First, this post is no sarcasm, just interested in the future of Rose OS and HiFi Rose streamer technology of the future.
Rose OS is based on Android 7.1, which was launched in 2016. This is a long time ago and technology (Hardware & Software) is developing rapidly.
So I assume that Rose OS will be limited in developing new features and integrating 3rd party services in presence, but at least in future.
Can somebody of HiFi Rose comment my assumption?
Are there plans in the future to change the software strategy (e.g. linux based sw platform) and if this happens, will there be a update possibility for existing devices?
I’ve been Erinnerung the same. Not just for the reasons you mention, but also for reasons of (cyber)security. The Rose devices rely heavily on internet connectivity and therefore are vulnerable to highjacking. To prevent this, constantly updated security implementations to the OS and other SW must be in place.
How is Rose securing this as a strategy in the long term?
This has been hashed out a million times, if you only search the forum.
There currently are no limitations or any other reasons to update the underlying Android version in RoseOS, but it would be a major undertaking taking resources away from fixing bugs and adding useful features.
At some point some service might release an SDK requiring newer version of Android, but with most of them just doing REST calls it’s unlikely in foreseeable future.
Android is very much Linux underneath. You could run a different flavor of Linux on Rose hardware, but to what end?
That’s true for the OS, most likely.
On the other hand, are we also running a 2016 version of e.g. YouTube? Don’t think so, but agreed, I didn’t check what’s previously been posted…
I think there are limitations right now, because in another topic Hifi Rose answers they have to wait for integration of 3rd party functionality until this vendor supports Rose OS Android version. If they will do ever, who will build in end of 2023 a compatible SDK for Android 7.1? You know what I would like to say. Its also a question of to be future proofed.
That’s a question of exactly that, vendor (Tidal?) supplying an SDK (Tidal’s SDKs are one big f’up anyway) which does not need any OS services that are not present in Android 7 (or Android 5 for that matter). Sure, they could make the SDK compatible only with the most latest version of Android (or none at all), if they wanted to, but that would be completely counterproductive as it would wipe out a good chunk of their user base.
From the technical standpoint there’s nothing in later versions of Android that would either improve the sound of the device or would be necessary to support any of the existing streaming services. Even the full phone version of Tidal, with new high-rez support and everything, only requires 7.0 (and most of those requirements are for UI and pone integration…
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation, but I do not agree with you that a (very) old OS version is exactly of that future proofed, but anyway - I use my RS130 primarly for streaming with Roon, so no problem yet and the sound quality is great.
But as I mentioned, software always matters, so I ask about the future plans of Hifi Rose regarding this.
If it were a phone, on which you want to run The Latest Thing from the Play Store, sure you want it to be up to date. Rose is a closed system that only runs custom apps. All that is required from the OS is that it works Rose’s custom audio stack (rewriting it for a newer Android is doable but not really worth the effort) and supports SDKs for whatever services Rose decides to support, and those are supported by Android 7 and are very unlikely to become unsupported in reasonable future.
It might be that at some point an update of the underlying Android core becomes necessary, but so far there are no signs of that and personally I’d much rather have Rose spend time fixing bugs and optimizing the existing system rather than working on an update purely for the sake of updating.
I don’t like to contradict anyone and I respect everyone’s opinions; I share Boris’s position, when he says that errors can be corrected and useful functions added. On the other hand, it does not seem to me that so much sophistication is needed to listen via streaming platforms, given that the audio quality is not the same as that of an SACD or a Vinyl Rip.
In my case, I have an RS250A, which I use as a Dac to play from an External USB HD, and I have absolutely no complaints, the way it handles the sound with the filter settings and audio output, leaves me more than satisfied.
Friends, let’s enjoy the Rose products that we all have, since they are fantastic for price and quality.
Just about anything sounds better than a vinyl rip. I can understand liking the ceremony of preparing and loading a vinyl record, admiring full-size art and all that, but sound quality is not one of vinyl’s advantages… Qobuz (and now Tidal as well, once Rose adds support for lossless tier) can stream in quality for all practical purposes equal to the best SACD (whether they are using good masters is another question of course). But it is really thew same degree of sophistication whether you are streaming MP3 from Spotify or a 24/192 from Qobuz. You gets the bits, you throws them at the DAC. Actually, doing Spotify is more complicated because MP3 needs to be decoded before hitting the DAC…
As far as the Rose goes, from the technical point of view there currently is absolutely no reason to update to any other version of Android. On something that lets you run apps from the Play Store (or sideload them; EverSolo or Fiio and such) there might be an argument about keeping reasonably up with current releases. On an integrated closed platform like Rose update currently brings nothing useful. Sure, Android 13 introduced a new photo picker, and there are changes to how packages can be signed. None of that affects what Rose devices do in any way. But upgrading would require rewriting the audio layer (not completely, but its an undertaking) and then regression testing everything because things will break. It might make for an interesting homebrew hack (let’s turn Rose into a phone!) but has little practical use currently.
The quality of a CD extracted in WAV format and without any loss with Exact Audio Copy, placed on a hard drive, is superior to audio that is played via streaming; The faithful ISO image of a SACD, placed on a hard drive, is superior to audio that is reproduced via streaming. A 180gr Vinyl, if it is ripped with the necessary elements (cables, capsule, amplifier, etc.) and if you know what you are doing to transfer that information to Wav 32 Bit Floating Point, it is much better than a plastic, hard and synthetic audio of Streaming.
Anyway, this is not a Forum to discuss these Streaming vs High Quality Audio issues.
If the stream is of the same CD and lossless, they are identical. It’s pure math.
How do you extract digital data from a CD with a loss anyway?
EAC is a nice tool though, although I personally prefer using dbPowerAmp, it’s easier.
No human can tell a difference between a SACD and a CD if they are made same way from same master. Most won’t even hear any difference between a high bit rate MP3 and DSD1024, although that is at least sometimes possible, with effort and on specific music…
Sorry, but this is a pure and unadulterated BS, unless you just really prefer something with no bass, little treble, no channel separation, and lots of noise.
There are nostalgic, aesthetic, etc. points to vinyl, but sound quality is not one of them. It is 19th century technology with corresponding limitations. A well-made Redbook CD already sounds better than any vinyl, be it 180 or 1800g could ever sound.
Probably, but there are no “issues” anyway. Quality depends purely on the source material. If the service is using a bad master (i.e. a CD made during “loudness wars”) it will sound bad. If they are using the same one that you have in your local collection, and you are streaming lossless, they will sound exactly and completely the same.
Since the topic is closed, just a short statement from me: I don’t agree with Boris. If the listening chain is good, you can hear differences quite well. The Rose is very pleasant to handle and play with. Digitize a vinyl at 192kHz and then pull a copy to 44.1kHz. Hear. Heard via NuPower A + nuControl 2 and nuVero 170. Audible via CX-A 5200 + MX-A5200 + Vulkan MK8. Or Hifiman Edition XS. Appropriate playback hardware available. The younger ones among us have even better hearing conditions with the appropriate hardware.
I see streaming as user-friendly. Especially since the rose looks simply stunning. The sound is very good. Just not analogue. I knew that in advance. My personal opinion and very long experience in my hobby and profession.
Depends on how you downsample to 44.1, you can absolutely make it sound different. Or identical. While you might cut frequencies above 20KHz into vinyl (and with a good enough cartridge even read them), and maybe even reproduce them, you can’t actually hear it anyway.
If the DAC starts rolling off high-frequencies sufficiently below 20KHz and you are very young you might hear something different at 44.1KHz sample rate, but even that is cutting it very close.
I must intervene as the one having turntable and full analog system which costs more than a decent limo. Thus far no digital source and playback can come closer to proper vinyl recording(analog). Not even dCS Vivaldi digital system.
But this is completely different topic to discuss.
One important topic that brings misunderstanding is digital signal is 0 and 1. It is on the paper but not in real life, not in wires and other electronic components. And particularly heavy sensitive in d/a conversion chain and analog reconstruction filters.
Oh, vinyl certainly sounds different – no matter how many limos you waste on it, you will not get any bass, channel separation, or decent SNR to speak of. Some people might prefer that, although usually it is just nostalgia and the ritual required for playing vinyl that colors the impression. If one is looking for something that sounds closer to what was originally recorded, a digital system costing less than a rearview mirror for that limo will do the job better.
That’s pretty typical claim from people who have no idea how digital audio, or electronics in general, work, but are convinced that spending more money than necessary makes them experts…
Ho ho, the mighy and all knowing BorisM, the master of the universe!!
The best ear and the bes tech person arround!
can you please share that knowledge with us here how to you do testing, listening, which equipment etc…
I’m seriously very interested to understand your statements in details.
Not having slept through high school physics class is quite sufficient.Or even having taken any. Sorry, but laws of nature do not care how much money you’ve blown on useless stuff.
Of course, you are always welcome to tell us how DACs really work in a way that people who invented them do not know anything about.
