started on Fraudioquest 