Refund for v3.5

Its no different to Computer games or PS/XBbox games. Im sure you know its been happening for years in all sort of products , whether its tvs, amps, laptops. For anyone to think it will stop is daft in my opinion. How long for , well Im merely a customer mate. Some of the early PS games are only starting to loose support

Everything you have contributed has either been incorrect or wishful thinking fuelled by a grievance. I accept I wont get a refund even though I bought it in October. You my friend are talking out your hat at times and simply wont listen. Its not Rocket Science

You’re right. But if it doesn’t work, you get your money back!!!

1 Like

Sorry jdt, I’m confused. Money back for what?

If what doesn’t work?

Obviously you don’t have a clue about how the real world works. People that have bought 3.5 in the last 6 months should have the opportunity for a huge discount on AS. What they bought is buggy and they were assured it would be fixed. Well, it’s not.

AS is not a separate entity. It is manufactured by Audirvana. It’s their next generation of software for managing and listening to music. You know, like 3.5 and the programs before that. If it seems I’m tough on Damien, that’s true. But no tougher than on myself or team when rolling out new products.

1 Like

We will get a discount when it goes live for current 3.5 but I repeat 3.5 and Studio and two different programme. Ask Damien if you dont believe me then maybe you’ll get off my case coz your boring me if im honest

Do you understand product progression? No, you don’t.

You buy a product because it satisfies your needs at the moment of purchase. That’s what the trial period is for. One should not assume that a function or issue will be fixed in the future versions. If you were satisfied when you both the Audirvana version then, you should be happy with it now unless a new bug was introduced.

I got Audirvana 3.5 some 2 years ago and I was already satisfied back then, let alone the latest versions. It depends a lot on your use case. For my use case 3.5 works great and even early betas of Audirvana Studio were usable to me. Now it works great, some UI quirks aside.

The subscription model is actually better for the users that are on the fence about Audirvana Studio. They don’t have to commit long term. If it satisfies your needs at the moment, subscribe month to month. When you’re happy with it, take yearly subscription and save some money.

If you want refund, just write to [email protected]. There’s no point debating among us, none of the forum members can grant anybody a refund. We can have opinions about whether you’re entitled to it or not, but that’s about it.

Remember that you’re getting to keep the old version and use it actively in addition to whatever the new subscription will allow you and you’ll be getting it at a discount. I’ve already put my Audirvana 3.5 to good use on a secondary system. Now I can enjoy the music on that system as well (actually 2 systems) and that includes streaming from Tidal and Qobuz.

I bough old versions of software just before new version was released in the past. It’s always a lottery and I wasn’t happy about it. Sometimes I was able to extract value out of old versions, other times not. It sucks but it’s life.

What I find funny is that the people that mostly complain are those that don’t like and don’t want subscriptions. Others are actually angry that they didn’t get features that don’t even (yet) exist in Audirvana Studio.


I’ve never seen a thread with so many flagged comments…amusing.


I had to scroll up so I could read them all. What ever happened to 3 strikes and you’re out?!

I bought Audirvana 3.5 in January. It worked then and it works now. I am trialing Audirvana Studio now. It works great for me. As I understand it, we will get a $20 discount for the first year if we subscribe to Audirvana Studio. I’m pretty sure I will do year one for $50 but not sure beyond that.

1 Like

Audirvana advocates, please explain to me why they didn’t implement album sorting by year, why they haven’t fixed that in several years, and why do you think it’s normal?


I’d like to see sorti g easily accomplished by my own criteria.
Piano, or
Composer, or
Album title, etc

And be able to save the sort and reclaim it from a simple drop-down.

At the moment it is a complex operation

1 Like

Because not enough people care about this feature. If you ask any user, he’ll come up with his own list of features he’d like to see.

Sorting of albums by year is not important? I thought, it was essential in an audiophile software. And why it’s in the Studio then?


I didn’t even realise it was there. I never sort albums by year of release, so I don’t really care about it. Good news is that Audirvana team obviously heard your request. For you it makes sense to upgrade.

I was waiting for the virtual fisticuffs :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp:

Great if you sort your albums by album art color, that’s fine, but if they don’t plan to write off V3.5, sorting by year of release must be there, as it’s a standard feature for all normal players. And I don’t want to upgrade to the bloated monster of AS, and I don’t want to invest any more dough into a music player. A 100 euro software should be near perfect, don’t you think? I think the developers are just greedy, they won’t be improving 3.5 to make people upgrade to AS, that’s obvious.


You can’t judge value of the software by one missing feature. I don’t think it’s necessarily greed, it’s just how software development works. The old king is history, long live the new king. They will still keep the streaming services going in 3.5 but there will be no new features. Most of the effort and resources will be dedicated to Audirvana Studio.