It’s a question of implementation as it’s relatively loose standard.
I think that it is more capricious than other UPNP players.
As I use Rbi based streamers, I can use various Linux distributions on the same streamer.
I see it clearly with A3.5, and saw it with Studio and Origin, when I tried them. With the same streamer, Audirvana does not stream well to some Linux distributions, though my other UPNP work fine with them. And it works fine with other distributions.
The same thing probably happens with the network players of some brands, and not with others.
That makes sense… However, why do some Audirvana users do not have these issues and some do?
It depends on the end device they have a how the UPnP, specifically the renderer part is implemented.
It’s not that simple, IMO.
“MPD”, for instance, is a renderer that exists on almost all Linux distributions. With GentooPlayer, Audirvana streams very well to it. With Volumio or Moode, it can drive you crazy…
This also makes sense… and also, system level connectivity level gremlins play into this and cannot be discounted in the process of trouble-shooting any given distributed digital-audio network configuration.
… @Cloclo
Maybe I’m confused or misinformed… I’m under the impression that Audirvana is a UPnP “renderer”…
The sound is rendered by the software on the streamer, not by the software on the server.
EDIT
There are Linux distributions with more than one UPNP renderer. In GentooPlayer, for instance, you can stream with Audirvana to MPD, Gemediarenderer or APlayer.
Each of these renderers has a different sound signature.
…
Ok… However, what you are describing is a “proxy” type hierarchy… Not Audirvana acting as a UPnP “media server”
I’m not referring to Audirvana as a media server.
It’s common to call the device from which the sound is streamed in the LAN “the server”, and the streamer “the end point”. And Audirvana streams from a computer that behaves as a server in this case.
…
Ok, I understand the connotative semantics… However, under UPnP protocol, I understand that Audirvana is not a ‘media server’, it is a ‘media renderer’…
Exactly, it’s about semantics.
Regarding the UPNP protocol, the expression “media renderer” about a player that streams is new to me, and I never heard it.
Audirvana plays to a renderer, but it’s not a full blown UPnP server like JRiver. It’s safe to say that they implemented a subset of the specification to be able to play to network devices that generally support UPnP.
The difference is that JRiver shares its library in the network with all the players that can support DLNA. That’s what makes it a media server. They can play the tracks of the library of JRiver for a local output or to stream them to an end point.
But when you use JRiver as a player, it streams the tracks from its library to the network player, just like Audirvana. It will stream the same even if you disable its DLNA features. In other words, if you disable its media server features.
Thank you for the links, but these are very long PDFs to read.
The fact that I’m not familiar with the expression “media renderer” is not important. English is not my mother’s tongue.
1 Like
Yep, that’s a good question. It’s quite puzzling and frustrating due to the fact that these hardware products work properly with other playback solutions flawlessly. I can only come to a conclusion that it’s of no consequence to the Audirvāna development team, or it’s outside of level of expertise available to them. It’s of course only an assumption due to the non participation of the company representative. It’s probably not easy to change the methodology of network playback but others have shown it’s quite possible. At this point it’s just easier to use another solution and realize that Audirvāna is best used with a usb to dac connection only.
… @OffRode
I understand your perspective… however I’m trying to understand why some Audirvana users don’t have problems using UPnP
That certainly might be helpful to troubleshoot. I can appreciate your inquisitive mind , myself I’m just needing it to work as simply and straightforward as possible. Additional hardware and software in the system/signal path seems counterintuitive to me. I’ll pretend to be the customer and Audirvāna can pretend to be the vendor. Always hope for the future updates and a successful trial period.
BTW the best I’ve ever heard Audirvāna Studio sound is via Ethernet thru my Oppo205…………but it’s completely unreliable, pops, no gapless support, hangs, skipping tracks UGGH bummer
…
As I remember you are using an NAD server type device… have you ever placed your computer running Audirvana, connected to a DAC, as an endpoint ‘media renderer’ client on your network?