Audirvana Plus 3.5

[jos]

Audirvana+ is not always playing the song I select, but another song in my library. Most times it goes well, but sometimes not. I used to play my songs randomly automatically, so not a real problem for me. I have had this problem before, so it still exist in the new version.

[jos]

In my opinion, ReplayGain is still very very slow, and because of that not very useful. It is possible that my system is too slow, but I don't think so.

[jos]

Sometimes I see the old Audirvana+ interface pop-up. In my opinion it is reducing the beauty of the new interface. I assume it will take some time afterwards to correct this.

[damien78]

36 minutes ago, jos said:

Sometimes I see the old Audirvana+ interface pop-up. In my opinion it is reducing the beauty of the new interface. I assume it will take some time afterwards to correct this.

Where do you see it?

If you activate the iTunes integrated mode, it is normal. Otherwise this means you are running the 3.2

Regarding your playback issues, to which audio device are you playing?

[damien78]

50 minutes ago, jos said:

In my opinion, ReplayGain is still very very slow, and because of that not very useful. It is possible that my system is too slow, but I don't think so.

What do you mean by slow ?

If it is about the ReplayGain computation for albums missing this information, this means to read and a decode the whole audio files of the album to analyse their loudness and dynamics.

 

It takes about 10-15 seconds per album here.

 

And once this is done, the dynamics values are stored in the audio files metadata, so this computation does not need to be done anymore.

[damien78]

And I've just released beta 18 with the aforementioned fixes.

[Jud]

1 hour ago, jos said:

Audirvana+ is not always playing the song I select, but another song in my library. Most times it goes well, but sometimes not. I used to play my songs randomly automatically, so not a real problem for me. I have had this problem before, so it still exist in the new version.

 

I don't know whether you're speaking of selecting the song on the computer or with the remote, but with the remote on an iPhone I do notice this occasionally (for example, select the first song on an album and the second starts playing).

[RunHomeSlow]

Looks like album with separate songs and still have the cue sheet inside the folder ?

[Jud]

15 minutes ago, RunHomeSlow said:

Looks like album with separate songs and still have the cue sheet inside the folder ?

 

Don't know if you're referring to a different track playing than selected with the remote, but this happens with Qobuz. (I don't remember if it is on local tracks, too - @jos, what is the situation for you? Remote or using the computer also? Local tracks?)

[Andrey]

Damien, how to return in a version 3.2.16 a light background on Mojave?

[RunHomeSlow]

A+ had some difficulties in the past not playing the first song when there was a cue sheet still in the folder with the separared tracks, that was just a comment from the guy (jos) you answered first 😀. I have no experience with streaming...

[RunHomeSlow]

1 minute ago, Andrey said:

Damien, how to return in a version 3.2.16 a light background on Mojave?

 

Preferences panel... light or blue...

 

[jos]

1 hour ago, damien78 said:

Where do you see it?

If you activate the iTunes integrated mode, it is normal. Otherwise this means you are running the 3.2

Regarding your playback issues, to which audio device are you playing?

In the Preferences... menu. My device/bridge is the ultrarendu connected to Chord Qutest DAC, and I'm not using the iTunes Integrated mode. I'm running:  'Audirvana Plus Mac Version 3.4.99.17 (3524)'.

[jos]

41 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

I don't know whether you're speaking of selecting the song on the computer or with the remote, but with the remote on an iPhone I do notice this occasionally (for example, select the first song on an album and the second starts playing).

Today on my computer, but I have had this also on my iPad Mini. But not your experience.

[Andrey]

6 minutes ago, RunHomeSlow said:

Preferences panel... light or blue...

Thank's.

[jos]

1 hour ago, damien78 said:

What do you mean by slow ?

If it is about the ReplayGain computation for albums missing this information, this means to read and a decode the whole audio files of the album to analyse their loudness and dynamics.

 

It takes about 10-15 seconds per album here.

 

And once this is done, the dynamics values are stored in the audio files metadata, so this computation does not need to be done anymore.

Damien, I have to look into this problem again. I just took a CD and that was going fine, but a big 192/24 album is still working after 30 minutes or so. So, perhaps it is because of some files that ar not working with ReplayGain.

[jos]

5 minutes ago, jos said:

Damien, I have to look into this problem again. I just took a CD and that was going fine, but a big 192/24 album is still working after 30 minutes or so. So, perhaps it is because of some files that ar not working with ReplayGain.

Damien, In addition: I am quite sure one album is the problem right now. It's the first one in the range. I have had to force Audirvana to quit to stop the 'Analyze Albums Audio Dynamics' process. Other selected albums are working fine right now. I guess we can close this problem for now. Thanks for your attention!

[jos]

1 hour ago, Jud said:

 

Don't know if you're referring to a different track playing than selected with the remote, but this happens with Qobuz. (I don't remember if it is on local tracks, too - @jos, what is the situation for you? Remote or using the computer also? Local tracks?)

I am not streaming from Qobuz or so, just files from my NAS.

[jos]

2 hours ago, damien78 said:

And I've just released beta 18 with the aforementioned fixes.

The update is working fine in my case, thanks. But I still think ReplayGain should be more on top in the menu bar, like it was before, or much better: make it automatic for new albums.

[Andrey]

9 hours ago, stewartg said:

I’ve been trying sox filter settings again as I think we may be about to lose izotope when 3.5 is officially launched and I’ve once again come to the conclusion that I prefer the izotope filters

i don’t want to be without izotope in 3.5 please don’t remove this option

thanks S

I will support the request.
If nothing has changed in the SoX filters, then iZotope sounds more voluminous and cleaner.

[rruffin]

Anyone experimenting with the SOX setting in 3.5? Kinda feel lost without my old iZotope filters...

[matthias]

3 hours ago, rruffin said:

Anyone experimenting with the SOX setting in 3.5? Kinda feel lost without my old iZotope filters...

 

Someone on the Audirvana FB page is very happy with these settings:

 

Bandwidth 94,5%

Max. length 24000

Anti aliasing 100%

Filter phase 75

 

BTW, the feedback on the Audirvana FB page regarding SoX sound quality seems to be much more positive than here.

 

Matt

[Jud]

29 minutes ago, matthias said:

BTW, the feedback on the Audirvana FB page regarding SoX sound quality seems to be much more positive than here.

 

When you train yourself listening to something for years, then something else that sounds different may sound wrong.  Just raising that as a possibility.

[Jud]

3 hours ago, rruffin said:

Anyone experimenting with the SOX setting in 3.5? Kinda feel lost without my old iZotope filters...

 

I have bandwidth at max (99.5%).  If you want something more like an apodizing filter, you can reduce the bandwidth.

 

I reduce the filter max length to minimum (100) to reduce ringing.  I have no idea if this setting is very effective in reducing ringing at all, and some people like long filters.

 

I have anti-aliasing at 100%, a complete reversal from settings I used years ago that had a very gentle cutoff and allowed some aliasing.  This seems to me to make for a quieter background, but that could easily be my imagination.

 

I have filter phase set to 100 (linear), because linear phase is what my speakers' imaging is built around.  If you don't have my speakers (Vandersteen), feel free to experiment.

 

So - that's what I have, but there's no assurance these are particularly good settings, especially in someone else's system.

 

[matthias]

24 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

When you train yourself listening to something for years, then something else that sounds different may sound wrong.  Just raising that as a possibility.

 

Agree,

maybe there is just a little bit time and fine tuning needed to get even better results with SoX than izotope.

IMO, the four SoX settings make more sense than the five izotope settings.

 

Matt