Official Qobuz Issues Thread

[vortecjr]

Thanks Chris.

 

Qobuz recently added DLNA streaming support. Has anyone been able to make this work with the various DLNA devices out in the wild?

[vortecjr]

I was looking for any official information:)

[vortecjr]

17 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

UPnP/DLNA is the most nonstandard standard. Qobuz will be fighting problems with the protocol’s implementation on an hourly basis if it decides to fully support it. I wish this wasn’t the case, but it is. 
 

JRiver, Audirvana, etc... have years of experience applying patches to make things work with different hardware. The Qobuz team has a ton if work ahead it to make this work. 

Every player software including Roon goes though this process. In fact, Roon has a massive collection of gear in house for this very reason.

 

JRiver, Audirvana, etc should handle the streaming because this is what they do best. Qobuz user can use their app on mobile devices.

[vortecjr]

6 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The thing with Roon is they get to certify all the gear and ask for changes by the manufacturer. UPnP/DLNA is the wild west. I commend all the people who've made it work over the years. 

I can't say it's been that wild or that hard to get DLNA/UPnP to work. It's always been very easy and very reliable. Our new Sonore endPoint is DLNA/UPnP and I have zero concern about it and know it will have minimal support.   

[vortecjr]

50 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

The issue is not with the UPnP / DLNA protocol per se but with the implementation. Most high end audio manufactures do not have software developers in-house to deal with mobile, desktop and web based development. Take for example company X. They make excellent power amps and pre amps but have never developed a streamer or even an app but now, due to market demand, they want to offer a streamer. They can invest money into the project, hire software developers, R&D people, etc... this is very costly and time consuming. Or they can they outsource to a third party that has built a low powered module with code base from 15 years ago. It support DLNA but only some of the features. It may have been developed prior to DLNA spec-ing gapless playback (Just an example) but it is cheap and allows faster time to market for the new product. So company X goes with the second option. The product goes under review and the reviewer, who does not know what gapless playback is or have never read the DLNA specs give it a great feedback. Months down the road, a user will complain on this forum that some features are missing but company X does not have a clue what is he taking about.

 

This scenario is very common. I have seen it with companies that sell streamers for more than $10k only to find out that the network module is a 20 dollars card with crippled functionality.

 

The DLNA “Alliance” dissolved years ago having left the licensing to a 3rd party who use this as a money grab so companies can have the DLNA logo in their products.

I can replace your use of the word "DLNA" with "USB" and the same argument would be true more or less. I agree with you that most Ethernet inputs including those with Airplay, Spotify, Tidal, DLNA/UPnP, RoonReady, etc are based on inexpensive cards, but not all. I disagree that X company does not have a clue...they do and just don't want to pay to have whatever functionality you want implemented. Why on earth would anyone pay 10K for a streamer anyway:)