Yes as title says (category was difficult to choose!?!)
YOU only have ONE choice to make
Studio or Origin better…
What would it be for YOU…
Yes, i know, only ONE thing is tough
to stay put on topic…
so many in my mind
Me, just make us have the choice
to make our own Artist Albums view
like (i) we want… First to last, not, like now
with no choice, stuck to last to first !!!
come on !!!, after all those years,
not done yet !!! It can’t be so difficult to change,
since we already have those options
else where in the settings of Audirvana.
A promise from Audirvana that they will never try to implement something like Roon ARC in Audirvana. Seen lots of posts on the lack of progress on the main Roon playback experience due to the very high volume of time/effort expended on ARC problems.
Not a feature request I know…….Just pray Audirvana sticks to what they are good at……superlative SQ, whilst improving features related to user experience playing and managing their online and local libraries.
I purchased Origin and subscribed to Studio for a year, so I didn’t need to use version 3.5.
What I don’t like is having to pay for a software subscription.
I think Audirvana could sell an Origin version with Qobuz and Tidal, and only update for a year.
Anyone who wants new updates pays for a year again. Basically how JRiver works.
Simple. Scrap the subscription.
I refuse to rent software.
I still use V3.5 and it still does what I need (streaming and playback of local files). If it were substantially improved I would absolutely consider buying a new version, but Audirvana will not get any more money from me while the current subscription model is the only option.
Yes, I know… That’s the option, purchase Origin, or subscribe to Studio if you want streaming. If I’m correct there was only going to be Studio, until enough people didn’t want streaming or subscription, so Origin was the result.
Of course we do, I am so far on 3.5.50 and also curious if Spotify will something bring to the party. Even when Spotify is 20 EUR/month the price might be competitive in comparison to Qobuz plus AS.
“Me, just make us have the choice
to make our own Artist Albums view
like (i) we want… First to last, not, like now
with no choice, stuck to last to first !!!”
Would like to see this but accept that Audirvana needs to ensure a sufficient revenue stream so the price would need commensurate with the cost of providing the service over 10 years or so. I would happily pay US$ 800 for a lifetime AS subscription.
David,
when you take the quotient between lifetime billing and annual billing with Roon and apply this to Audirvana you would pay about EUR 400 for a lifetime AS subscription. I would be happy to pay this if Qobuz/AS is superior to lossless Spotify.
Either way, that’s up to Audirvana, I would not want to see them deprived of cash and having to reduce their support and development of the app. They are in the business because they are passionate about sound quality but they need to be remunerated sufficiently to ensure they can continue development and make a profit. Has to be win/win for both sides. Having a smaller subscriber base than Roon means they have to balance income and development expenditure prudently……….
Do everything, moving forward, to maintain and/or improve the audio-engine performance… Enable Spatial Audio on computer platforms that can support the DSP without impinging on the fundamental quality of the Audirvana audio-engine… The future is in the multi-channel experience,
, i don’t stream),
