Audirvana 2.0 teaser

[mwheelerk]

To some of you that may not be a lot of money. There are those of us, however, that do not make outrageous amounts of money and/or have families to think of first. I honestly wish now that I had kept my money as well as the copy I had obtained on the sly. Lesson learned.

Seriously? You are complaining and you stole a copy?

[timmermc]

As many of us I am looking forward for this new version, but as I notice in this threat it will have limited functionality. There will be no remote app available at launch? Well tell me what's the point in upgrading to this version, for now I have the enjoyment of operating A+ from about everywhere in the house with my iPad, and in A+2 I will loose this functionality?

Don't tell me this would be no big loss, you can use a screen sharing option. Well, this is of no way a comfortable way of operating.

 

Do not misunderstand me, I am perfectly happy in using A+ as its operating now. I paid him the fee for the program because it was worth the money. With version A+2 I start to doubt, by loosing its mean basic functionality the remote... for a additional €37,51? And how much will the developer charge me in the future through the iTunes shop, to get that newly build A+2 app remote again?

 

I really wondering now if its a fear deal for a music program developed by a music lover, it looks that the French developer is finally starting a small business. Here's a small exercise I did:

- A newcomer pays for A+ version2 the som of €71,39 VAT inclusive.

- As an already user of A+ version1, to get me to version2, I will pay 71,39 + 37,51 that makes a total of €108,9 VAT inclusive.

- How much will the iTunes app cost us?

 

Think what you will, paying about 50% of the new price for a update... for now I'm staying with A+ version 1.... or A+2 has to be really worth the money!

Not even Sonic Studios is charging you by percentage so much for an upgrade.

[wgscott]

A+ 2.0 still has iTunes-integrated mode. That will work the same way as before.

 

My personal hack to use Apple's Remote.app while the player is in stand-alone mode doesn't work with 2.0.

[timmermc]

A+ 2.0 still has iTunes-integrated mode. That will work the same way as before.

 

My personal hack to use Apple's Remote.app while the player is in stand-alone mode doesn't work with 2.0.

 

Thank you for answering.

I now this will be stupid questions. It has still iTunes-integrating mode.

- In iTunes integrated mode, I still need iTunes?

- Is the sound engine any better if your still using it integrated?

Whats the point for an upgrade then?

[Musicophile]

Not even Sonic Studios is charging you by percentage so much for an upgrade.

True, but Amarra 3.0 is $189, i.e. currently around €145, so still more than A+ 2.0 including upgrade, and to this day hasn't managed to come up with an Itunes integration that works on all machines, and has absolutely no library management capabilities. And JRiver, while being cheaper than A+, still feels very much unfinished on the Mac, and constantly charges for minor updates.

 

I agree with you, the initial lack of a remote app is a downside that I'm personally also not very happy about, but Damien doesn't have a team of developers around him, so it's one step after the other.

 

If you're happy using the current solution, there is absolutely no need for you to upgrade. Just stay with the current version and wait until the remote app comes out, and then make up your mind.

 

And with regards to whether Damien is starting a small business, I'd say absolutely, but in a positive sense. When I see how much effort went into developing the library management, I actually think the upgrade fee is ridiculously small, and very much worth it. Again, value is in the eye of the beholder.

 

I'm close to the point where A+ 2.0 will become my main player, and I'll keep Itunes only for the Iphone sync. What you get is a smooth, customizable interface, with significantly more tagging options especially for classical music, all this in a program that unlike Itunes isn't hundreds of megabytes but a small, dedicated system. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. Damien has already done some tailoring to the input he got during the beta testing, but there are still many open ideas on how to improve the interface and add functions. The good news is Damien actually listens to his audience, and I'm confident many of these ideas will eventually be implemented.

 

Again, A+ 1.5 at this stage is fully functional, nobody needs to go to 2.0. If you see the added value of a dedicated library management system with different options to Itunes (and I believe many here will), get it, otherwise just stay with the current solution.

[Musicophile]

Thank you for answering.

I now this will be stupid questions. It has still iTunes-integrating mode.

- In iTunes integrated mode, I still need iTunes?

- Is the sound engine any better if your still using it integrated?

Whats the point for an upgrade then?

The Itunes integrated mode is kept as a legacy function for people who purchase this program newly and want to use it this way, however, there is absolutely no point in upgrading from 1.5 if you intend to stay with Itunes, and not use A+ new library management function.

 

I've never A/B'd 2.0 vs. 1.5, Damien says the audio engine is unchanged, but to my ears 2.0 sounds a bit smoother and more relaxed, probably because it doesn't have to deal with the complexities of the Itunes handover. Not sure this on it's own would be compelling enough to upgrade.

[timmermc]

 

...I agree with you, the initial lack of a remote app is a downside that I'm personally also not very happy about...

 

...If you see the added value of a dedicated library management system with different options to Itunes...

 

Thank you for your answer.

Indeed for many in search for a dedicated library managed music program it will possible bring a solution. I'm one of the customers who is not looking for this, I'm more the person who looks after a good sound, with easy to use capabilities for the whole family. So for me A+ version2 is not complete without the remote.

 

It has nothing to do about the money, I'm using a music-system that cost me thousands of euro's. Paying Sonic Studios the fee is really worth it for me, the same counts for Audirvana. But I think I made a point with the percentage upgrade, around €20 looks more fair to me for a not complete upgrade of a music player. And a total of €37,51 including the remote would be fair.

[wgscott]

Then wait and decide whether to get it after the remote is released.

[Musicophile]

Thank you for your answer.

Indeed for many in search for a dedicated library managed music program it will possible bring a solution. I'm one of the customers who is not looking for this, I'm more the person who looks after a good sound, with easy to use capabilities for the whole family. So for me A+ version2 is not complete without the remote.

 

It has nothing to do about the money, I'm using a music-system that cost me thousands of euro's. Paying Sonic Studios the fee is really worth it for me, the same counts for Audirvana. But I think I made a point with the percentage upgrade, around €20 looks more fair to me for a not complete upgrade of a music player. And a total of €37,51 including the remote would be fair.

I understand your point of view. I stopped with JRiver for Mac after v18 since the constant upgrade fees of $15 etc., while only the price of a high-res album, did annoy me, as I felt the software to be constantly in beta mode. At least A+ 1.5, and now 2.0 even more, feels like a finished product.

 

How much value you attribute to a given function and how much you're willing to pay for it is an individual decision, and I'm very happy we have the choice of so many options. To me, the library function is a major step up vs. the Itunes mode, so as said before I feel the upgrade price is more than justified.

[timmermc]

I understand your point of view.

 

Thank you for this nice conversation, having a conversation like this is really the point of being and writing on a blog, a forum. Learning from each other, exchanging thoughts, not always being on the same road but knowing that there is one thing that felt as the most important. Its the music that brings us here.

[AnotherSpin]

THE MAIN POINT FOR THOSE WHO HAVE MISSED IT IS NEW CUSTOMERS PAYING LESS FOR 2.0 THAN THOSE WHO HAVE ALREADY PURCHASED A COPY.

Agree. That is the question which bothers me as well. And to those who might be willing to inquire - Yes, I purchased my copy of A+ couple of years before.

[timmermc]

Agree. That is the question which bothers me as well. And to those who might be willing to inquire - Yes, I purchased my copy of A+ couple of years before.

 

That was also the point I made in my post #77, and in will be not pleasant for users who did buy this software at July 31.

In my post #82 I mentioned that €20 would be a fair amount for the upgrade, especially if you now there is no remote app to use the software as it is mentioned to use.

[AnotherSpin]

That was also the point I made in my post #77, and in will be not pleasant for users who did buy this software at July 31.

In my post #82 I mentioned that €20 would be a fair amount for the upgrade, especially if you now there is no remote app to use the software as it is mentioned to use.

I think upgrade cost (whatever it might be) should be split fairly between customers purchased the product anytime ago. And, if some of them entitled to get any favour, probably it should be paid back to most loyal (read: old) ones.

 

Truly, there is a question answer to which is much more important. If version 2 has basically the same SQ as version which available now I see no reason to pay $39 for library managing option anyway.

[satbaba]

I think upgrade cost (whatever it might be) should be split fairly between customers purchased the product anytime ago. And, if some of them entitled to get any favour, probably it should be paid back to most loyal (read: old) ones.

 

Truly, there is a question answer to which is much more important. If version 2 has basically the same SQ as version which available now I see no reason to pay $39 for library managing option anyway.

 

+1

[AllAbouttheSound]

Seriously? You are complaining and you stole a copy?

 

Yeah, seriously. Unlike many of you, I have to actually work for a living and I don't have the luxury of kicking back for hours on end testing a new piece of software. If I download a trial version today there's no telling if I'm going to have the time in a two week period to find out what it can/cannot do. So yes, I tried it out for a slightly extended period and when I was somewhat satisfied with it's performance I purchased it - standard op for me and I don't care in the least who disagrees with it. And when I stated I was satisfied with it's performance it means when it works it sounds great. Then there are times when having to quit the app and restart or even worse - do a reinstall, when I wish I had held off on that purchase. It's difficult to listen to music in a somewhat relaxed state of mind when you've spent the last half hour getting the software to work properly. For those who have no problems… good for you. It's very obvious though, looking through these posts that A+ is nowhere near perfect. And as far as my extended trial… I may need to make an adjustment, given the circumstances of late.

[SavantGarde]

Anyone know if A+ 2.0 will support automatic playback level adjustment, such as JRiver's Volume Leveling or iTunes' SoundCheck?

[Jud]

I'll tell you what… maybe I'll stop posting as a christmas present for you. You'll forgive me if that doesn't happen though, right? I won't even charge you extra for that.

 

No need. As it's 30-odd posts without a single one yet about audio, you'll quite possibly be banned well before that. But why wait even that long? Welcome to my ignore list.

 

As Buddy Holly said - rave on.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Musicophile]

Anyone know if A+ 2.0 will support automatic playback level adjustment, such as JRiver's Volume Leveling or iTunes' SoundCheck?

 

Not to my knowledge.

[AllAbouttheSound]

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Again - great idea. I'm not at all interested in sharing view points with you anyway. Carry on with your worship, Jethro.

[jrflanne]

I will be happy to pay for the upgrade and I hope the developer makes a decent amount of $$$. For those of you who thinks you should get free software, there is free stuff out there. Like iTunes. Use that. Besides, complaining about the upgrade fee (new users only pay $79 but I have to pay $109, or whatever it is) remember this, you have been using the software already.

[Jud]

A+ is now used by enough people that there are all kinds of reasons folks have it as their player. For some, like me, it's the SQ. Others have been waiting for library management that would allow them to get rid of iTunes or another player. For others convenient remote operation is critical.

 

The first goal for 2.0 is library management. As reading this and other threads shows, there's been a lot of pent-up demand for it. So it's being released, with other high priorities, such as remote functionality and sound quality improvements, to follow as soon as possible.

 

I think Bill's suggestion is a good one - follow this or other sources to see when the particular capability you're most interested in is added.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zoomp]

I'm really excited for the new A+ version. I've been waiting for months to buy it.

 

For our heated friend, I also read all the threads of A+ here, and personally wrote to Damien asking if I bought it back in January, I would have to pay for the upgrade, he never wrote back, and I assumed he was too busy for that. Anyway, in no time doing this research, I was left with the impression that I would get upgrades for free, only the .x ones. So, I waited.

 

You see, I'm a brazillian, and paying for this software will cost me about 7 dinners out. It's about 10% of what I earn every month. It's a lot. And I am very happy to pay for it. It's an amazing piece of software, and I tested a lot of them, it still beats every single one I tested on my system.

 

And before you say you can get it somewhere else, I know for a fact, that the cracker group behind it has decided to stop cracking this software out of the respect for this indie developer. So, if even they can perceive this as a well worth piece of software, I guess you are on the wrong side of the fence, my friend.

 

Cheers and long live Audirvana!

[NOMBEDES]

Yeah, seriously. Unlike many of you, I have to actually work for a living and I don't have the luxury of kicking back for hours on end testing a new piece of software. (EDIT)

 

 

Well since you live in Detroit, I guess you are lucky that you have a job.

I live on a modest fixed income, but I will pay full price for the software and I will not complain.

 

 

Thank you for your interest in "sound".

[SavantGarde]

Not to my knowledge.

 

OK, i'll set my hopes towards such a feature being included in version 2.x, then …

[wgscott]

OK, i'll set my hopes towards such a feature being included in version 2.x, then …

 

I think it is a deliberate design decision not to do this, since it potentially degrades audio quality.