Not far behind. 
Jus, I have been an Audirvana user for at least as long as you. Donât get me wrong. I want Audirvana to survive and prosper. I much prefer to be in control of my music using Audirvana on my Mac rather than some app on my phone or other dedicated small-screen device. But you and I are members of a dying breed.
I hadnât heard about the specific lawsuit, but Sonos have been suing several companies for similar patent infringements. They won a few in the past, but ended up losing the recent case against Google. We will see how it goes, but it is notoriously difficult to really win over Chinese companies in such cases. Apart from that, Sonos is challenged by increasing competition on multiple fronts and by near-catastrophic decisions by the previous leadership. Soon AI may change everything for everybody. We live in interesting times.
I assume you are referring to not utilizing the DACâs upsampling capabilities to their fullest!? I doubt I can detect the difference. My ears and brain have difficulty identifying the positive effects when upsampling to my current maximum (I use power of 2. Most of my music is 16/44.1). On the other hand, I was immediately struck by the D70 Proâs exceptional resolution, even compared to my previous set up based on an older Sabre reference chip. Everything else being equal, I doubt the extra bandwidth with the IFI is a worthwhile investment for me, especially since the IFI is using technology on its way out (as is the Wiim Pro BTW), and sold at a ridiculous price point. Anyway, compromises are a fact of life, and each his own. Some even prefer headphones rather than investing in a proper listening environment 
I would be surprised if Damien et al. are not thinking about how to use AI technologies to improve the app. I hope so. AI appears to be on everyoneâs mind. Audirvanaâs connections may prove an advantage if translated into cutthroat competitive behavior quickly leading to products. The US and especially Europe are not very good at this. Asia is.
In a separate thread, so as not to take this one further along this tangent, Iâd be interested to know how you think AI might change/improve current products, since youâve now referred to it several times.
Of course you will hear the difference in exploiting the up-sampling and plug-in DSP of AudirvÄna (with or without integrated equalizer) in concert with the D70⌠If you were able to discern an audible difference in resolution and dynamic range in comparison to your other DAC(s) you will most definitely perceive another level of appreciable sound-quality⌠Whether you value this or not, is the salient point.
How do you define a âproperâ listening environment? 
Nobody has a morphing playback system amalgamation that emulates the mastering system and environment seminal to each and every recording in their music library and streaming content⌠Even with artificial intelligence it will always be a compromise. You are stepping into a subject that you are not prepared to espouse. Your presumptions and assumptions are blinding you to the reality.
I first bought Audirvana in 2019 when the Windows version came out. Today Iâm using Apple.
I hope Audirvana will be around for many years to come.
Iâm 72 years old, and I also want to be around for many years to come. 
Without a doubt, itâs the best audio software Iâve tested to date.
I was upset that the EQ didnât come with the Origin version, but I hope they can fix this.
1 Like
I love the smell of irony in the morning!
1 Like
If the context of your presumptive, connotative interpretation of the intended premise of that statement, is construed by you to be related to the subject of artificial intelligence, you would be right⌠however, I was not referring to the subject of artificial intelligence. 
Your point about cognitive dissonance is valid. Such dissonances are common in life and have been a trait of my professional career in an unrelated field. My own gut reaction is to try and seek possible explanations. This particular dissonance, I have given thought as it has been puzzling me too:
My hypothesis is that my brain is better at detecting resolution changes because I used to be a musician and intuitively knows what to listen for, fx. minuscule changes in the sound of instruments familiar to me.
The effects of upsampling are less obvious to me, perhaps because my brain hasnât been taught what to listen for. Sometimes I believe I detect âbetter" sound with upsampling, but most of the time I donât hear any definable change if any at all. Apparently, upsampling doesnât affect much what I term âresolutionâ, at least not consistently. I keep âpower of two" on though, as I also cannot detect any detrimental effects.
From my own perspective, a âproperâ listening environment is one that goes a long way in mirroring a live setting, i.e. what one experiences on stage, in a studio setting, or as a concertgoer. Of course, these are all very different and have their own individual atmosphere, but all enable physical multidimensional interaction with the music. To put it in plain terms: one can feel the bass, moving the head changes what you hear, and the sound comes from everywhere.
I have used headphones a lot, mostly STAX. It can be a truly enjoyable experience; you hear stuff even the very best speakers donât reveal, including perhaps whether upsampling to 192kHz or 384 theoretically matters. When I was younger, I spent a lot of time searching for such answers using my STAX, tweaking and upgrading. It cost me a lot of money and time.
I continue to appreciate why producers, studio technicians, developers, and even musicians use headphones and near-field monitors to rot out even the slightest audible mistake and to achieve the best possible performance. I also appreciate why technically focused listeners may enjoy the artificial environment of a headphone, but I have come to the conclusion that it is not healthy, at least for me. It perverts what music is about. But again, each one his own.
As to AI, I fully share your worries and also your assessment of how it is currently being used by many in the music business. But I also see possibilities. AI can also be used for good, fx. enabling a live setting environment in a normal home. I foresee what we now call âroom correctionâ developing into something way more and into the mainstream sooner than we all think. Where that leaves high end, God knows, but it might be an opportunity.
Quite frankly, I am not sure I understand. This may be as good a time as any to say this:
I am not a native English speaker and though I am partially educated in the US - high school degree and a graduate; have studied and worked in the US periodically from 1971 to 2005; spent 11 years in University environments there and elsewhere as well as having had a long competitive career in what most would consider a very "high browâ environment. During the latter, I have dealt with a wide variety of issues, including complex technical and computer-related stuff. In short: I am a certified non-idiot.
Despite this, I often have trouble deciphering what you say and mean. By chance, I happen to know what 'cognitive dissonanceâ means, but also the meaning of âcognitive dissonance intoleranceâ and if I were to counter your own diagnoses in your responses to me and others not agreeing, I would likely have used it.
But alas, I guess most here donât have a clue and they shouldnât need to have. I find most of your postings insightful and useful with perfectly good advice. I have learned a lot, and you are obviously a huge practical asset to the Audirvana site.
Perhaps you should be less judgemental in your responses and not up the LIX when you are at a loss for arguments. Perhaps you should also change your username claiming to be God Almighty in Audio.
These comments should be seen in a positive light though I understand if they are not.
6 Likes
Well, this would be true if the only music productions you listen to were actually recorded in that context⌠Generally, what you are getting are several performances mixed and spliced together to produce the recordingâŚ
I was a technical advisor for Stevan Pasero a classical guitarist who won a Grammy for Best Classical Guitar recording in the 80âs, and much to his embarrassment, he never played any of the pieces on that recording completely-through in one take⌠the entire album was a compilation of his best takes spliced together to complete the recorded performance of the pieces.
There is no given that any recording is done in one venue, studio or concert hall, club or bathroom⌠You are making presumptions about things you have little or no experience with⌠It is all artificial.⌠your playback system is artificial, mine is artificial⌠I use high-resolution 32 bit/352.8kHz HRTF with a custom made stereo tactile subwoofer seat-back as my headphone playback system. I donât have room anomalies to distort the soundstage⌠I probably have a more coherent focus on the contextual artistic Left + Right channel phase, harmonic and dynamic and spatial relationships and decisions that have been imbued in an given master recording, than your speaker playback system could ever achieve in your acoustic environment. This is why you want room-correction, so to pull it all back into focus.
A stereo recording does not imbue contextual positional auditory cues that are dynamic to the head-transfer orientations⌠a stereo recording doesnât provide enough information⌠Few binaural recordings really capture the space⌠This is in the realm of a multichannel playback experience. You are debating with the wrong audiophile and out of your element. I was a THX certified installer and have had multiple multichannel playback systems in my career which include 5.1 SACD 2.8MHz and DVD-A surround production arrays. Iâve been involved with psychoacoustics for more than a couple of decades⌠The Lake TheaterPhone system was my idea implemented by Zoran, Dolby Labs and Lake. I have Abbey Road Studio 3 virtualization (surround and stereo) with head-tracking available to me as a plug-in that I employ in Logic Pro⌠I like listening to surround music via a well calibrated surround array in a well managed acoustic space. I have a surround array, but I prefer my headphone system for my critical listening enjoyment⌠Iâll leave it here, because I can keep going.
I modulate all PCM files to 5.6MHz (DSD128)⌠sample-rate makes a difference in the DAC platform⌠I wonât dive into the technical benefits and perceivable attributes in this regard here with you.
You forgot to write the year you competed for and won the Oscar. 
4 Likes
@Reynaldo
??? 
⌠Music has been my life since I was a baby⌠the music box in my Teddy Bear that I would wind-up that played the Strauss piece âThe Blue Danubeâ and put me to sleep at night⌠My experiences as a musician, sound and recording engineer/producer/mastering engineer and in electronics and mechanical design engineering are what I draw from ⌠I still have 78 rpm records from when I was old enough to set the needle on the acetate spinning on my little record player⌠
The banality of your statement is boring.
You shouldnât really understand the statement you responded to, because it was directed to a response Jud made⌠not you⌠This is not the first time you have assumed one of my statements was directed towards youâŚ
Yes, so just to clarify, the irony I see in you telling someone else theyâre stepping into a subject theyâre not prepared to âespouseâ (âdiscussâ would have been more appropriate and simpler, but as weâve all seen, the less assured you feel, the more prolix your writing becomes) is that you chime in on threads about UPnP having never used Audirvana with UPnP, on threads about Linux having never used Audirvana for Linux, on this thread extolling the virtues of an iFi streamer you have never owned, and on other threads telling Reynaldo and me there is no advantage to upsampling to DSD256 or DSD512 (despite measurements indicating lower noise and distortion figures) when you have never had a system capable of upsampling to those resolutions so you could hear the difference, if any; and here youâre presuming to tell someone else what they ought to hear and enjoy without having owned their rig or seen their space. But theyâre the ones talking about things theyâre not equipped to discuss. So yes, quite ironic.
Youâre frequently quite helpful. If youâd confine yourself more to what youâre familiar with and let go of the ego a bit, youâd be even more helpful.
Of course no one died and made me king, so all of this is just one personâs opinion, for whatever itâs worth.
11 Likes
@Jud
I follow your posts and those of others more versed in specific aspects regarding digital-audio playback⌠there is quite a compendium of anecdotal information from which to extrapolate from in concert with my own experiences⌠The level of detailed information regarding specific technologies and implementations is extremely deep if one chooses to edify themselves in everything related to the technologies AudirvÄna and any given amalgamation of playback components employ⌠What the cadre of folks here on the forum that find me irritating about my involvement here, is a continual process of learning and a desire to educate.
Show me the blind-test(s) audition(s) that corroborate(s) your positionâŚ
The context of my use of âespouseâ⌠âto adopt or supportâ ⌠as there was evidence of a level of naĂŻvety.
Luckily I donât need my system to please a blind testing panel, just me. Even if the measurements werenât better this would of course be the case, but since they are, I see no reason to object to the preference I have for my own listening.
2 Likes
Then donât judge my perspectiveâŚ
Iâll try my bestâŚ
3 Likes
Thank you for your insights, but also for proving my point. You approach the issues from the point of view of a technician. I approach them from the point of view of a musician and music lover. Two different perspectives. Both necessary in order to make great sound, but also marred by communication challenges. Clearly, I didnât succeed in making you understand my perspective on headphones vs speakers. I was talking about stuff like feeling the effects of a bass in the stomach hitting low E, the felt blow from a symphony orchestra or brass band, and not least the realism of the listening situation itself. I know of few musicians preferring headphones given a choice.
I should also thank you for putting my mind at rest. I had regrets posting the later somewhat harsh comment on your writing style, but your response makes me feel justified in doing so. You are basically again telling me that I am an idiot that doesnât know sâŚt.
I had tried to avoid another such response by hinting that I do have some personal experience on stage and on both sides of the glass in a studio setting, but you obviously didnât take the hint and must also have forgotten that I was a ProLogic user before Audirvana. I could also have mentioned my very close relative and lifelong friend with a cv in sound that on all counts dwarfs your own. Of course, my claim is only based on what you have divulged during the discussions, so I might be wrong, but since you use such references to dwarf me and others, I assume those references are the best you can come up with. Again, I may be wrong. Of course, referencing my relative is utterly irrelevant as to my own abilities and our discussion (I have not involved him or sought his advice). I am merely providing it as yet another hint that I just may have a little more insight and experience in your realm that you give me credit for. BTW, my relative, also way back a musician, uses headphones for diagnostic purposes when possible or relevant. When he listens to music, he does it over speakers, but of course, his ever-evolving setup is in the ultra-high-end category mere mortals can only dream about.
3 Likes