When is Studio 1.7 coming out?

Studio
1

10

2

What is your wish list for this release that you expect?

3

Well, I don’t have a crystal ball. But my guess it’ll be awhile till we get to 1.7
I mean at the moment we are at version 1.6.1. The 1.4 series got to 1.4.5 if I remember correctly, and the 1.5 series till 7.

I expect a few more 1.6.x versions.

4

When its ready

5

I think basic user interface issues need to be fixed right away to make the software more user friendly and not so clunky. For example, the following issues should be fixed right away:

  • Studio combines albums with same Album Artist and Album Name or randomly splits such albums into arbitrary groupings.

  • Keyboard cursor keys including page up and page are not active until a track is first selected/highlighted.

  • Page-up and page-down are too slow.

  • End and Home keys are not functional.

  • After advancing through the tracks listed with the page-down key or the down arrow key, subsequent uses of the scroll bar causes an automatic return to the top of the tracks list (rather than continuing from the last place).

  • In Local → Tracks view, scrolling down as far as one can with the scroll bar stops short of the end of the list.

  • When using the Remote, there is no indication of Artist in Tracks view

  • Whenever the Remote is in “Local” mode and goes to sleep, when bringing it back from sleep, the Remote defaults to “Favorites”.

  • Composer column not picking up multiple composers from file tags

  • Artist biographies missing or defective

  • Release Date column not using correct metadata.

Then, after these basic issues are fixed, @Antoine should consider (for a subsequent release):

  • the ability to add radio stations permanently

  • bit-depth reporting, and kernel streaming issues with some DACs.

The fixes/bug fix releases are coming in excruciatingly slow. Maybe @Antoine should consider getting help?

3 Likes
6

There appears to be no rhyme or reason between 1.5.X minor releases (similarly for 1.6.X releases) and releases such as 1.5, 1.6, etc. except that the former type releases involve only a very little in bug fixes (1 or 2?), while the latter type releases address a longer list of issues.

7

I think it’s very wrong what is happen. In my country people usually don’t pay for software mainly because are poor (food and rent are more important than a software, right?) but when does, even few bucks, not audiophile (very) expensive software they have huge expectations. In my opinion AS should never be released. Or released as a beta free for Audirvana customers and as a paid working solution at the end of the year (in this rhythm of developement). Even If I am mostly satisfied I can’t recommend it to my friends - I don’t want to take this responsability.

1 Like
8

I also suggested, already in the first weeks of the trial, that AS become a public beta until it reaches the maturity of a commercial product.
I thought that you were happy with AS, what disturbs you suddenly with the player?

2 Likes
9

So I am happy. In fact I was because I didn’t subscribed yet, I am with A 3.5 now. I will subscribe soon for a month to make a better comparision, especially on SQ, than I did in the past.

As far as I can tell A 3.5 is more stable, not a single crash and you know what computer I have. If I make too high settings for my old CPU, for example upsampling 24-192 slutterings occures because my CPU can’t handle but NOT A SINGLE CRASH. But AS is more unstable (in fact the last thing before my trial ends was an “unexpected” crash when trying to play a radio).

3 Likes