If that‘s true then I am sorry to say good bye 
to Audirvana after more more than 8 years. 
Well, then I am out. I have owned Audirvana for years, but also own JRiver. Looks like I’ll be only using JRiver from now on.
Well that’s the end of Audirvana for me. Purchased a “lifetime” licence a few months ago and have had a very up and down experience, frankly, hardy ever have a problem-free listening session via UPnP to my Cyrus streamer, I’ve taken to using the Qobuz app alone lately. Looks like I’ll be staying that way.
Well I must say I am really quit shocked at the level of negative feedback coming from this forum about Damien’s new and I expect much improved Audirvana Studio, and what is it all concerning, yes a measly £6.99 per month subscription.
Well guess what, if you don’t want to spend it or cannot afford the subscription, then the best thing to do is simply move on to another platform but please stop whinging about something that you have not even tried yet.
The whole point of using Audirvana or Roon for that matter is that it allows us to experience a far higher sound quality when streaming from Tidal or Qobuz than using the standalone desktop versions of either software alone, the new Studio version I hope will give us even more opportunities via the Radio function and possibly a much improved user experience as well.
If you only play locally sourced files then maybe it’s an upgrade you do not need and can therefore save the cost of subscription but I and I’m sure many more people will be quite happy to support Damien in his efforts to improve our listening enjoyment.
I would just prefer to wait until I can try it myself before being over critical and then let my wallet decide if I think it is worthy of my support.
As a side note I watched the presentation live via Facebook and thought the amount of negative drivel being expounded by some of the people listening & posting was really quite sad and not worthy of Damien’s hard work and the possible benefits that might be achieved once they have given it a try.
You may not agree with me but you cannot say I am not being fair.
Looking forward to Sunday with anticipation!!
1 Like
I only listen to local files and would not like to lose updates Mac OS.
Can you guarantee that 3.5 will be compatible with newer versions OS?
That is something Damien will have to answer Andrey, I have nothing to do with Audirvana, just a very keen music lover with a passion for high quality sound.
From the presentation last Sunday it would appear that most of the continuing support will go into the Studio version although 3.5 will still be run alongside for existing users so hopefully it might still be kept up to date for newer versions of operating systems.
Nobody can guarantee that. It will depend on how much MacOS changes in future releases.
I think the problem is the duplicity of it. People have paid for a lifetime licence in the last year and are expected to start paying again. I don’t expect anyone to not be able to make a living, but at the very least an offer to existing users, at least for a trial period or for the first year, would have been an olive branch where a fair assessment of the new version could have been made with no hard feelings. As it is, people’s noses have been put out of joint and where people have had a less than smooth experience so far, they are thinking… why pay again?
Computer audio has transformed the digital format in recent years, who would have thought that CD players, as invented by Philips, we’re so ridiculously flawed. Software like Audirvana has been a major part of this journey. It’s difficult to fathom where the ceiling might be in all this, and how much more there is to achieve. If Damian believes he can keep exploring and pushing the boundaries of SQ with a subscription income then I guess that’s a good thing. If however this is all streaming from this point forward then I’ll stick to 3.5
In reply to Paul2, I think streaming is the way forward and has been now for a few years but unfortunately that relies 100% on having a continuous and secure fast internet connection, something I personally have struggled with on occasions living somewhat out in the uk countryside.
For me streaming music on subscription allows me to access vastly more music than I could EVER hope to purchase in Hi-Res from the likes of Qobuz, so if the technology works and Audirvana continue to offer an increasingly user friendly interface with that scenario, then it’s a win win all round.
Colin00, I understand your worries but last Sunday it was mentioned that recent purchasers of 3.5 would be able to transfer their full payment straight into the Studio subscription, I am not sure how far back that would apply, but hopefully Damien will clarify that situation before too long.
Hi all, whatever @peternewton says, I agree with those who think Audirvana is wrong with the subscription.
I am one of those who think that for this type of niche product, there is no room for two. ROON does a better job than Audirvana for a price difference that is now small for those who have the hardware to justify such a high performance player.
For the others, I agree that the streamers are more and more powerful as well as the native applications Qobuz and Tital which are multiplatform and therefore much more flexible.
For my part, I can no longer tell the difference between a song played on the Qobuz application and on Audirvana. The only advantage that Audirvana has, for me, compared to Qobuz is the network management (DLNA).
Now Audirvana probably has no choice but to continue developing its application. The future will tell us if the subscription will have allowed him to live a few more years or will have precipitated his loss. I don’t think Audirvana will be around in 2 to 3 years.
The software world is ruthless and whatever the field, trying to take the place of the master without trying to innovate or to stand out is doomed to failure… It’s all very French… I say it all the more because I am…
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator
Totally agree. Apple, Spotify, Tidal and Qobuz have better user interfaces as Audirvana. For me this just leaves two reasons to use it:
- Perfect DLNA/UPNP output to my streamer - Qobuz UPNP is buggy and works only with some streamers.
- Automatic change of the output format to the played music format on MacOS for connected USB DACs (e.g. changing to 24 Bit / 96 kHz for a HighRes FLAC and back to16 Bit / 44.1 kHz for CD Quality), which was the original reason for me to buy it.
As the streaming services are trying to keep us in their apps and the Audirvana sales are dropping, it might have been a better idea to team up with Qubuz and help them to solve the UPNP and other problems instead of annoying the Audirvana customers by forcing them to use a subscription model.
Just found out that is supported now by the Qobuz app on Mac as well, which leaves just on Unique Selling Proposition DNLA/UPNP.
Seeing that more and more people are listening to music via Tidal, Qobuz et.al as supposed to their local music on a HD. The only reason to use ‘any’ third-party software is its ability to stream hi-rez to a client…with a small added benefit of being able to play Internet radio.
Native User-Interfaces are always better than third-party, I know Roon has a huge problem with artwork etc that shows on native interfaces but no in Roon. Playlists etc are also easier to create, navigate through and play with native UI’s.
This presents a precarious situation for third-party software as only one small development can sink their whole business.
Try Tidal Connect if your streamer supports it
Upnp via the native Tidal app
Personally, I prefer open formats over MQA and therefore use Qobuz HighRes.
I’m in South Africa , Qobuz have difficulty finding the equator so I have no choice. At least Australia shows their geography is expanding 
One day i suppose
@MikeO That‘s a pity. In my experience it delivers the best sound of all streaming services on the same level of local High-Res files and at least on my Nova it sounds better when directly streamed by the Naim App than when decoded by Audirvana and the PCM streamed with UPnP to the streamer. If Qobuz isn’t planning to deliver to South-Africa you may have to invest into a streamer supporting all MQA unfolds or wait if Tidal gives up MQA - which I h Heard- recently on the grapewine.
This topic was automatically closed 375 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.