Audirvana Studio vs Daphile

Does any body has experiences with Daphile. It’s an OpenSource project in the same category as Audirvana.
What about sound quality and library management?

Daphile is pretty bare bones compared to Audirvāna. It really only handles local playback and the Daphile machine needs to be directly connected to the DAC. But it works well if you don’t need more than that.

it runs squeezebox which from experience is pretty good. There are numerous plugins to allow qobuz, tidal and skinning etc.

Its sound quality when i last tried it a year ago wasn’t up to Audirvanas standard.

Daphile is not a program (like Audirvana) which you can run on Windows. It is based on Linux and you have to boot your computer with it.
You can only operate it via a Web-interface. The interface is quite spartan. I have tried it around one year ago and for my ears the sound was not as good as Audirvana and Foobar (with SACD plugin) on Windows.

1 Like

It seems you don’t know all the functionalities of Daphile (didn’t want to be rude, sorry)
Daphile can run in client/server mode.
You should know that Daphile is an optimization of LMS and Squeezelite and these two components can run on different hw.
Server and client do communicate on Lan.
Therefore you can have:
Daphile server → Daphile client
Daphile server → any Squeezelite flavor (PiCorePlayer or RoPieee XL for example)
LMS (Logitech Media Server) as server → Daphile client
… and maybe more other solutions.
And more, you can enable the C-3PO plugin which allow upsample (up to DSD512) on the server side using sox library , this allow to use a low power computer as Squeezelite client, like a Raspberry.

Daphile is not really a competitor to Audirvana, but could be a solution for users running dedicated computers for audio playback.

I stand corrected. Thanks for the information.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.