Two Wax users coincidentally sent comments at the same time comparing Wax and Roon. A common theme to these two testimonials is that Roon looked great initially, but closer examination revealed significant flaws. It is peculiar that few reviewers have noticed the problems.

The first reviewer (MB) comments memorably "Roon sucks for classical music". The second reviewer (JA) reaches the same conclusion, albeit with somewhat less colorful language. Read the reviews for information about the specific problems they encountered. The second reviewer also comments favorably on the sound quality of the Wax Box. If you are considering using Roon in your system, you owe it to yourself to read the comments of two experienced users.

When I bought the Wax Box I had two objectives in mind: making it easy to find anything I wanted in my collection of about 7,000 CDs and 700 downloads, and being able to queue up for listening any desired sequence of tracks. I was apprehensive about the time and labor that would be involved, especially entering the appropriate amount of metadata since I have a significant number of fairly obscure recordings. I need not have worried. The process turned out to be much easier than I had imagined. This was in part because of the facility I developed as I got more experience with the system, but the main reason is the amazing support from Jeff Barish. Every question and every issue was dealt with quickly and effectively. He has guided me through any number of issues, for example, how to get surround sound files to work with my system. He modified the search procedure to make it possible to find anything in the library nearly instantly. The flexibility of the search process has, for my needs, reduced the need for more elaborate metadata capture. The Wax system is so flexible that it can provide optimum results for users with a wide variety of collections and preferences.

Once ripping was done, the listening results have greatly exceeded my expectations. It is easier to use and produces better results than I had imagined at the outset. Even though I read the user manual carefully (I thought) before purchase, I continually discover things it can do and ways to do them that improve my experience. The Wax Box is a first class product which has greatly increased the value to me of my music collection.


The soundstage is MUCH deeper and wider [compared to a Naim server]. On "Sinatra and Jobim" — an average recording (but great music) — the orchestra extends across the entire front wall and is noticeably well behind the singers. The depth and width are greater than any SACD or DVD-Audio disk in my collection.

Strings are much clearer. On the same recording, the strings on earlier systems were unlistenable. Now, ripped from a Capitol CD, they are clearer than on a 24/176 version downloaded from Pono played via the NAIM system.

Same for "Dance of the Tumblers": earlier systems diminished the strings, so their contribution was minimized. The WaxBox restores their volume, size and location so the music is properly balanced between strings, winds and brass. And the bass drum is properly balanced: loud and deep when the music requires it, integrated into the orchestra (but still deep) when supporting the other instruments.


I auditioned the Wax Box 4SE along with some Roon-ready servers at RMAF2016. I was so impressed with the 4SE that I ordered one the next day.

The 4SE demo was among the best sounding systems I heard at RMAF. The spatial effects were exquisite on The Tallis Scholars’ Miserere, a recording of a late Renaissance choral work that I know very well. The voices in the front and rear choirs were free of distortion or smear. The soloists sounded clear and expressive; the imaging and reverb were just right. Folk singer Emily Barker’s Little Deaths, a superb analog studio recording, had a live quality to it.

So why did I buy the Wax Box 4SE rather than a Roon-ready server? Partly because of the Wax software. Roon’s software is incomplete. It’s impossible to rip CDs directly to Roon or to add custom metadata to Roon’s files. I am skeptical of Roon’s idealistic promise to perfectly catalog my library with no effort from me. If I terminate my subscription, or if Roon folds, my catalog will revert to mayhem and all of Roon’s proprietary metadata will disappear. The 4SE supports ripping itself. With Wax I have complete control over my catalog and metadata, as well as free access (with Wax’s Wikipedia feature) to a trove of interesting information about my music. Wax doesn’t store my data in proprietary formats, so if 3beez folds, I can export my library to another music management system.

I’m glad I bought the 4SE. Sound quality is terrific with my “kit” and I’m having fun ripping my CDs with Wax. I hope 3beez lives long and prospers; the 4SE is the product I’ve always wanted!


I consider myself computer ignorant, but I found your software “stupid” easy to figure out and use, without even reading the manual. I have already ripped over 1000 CDs. Only four times was the Wax software unable to find metadata for the recording, cover art only once. The process of entering or correcting metadata is much quicker than it was with the previous product I owned. I’ve been able to add all metadata and album art before the disc finished ripping. The unit is built like a tank. Very, very nice.

[one year later]

After one year, I’m still “blown away” by your product. Why anyone would choose anything else is beyond me.

I have [my Wax Box 2 system] connected to a PS Audio Direct Stream DAC… The quality of the sound is equal to any other source connected to my system including products made by folks such as Ayre Acoustics, Magnum Dynalab, Revox, PS Audio and Rega. The sound is superb! I have been spoiled by my Wax Box. +2800 disc ripped. Thanks again.


I find your approach to digital music playback to be really interesting. Here are features that are most interesting to me:

  • Combine multiple CDs into a single recording or split a single CD into multiple recordings. Just the thing for operas and oratorios.
  • Virtual keyboard allows easy entry of characters with diacritics (e.g., á, è, ö, ç, ñ) without obscure keyboard combinations.
  • Support for downloading from the Internet or importing from NAS and flash drives. The less dependence on a computer, the better.
  • Automatic daily backup of sound archive to internal hard disk drive.
  • Play CD immediately or play while ripping in addition to basic rip. Just what's needed when a visitor asks you to play a favorite CD he's brought on a visit.
  • Bulk import of music from your computer or NAS allows you to play your legacy music collection immediately. Dealing with a big existing music collection can be a hassle.
  • Support for display of liner notes. How I longed for that feature!
  • Turnkey hardware architecture: Connect to your audio system and play. I have tons of computer-unskilled friends who would love this feature.
  • Compatible with USB DACs at sample rates up to 192 kHz and 24-bit resolution. This keeps you from having to trash your whole player when a better DAC comes along, which it will, if it hasn't already.


If I were an engineer and able to write code and design my own hardware, wax is what I would have built for myself! The hardware is solid and gorgeous. The software is easy to use and elegant. I love operating wax from my iPad. I don't know of any other software that can display so much metadata in such an uncluttered and easy to read format! It's easy to find any work in my library and to set up a play queue. I love using Wikipedia to find out even more about my music.


Finally, a turnkey solution for classical music lovers! Operating the wax music management system from my iPad is pure delight: a rich and engaging musical experience that is unique.


If you are a music lover with a PhD in electrical engineering you have several options for rolling your own music management system. For the rest of us, there is the Wax music management system! Wax is the first all-in-one solution I have found for managing my music with rich metadata (title, date, composer, conductor, singer(s), etc.). The Wax box is a handsome piece of hardware that fits perfectly in my audio rack. The code warriors at 3beez have done a masterful job writing software that is easy, intuitive and accessible to non-techies. I can't imagine what's under the hood of the Wax management system and I won't be looking because the system just works, right out of the box.


It works like a charm. It is fabulous. The whole world should have this!!


As a satisfied user of the 3beez Wax music management system, I am pleased to recommend it to music lovers with a large collection of classical CDs. The impetus for my purchase was a need to downsize before my wife and I move to a retirement community next year. Discovering that my more than 2500 CDs can be stored safely in a box that sits on my desk is amazing.

The cost of the system is steep, but so is the investment that many of you have already made in your collection. Once one gets the hang of it, ripping CDs goes very smoothly. Because Jeff Barish is a lover of classical music, he has designed a software package that is geared to people with similar tastes. The transfer of metadata (from either MusicBrainz or FreeDB) occurs smoothly, often requiring only minimal input from the user. The genre system that Jeff has developed is easily modified if you think that a different categorization is more suitable for your collection.

Technical support couldn't be better. Jeff responds rapidly and in depth to questions sent by email or phone call; and he is eager to modify the computer code when a user makes a suggestion that would improve the system.

[Three years later, after ripping about 2500 CDs] By the way, I am LOVING my Wax Box.


The rules of engagement ... are logical and consistent, once you understand them.


I searched for a cataloging and "music server" turnkey solution for years. Most fail in the metadata department. The ability with your system to add the date of the recording and other metadata is God sent! I'm really excited!