Jump to content
IGNORED

Audirvana Studio


Recommended Posts

Every company/developer would like a slice of my reoccurring income instead of pricing their products to account for development / service costs.

 

The problem with the “product as a service” subscription model is it’s designed to maximize the benefit to the producer - once you stop paying you no longer have access. Therefore, I have little control over the value decision if/when I decide to invest in paid upgrades. As a consumer, subscriptions reduce my discretionary income and therefore my choices - stop paying, stop listening.

 

The way things are going there may come a day when I cannot listen to music either because I didn’t pay for a music subscription or a software player.

 

Frankly, for the price of the paid version I thought Damien was giving it away but I will not upgrade on principal. Unless you’re my utility, phone or insurance company I’m not spending a cent on monthly subscriptions and enjoy my life instead in the physical world.

Link to comment

I hear all the pros, again not my problem whether revenue dries up or revenue curve is flattened. Innovate and sell me something new or price it high enough to justify staying in business - why do you think Herman Miller chairs are so expensive? I’ve had mine for 37 years, one and done.

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I pay for quite a bit of software monthly. This gives me a lot of freedom to stop paying whenever I want and I never pay for something I don't use. If people pay Roon $700 for a "lifetime" license and a better product comes along next week, they may be out a substantial amount. In addition, "lifetime" licenses are a liability for Roon who pays based on the content being used within the app. 

 

I like paying for what I get rather than assuming all the risk on the front end. 

Right, how do you like having to babysit your subs? Sounds like a great way to spend your time. We all know the economics that ownership is less expensive in the long-run hence why everything is moving to a subscription model.

Link to comment

The last thing I will say is I hope the developer is successful. But the reason I am personally bent out of shape is because I chose Audirvana over Roon because it was not a subscription - or a ridiculously high upfront cost that is too risky to make for reasons already cited.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Jud said:

 

I know you said it was the last thing you would say, but I'm interested in the following (not trying to persuade or challenge, but rather curious):

 

You have said both that the developer must charge a high enough one-time cost to stay in business, and also that you would not risk paying a ridiculously high upfront cost. I know from what you have said that $700 for Roon was too much.  I'm curious what a ballpark maximum upfront cost would be for you.


I feel a reasonable amount is $60-$90 initial buy-in and $40-$60 for future upgrades - people’s value perception will be different. My needs are simple, playing local files on Mac with a nice / gui - I would be happy with 3.5 and no further upgrades just maintenance.

 

Roon I feel has taken it too far… why should I as the consumer pay for development features that have not been delivered? As someone already mentioned too high an upfront cost places risk back on me.

 

Personally I think Damien had it right and I don’t see the need to innovate on pricing models. As a consumer, it’s not my responsibility to keep companies in business - I don’t have an obligation to support them, companies to stay in business have to continually deliver enough value for customers to pay for their product or service.

 

Therefore, I think it’s pretty simple and no reason to change what’s worked, you create a product and stand behind (warranty) it from defects (bugs) for a period of time; beyond that it’s fair game. If a major improve or change occurs (new OS) then charge the customer and I can decide whether what I have is good enough for my needs or whether an upgrade is warranted. With a subscription there is no middle, it’s pay to play whether you like/need it or not.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Fab Filter is somewhat of a "gold standard;" you couldn't go wrong there.  But yes, expensive.  I have resisted "splurging" on it.

 

Bill

My system is transparent enough that I could hear a negative change when using EQ, mostly lost depth, flatter sound and thus stayed away from EQ. 
 

I recently tried FabFilter to see if it could improve my headphones for an issue of excess treble energy and recessed sub-bass that always sort of bothered me - albeit at the expense of something else. I was surprised that and noticed no loss, it was completely transparent and that’s saying a lot as expectation bias has a significant influence on how we perceive sound. It’s expensive, but it was cheaper than buying a new set of headphones.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, bbosler said:

 

this makes me very curious, and forgive me if I am reading into the post, but it sounds like you are almost wearing this as a badge of honor. I say that because I can't image NOT streaming. I have discovered hundreds of artists I would otherwise be unaware of and so much "new to me" music I regret not doing it sooner. People bitch about the price of it but  for the cost of 1 CD a month I get unlimited  access to millions of songs... millions. Unless you are one of the OCD crowd who listens to the same 5 reference albums over and over and over, I can't think of a single reason why I would stop doing it. I would be devastated if I was no longer able to do it.

 

 

The value proposition of streaming is abundance - it’s the same argument sold to music distributors, you have catalogs of music you are not monetizing, make it abundant and now it’s easier to justify the value proposition.
 

Traditional radio is/was the place for music discovery for most people, then friends and music stores. This has been supplanted largely by streaming services so I understand their place.

 

However, some of us like what we like already having gone through that journey - I’m at the place where if I hear a new artist all I can hear is how it sounds like something or someone I’ve already heard. I think it’s probably the normal course of aging but I don’t need to stream because I like my curated collection of music that I own. I used to have 40+ bottles of whiskey but now I have 3 or 4 of my favourites and don’t care much to explore further - however every now and again something worthy of attention happens and while I may be late, I’m still open to the idea that people can find ways to innovate and improve on our experience- I just don’t have the time anymore to investigate every hot thing and let it come to me.

 

Link to comment

All that to say, I don’t need a music sub and also it’s annoying that one day it may be the only way to enjoy music; which if you like what you like and don’t want for more, a sub is like the equivalent of buying the same albums over and over again not a new one every month - that’s the crux of my problem.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...