My respect for making one of the best sounding bitperfect audio player programs ever!
I love the straight forward interface and the sweat integration of Tidal and Quobuz.
Only ONE wish that would make this program really useful for me: a simple file browser :mrgreen:
With 10.000+ tagless wav files, gathered from the time of 1x speed CD computerdrives until now, it’s a dealbreaker for me to buy a programm that does not see all these files because the lack of tags
Another advantage would be to just put some music on a stick in order to play this without having to assimilate this into my music catalog.
I have tried out many many programs and don’t understand why this simple(?) feature is left out in every program on the market.
Software programs come and go but for my digital pictures made with the first reasonable camera’s in 1998 I keep the same approach as I do for my music: stored in artist-album-file format with one big advantage: I always can find my music, even on a simple windows/mac browser. Even if the programm I bought long time ago not suited for the new O.S.
Please let me know when you will add this necessary function. If you double the price, I’ll gladly pay for it!
This would make Audirvana the perfect, unique and only solution for playing my music without swapping cd’s in and out a cd-transport, connected to my DAC.
If making this option available for Windws 10 first, I can finally use my dedicated NUC, bought for Audirvana
You could temp create a ‘temp’ directory which is added to the A+ library. Drag and drop a file into this directory and A+ should list it, i.e. it will become searchable ad playable. Not exactly what you’re after but an easy workaround.
As for the tagless WAV files, if they are still grouped in album directories, then a free app such as XLD should be able to identify the album and tag files at the same time as converting to FLAC – a double win! Please give it a shot.
One major issue is that for anyone with a large number of albums with poor or missing metadata it is a very time-consuming task to go through and tag them -I know, as I have tried - with several different apps. Maybe some computer geeks enjoy doing that, but I found it sapped my will to live.
I don’t understand what is the resistance or lack of Will to implement something so simple as a browse by file structure facility, using the name of the files as names of tracks and names of the folders they are in as names of albums. So many people have collections organised that way, being incredibly easy to set up and manage, and to add new albums from any source.
And that is even without consideration of difficulties caused by downloaded or ripped CD having inconsistencies between their tags, so that A+ either diesn’t See them at all, or only shows some of the tracks, etc - no issue at all with file structure browsing.
So as well as the obviously useful and popular metadata based browsing for those with compliant collections, or plenty of spare time to tag, a file structure option would bring on board all those who have less than perfect metadata (especualky with large collections), precious little time, or struggle with IT. And that may include “boring old farts” - but isn’t inclusion a good thing?
Unfortunately it seems @Damian has no interest in providing this feature in support of those of us who have trouble with metadata. What a shame, as A+ is so good in all respects other than its ability to cope with poor or incomplete metadata.
This lack of folder browser ruins Audirvana for me. So sorry because the player seems excellent, but it fails for me with silly attempts to generate albums of tracks, sorted with clumsy combinations of confused album names, album artists, track artists, and sometimes composer names. I have music arranged logically in many folders of music of specific composers, and others artists/conductors/orchestras of compilation albums. Folder browsing works well for my collection, and Audirvana trashes this organization. Sorry it won’t work.
Yes, I, too, am really reaching the end of my patience waiting. I used to promote Audirvana at every opportunity, because sound quality wise (as a player in direct mode on a Mac Mini) it is excellent for sound quality, yet is very affordable. But in practice its inability to browse and search by file structure left me feeling a fraud lest other people find the same limitations. Pity, because otherwise it is good, and all for want of such a simple add-on capability.
I’ve been testing/trying a JRiver . However, it also lacks simple folder browsing. It 's lots more flexible but also more complicated. It even includes a scripting capabilities that might making workarounds possible and permit something like folder browsing. Unfortunately, the default interface piles lots of useless (to me) garbage (like invented playlists that come from I don’t know where). Because of it’s apparent flexibility and modest cost, I might invest in a license to see if I can make it work. However, I’m less concerned about investing the money than the the time required for learning how to make it work for my large classical collection and listening habits. Like Audirvana, JRiver is needlessly complicated when simple folder browsing would mostly meet my needs much better than it’s default interface.
Search in Audirvana worked sometimes for me [quote=“bitracer, post:14, topic:1950, full:true”]
There are simpler audio playback apps that focus on folder based browsing, like Vox for example.
I also thought that lack of folder based navigation could be a limitation, but I’ve since got used to just searching for things.
[/quote]
Searching in Audirvana would sometimes work if the album or music I want has the appropriate metatags. Unfortunately, Audirvana is rather dumb about classical music, ie., it doesn’t seem to have composer as a metatag, seeing composer as artist. JRiver does much better with classical music, with regards to tags, like composer, and with searching filenames, than Audirvana. I’m still comparing but that’s what I’ve found so far.
Guess I’ll give up on Audirvana and try to make JRiver work. A simple player like Vox COULD work if it didn’t harass me about upgrading to a paid version because it’s really not that good, as it is. On the Mac, at least, Colibri might be just about as good, though I haven’t tested either player thoroughly.
Dear psyscott,
If I am not mistaken, your computer is equipped with an OS that allows browsing.
Assuming that you have organised your music files in a way that suits you, why not selecting any file you wish to listen to and then right click that file to open it with audirvana?
It might be a simple solution to your problem.
