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 wouldnât 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 itâs very good example for showing that also a system with weak hardware can perform much better than Rose doâŚ
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 canât 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 donât get my point:
My experience is, that the Squeezebox (Iâm 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 weâve 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 wonât 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 donât know anything about Rose Audio internals and so all of this are speculations, but a few points:
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.
Does your scan problem still exists? I have a similar oneâŚwould 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 âNew Musicâ and added a new DB in Rose Media Librarary. When I have added a new ripped CD I put it in the folder âNew Musicâ. I then delete the database âNew Musicâ 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 275â000 tracks).
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. Thatâs 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 itâs 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).
Youâd 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. Thatâs like expecting that your bank balance will be higher if you log on to your bank with Mozilla instead of Edge⌠Donât get me started on Fraudioquest 
Fur sure, bit-perfect software sounds always the same, but every change in your playback setup can make a difference in sound, not always in better or worse, but very often in sounding you like more or not. Thats why we are talking all aboutâŚ
Can and will are different things though. Turning on Muse in Roon will (probably) make an audible difference. Using Rose Player (or foobar) instead of Roon, or replacing the power cord with $10K one will notâŚ
Please Boris, why donât you stay at ASR with your psedou science and measurement arguments and leave us that believe (imagine 
) what we hear in this forum.
Please donât respond to this. You are on a dead end street.
A nice response would be to quote âYou are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.â
A less nice but more approipriate response is âWhen I need some willfully ignorant flat-earther to tell me what to do or not do on the Internet, I will notify you in writing.â
But it is, indeed, a dead-end street. Some people just arenât intelligent enough to even want to learn.
This is so disappointing. Took delivery of a new 150b on Friday, now Sunday and still scanning. Yes Iâm an audiophile and so have a large music library like many others. Sonos scans this in about 10mins.
I wouldnât mind so much but this is a VERY expensive piece of kit, not a cheap eBay item.
Rosehan,
Iâm having difficulty connecting via smb from my Mac Studio to my RS130 internal SSD. I have not had this problem in the past. I suspect this is due to the smb not connecting to the RS130 while the Db scan is running? Am I correct? If not do you have any other suggestions?
StandardModel
Time is money, Rose burn our time on scanning DB.
Because you have to sit and wait in front of your player until it finishes?