I agree and I am talking generally speaking, not about me, I am mostly satisfied, especially with sq. Also radios are a plus for me and sounds better than with other apps. I feel the things are in a good direction, I installed the unofficial test version (1.6.2) and works better: no more problems with radios, less cpu usage, very good response time (with my old system) and better sound with my ASIO driver.
Does it sound better than A3.5?
For me yes. But note that I’m on Windows and also the things may be different with other equipements. I uninstalled the VST - just ASIO and r8brain upsampling - perfect for my current solution. Even with high bitrate files (for example 24/192) no slutterings I also note something - if I set my DAC to 24 bit instead of 32 sounds better. I don’t understand why but I don’t consider this a problem - 24 is pretty ok for me.
Mac users reported that the best sounding versions of A3.5 are A3.5.41 and A3.5.44. They say that these versions sound better than AS and A3.5.46.
You did well. If you want a good sound correction for your listening room, use convolution.
Thanks. For the moment I will not add any more element- I don’t want sluttering because of CPU saturation.
Who was complaining about those 2 updates? Maybe you have the wrong thread?
With all due respect, it was a good will gesture when I purchased Audirvana.
Studio fixes some of the issues you have. Subscribe at a discount until the end if the month. It‘s a limited risk.
No. people just assume here that Damien will not update 3.5 like the bug of 2gb file not seen in windows, i said just let him release the update in Studio then see if there is one for 3.5
I’m happy that I did not buy A3.5 whose flaws will never be fixed.
Now I hesitate either to subscribe to AS and benefit of the 20 € discount or to wait for the flaws to be fixed first.
Subscribe and enjoy it. It’s just about little bit if money anyway.
I had 3.5 and was happy with it. Now I‘m even more satisfied with Studio. It works well, sounds great. What more can you want?
There will always be some feature missing. Since you already run multiple application, you‘ll be covered in those cases.
I want it to improve the library management, and to support DSF-WV.
As there’s no roadmap for the development of Studio, I don’t know if it will be ever done.
So, if I subscribe before the end of the month, I may save €20. But if the library management is left like it is, AS won’t be useful for me and I will lose €50.
On the other hand, I’m curious to see how the player will evolve, and willing to continue to test it. But since June there were only bugs fixes, and no new features, so I did not decide yet what to do…
Who knows, it might be never. Still you have few other solutions to play those files.
You can better influence Audirvana‘s future by being an active user than by standing on the sidelines.
I’m willing to try Roon again. I have a two months voucher for that. I’ll do it later this year when I’ll have more free time for that.
It supports DSF-WV and has an excellent library management.
Now, I’m sorry that I did not buy a Roon lifetime license when it was more affordable.
Roon is great. I also use it. If you have multi room setup and wife, that’s what you need.
For playing to a single system or single user, it’s an overkill. For people that fiddle with metadata it can be a bit frustrating. You need to let it do it‘s thing.
Audirvana is great addition or main system for any audiophile. There is no single solution on the market that covers every need.
Face it, you will never subscribe to Audirvana Studio or Roon.
I don’t need multiroom. And my girlfriend does not listen to music. In addition, she hates my music.
AS has a good sound, but it’s inferior to HQPlayer.
What I need is a player for macOS with a good library management, and a better sound than JRiver. There’s nothing on macOS for that, except Roon’s integration with HQPlayer. And maybe an improved AS in the future.
When I tried Roon with an earlier version, I remember that I could set it to take into account only my own metadata. That’s what I did. This time the trial will be longer, and will last two months. So I can also try to see what I’ll get, if I let Roon use its own suggestions for the metadata.
Roon does not overwrite the metadata in your files – ever. Normally, for display, the file metadata is the default (with Roon filling in the blanks), although you can set the preference for Roon to provide the metadata (this is on a field by field basis). In Roon, you can also reject both the file metadata and the Roon metadata and type in your own. Roon is very flexible and makes no changes to your files.
I did not mean that Roon overwrites metadata. Only AS did such thing with its ID MusicBrainz tag.
I meant that in the settings of Roon, you can set it to use only the metadata of your tacks, if you want it to do so, or to accept that it will use metadata that it suggests. But it’s in its database. The metadata is not written to the tracks.
And as long as I remember, it was very flexible indeed. You can set it differently for each type of tag, and you can tune it even differently for each album.
Damien should hire the guy who made this software to work for Audirvana and improve the library management of AS, because it needs a revision in depth.