I just paid full $96 for Audirvana 3.5 a couple months ago and now I don’t even see it as a supported product on your website. I’m not sure if it’s been abandoned in favor of Audirvana Studio, but there isn’t a product landing page anywhere from what I can tell. What recourse do I have for upgrading to Studio at a discount? Will there be any attempt to grandfather-in your current customer base?
What influenced the totallyirrational move to a subscription model for a music player? This isn’t a streaming service, we aren’t paying to sample media. We should have the right to ownership for a one-time payment. At its core, this is the same concept as your Audirvana Plus software, albeit with more features and better UI.
Again, how does this warrant a subscription model? I could understand monthly payments towards the principal with eventual ownership, but that would obviously be alongside the option to purchase the program outright.
I’m a bit baffled too. Normally when you subscribe to something you get something new over a specified interval of time like magazine subscriptions, streaming services etc. Is Audirvana studio offering something like that which a may have overlooked. In the premiere, the only thing that I picked up was them saying that with the subscription model they can release updates much quicker but you can do that without a subscription model too. Whether they decide to immediately release updates of not is down to the company. Right now it feels like a rental rather than a subscription. Don’t get me wrong, I do like what they have done with the software but in the end of the day it’s an audio playing software and it will always remain being so. If this was hardware, I wouldn’t even think of obtaining it as a rental as it would never be mine. I am currently finding it really hard to justify a subscription but maybe they have something down the pipeline that would make the software worth subscribing to. I’ll keep my eyes peeled till then
I fully agree, there isn‘t a rational reason for the subscription model, it‘s just a way to generate a more continuous and potentially higher income stream. It worked for Adobe, Microsoft and Roon - we will see if it works for Audirvana.
See following explanation on the product website (Audirvāna Assistance - Customer Support And Community Forum): Our software is constantly evolving with new operating system and hardware generations coming year after year. The heart of our technology and product value precisely consist in making the most of these environment to guarantee the best possible audio playback quality and customer experience. Keeping our solution always up to date is the service we provide, and so is the addition of new features and the customer support we keep delivering day after day. As a company, you don’t want to choose between bringing value to your existing loyal customers and preparing the future to attract new customers and secure your business. Subscription is the model that reconciles both objectives. As a customer, you know you always get the best of what we can provide, and our only goal is to keep you satisfied.
The standard model in the B2B world (used by IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, SAP, …) for this is a one-time perpetual license fee with an annual software maintenance fee of 10-25% of the one-time fee for support and upgrades. Haven’t heard that working in the B2C world, where the best model is typically high volumes with low license fees like in the Apple and Google App Stores. And especially, I haven’t heard of a single successful subscription model there, but only of companies who try to rob you with what in German is called „Abofalle“. Adobe is providing services to professionals and Microsoft is providing Cloud storage with their subscription models.
I agree, but all A3.5 bugs must be put right, because that is owed to the customers who have forked out just under $100 for that. That, is the crux of the matter.
It seems quite clear, that no information or commitment from Audirvana has been forthcoming on that subject. It is not good PR, and may prove ultimately costly.
We can all survive the loss of $100, but can Audirvana survive with a shrunk user base?
I have to agree with those that are objecting to the subscription model while owning 3.5. We paid for a product to work, update when errors are found and continue indefinitely for those that choose to use it.
For many AS users, they feel that they’ll be paying for a high quality program that’s still in beta form. Audirvana might consider not charging 3.5 users for AS until it warrants the price they want to charge for it. Otherwise we’re all paying customers that aren’t receiving what we paid for.
With a move like this, I’m going to replace Audirvana. Moving to Roon. I bought Audirvana last October avoiding Roon’s subscription model. With this business model change, I will change also
I agree. I am using AS as well as 3.5. There are subtle differences. If I decide not to subscribe I will definitely use 3.5 (lifetime) as is. Sure, there are things I want fixed/changed. However, as it is it is pretty/very/ excellent good.
I’m looking forward to AS getting better and better as time goes on. And I will decide if I want to pay (subscribe) for those advances.