I am using Windows as well and I am basing it on my own experience. Studio is by no means ‘buggy as hell’ compared to 3.5. That is why I asked you if you have used Studio lately.
Pointing to forum posts has no significant value, because people only post on forums if something goes wrong. People never post if something works perfectly well. Lately I see a lot of complaints about streaming Tidal on Studio. Lately I see a lot of complaints about streaming Tidal on the Roon forum too. Coincidence? Maybe. Does it proof that Studio or Roon is buggy as hell? Certainly not.
That’s a very good point in fact, however I still think AS doesn’t offer an experience worthy of its price, and my complaint is not related with Tidal streaming, I only use local playback.
Buggy or not, this doesn’t invalidate the point of this discussion, Audirvana 3.5 needs to be updated, just common decency for the userbase
I agree with you that bugs in 3.5 still should be fixed and that Audirvana owns that to its user base.
My remark about Tidal streaming was only an example to make a point and not referring to your specific use case.
But I also see a lot of people on this forum (not you) who still (unrealisticaly) expect new features to be implemented in 3.5 (and consider it as a bug if those features are not there). When they bought it (including me) they knew what they bought, and where paying for the features that where already there.
In short, I think it is realistic to expect that 3.5 will still get bugfixes. Also (since I bought a ‘lifetime’ copy of 3.5) I think it is realistic to expect that it will still run years from now as is on my current hardware and Windows. What I do not expect is that completely new features and functionality will be added to 3.5.
About the quality of Studio I thought the same as you until one or two months ago. Since then there have been significant improvements in Studio (adding a folder tree view for instance) which made me change my view. I do mostly play local files too (and use Qobuz), and that all works without problems on my system. I have a subscription for Studio and I have a subscription for Roon too. At the moment I notice that I am using Studio far more than Roon (also because of sound quality), so for my use case a subscription to Studio is definitely worth it. If I had to renew my subscriptions now, I would probably ditch Roon and keep Studio. Of course your use case may be much different than mine, so I can imagine that you do not have that opinion. YMMV as they say
I don’t think are so many. Maybe “more from the forum” wich is different, because most of the users don’t post. Audirvana Studio is expensive for a player, but Roon is sooo. And you say that “the products are complementary”? Hey, I’m not a rich person and even if I’ll have more money I’ll never pay for a player more than few bucks. Or nothing (free players). AS is an exception, is the only audio player that I use with few exceptions but I will never pay for another one in the same time…
That‘s perfectly fine. Everybody is spending their money the way they‘re comfortable. Many in the forum have multiple systems. In some scenarios it makes sense.
That’s true. But for a person with a normal salary from East Europe is usually too much.
I have simple needs: Qobuz, local files, sometimes radios, a single room, no need for remote or other things. No need and don’t want - I prefer simplicity.
I purchased A 3.5 in March also but I will never return to it - Studio it’s much better for me now (Windows 10).
