Audirvana Studio

[The Computer Audiophile]

26 minutes ago, Marco Klobas said:

The artists' income from streaming is insanely low. Even for the big names.

 

Let's stick to facts.This is only Spotify numbers. 

 

●  Drake is Spotify’s highest earner, with an estimated haul of $52,546,150.

●  The top-grossing song on Spotify is Shape of You, which earned Ed Sheeran $6,566,000.

●  Spotify’s 10 highest-earners have made a combined $337,485,480 from the platform.

●  The highest-earning song from before 2010 is Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody, which has made $3,349,150 on Spotify.

 

 

27 minutes ago, Marco Klobas said:

A provocative question: would you pay, let's say, $250 a month to "subscribe" to a hi-end system composed by a streamer-DAC/pre amp/power amp/speaker of your choice, valued ~$7,000 each piece, without owning it?

 

Many people have run the numbers for offering audio gear leasing options. Dealers, distributors, and manufacturers. 

 

Tons of people lease cars now days, but never think of it as a subscription. 

[WAM]

14 hours ago, lucretius said:

So, what does it yield?

I will know that after I have seen/used Studio. If I like Studio, I will probably subscribe. If I don't like it, I will stick with 3.5 (and JRiver). 

[Jud]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Tons of people lease cars now days, but never think of it as a subscription. 

 

If I could think of a way to expense an audio system for tax purposes, as many people do with leased cars, I'd be on that in a flash!

[pl_svn]

12 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If you really think they are amortizing the cost over 50 years or that the albums haven't been paid off for 40 years, then OK

 

you do know that for every well (and long) selling album there are at the very least 10 not so well or not at all ones, right? ;)

[Bill Brown]

14 hours ago, RunHomeSlow said:

i don’t stream, i don’t listen to radio, i don’t upsample, i have all my music. I tags my music like i want, i just want to hear it bitperfect.

 

Wow!  Despite you being who I perceive as the leading expert on Audirvana, if I had your requirements I would be using Swinsian! :)  I like its organization, tagging, appearance, and simplicity much better (though a dark mode would be nice).  If I didn't want to upsample and use AU plug-ins, it is all I would use as I don't stream or listen to internet radio either. 

 

Bill

[Bill Brown]

31 minutes ago, Martini said:

Will Studio incorporate an EQ or do we need to use a host program? This is for Mac. I'm searching for programs now.

 

Audirvana does a great job of hosting Audio Unit (AU) plugins, the Mac specific format (rather than VST format typically used in Windows).

 

There are a dizzying array of options, from free to huge bucks.  I have several that I have used over the years, but have been using these for quite some time and like them:

 

https://ddmf.eu/iieqpro-equalizer-plugin/  (min phase)

 

https://ddmf.eu/lp10-linear-phase-equalizer-plugin/  (linear phase)

 

Bill

[bbosler]

11 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

I don't stream or listen to internet radio either. 

 

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 Computer Audiophile]

24 minutes ago, pl_svn said:

 

you do know that for every well (and long) selling album there are at the very least 10 not so well or not at all ones, right? ;)

At least 10 of them. 

 

Given the cost to record one of these albums in 1970, frequently at a live show where people also paid to see the show, and all the other associated costs, I'm willing to bet whoever owns the rights to the titles, has long been in the black. 

[Foggie]

11 hours ago, bbosler said:

completely agree about not valuing software. Went out to dinner tonight and spent $75 + an ice cream on the way home and the cost of driving there and back....   buy a few records or CDs and you are out that much, it costs $50 to fill your car with gas, yet people bitch endlessly about spending $70 a year  for the use of something they use very day. I don't get it.

Exactly, and yet don't blink on the costs for speakers, amps, DAC's, cables etc..

[Musicophile]

3 minutes ago, Foggie said:

Exactly, and yet don't blink on the costs for speakers, amps, DAC's, cables etc..

Which we all know typically have a mark-up of several hundred percent.

[Foggie]

21 minutes ago, bbosler said:

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.

Therein lies the ahem...problem / crux.  Millions upon millions of songs for basically free.  How that sits with everyone is different and really there is no right or wrong answer I suppose.  This is getting OT to the thread though.

[Marco Klobas]

Thanks for the Spotify's figures, @The Computer Audiophile.

 

It seems that at least some big names are actually having good incomes from streaming.

 

I'm wondering how much would they have earned by selling their music instead. Without streaming (in the CD era so to speak) many of them declared that earnings from selling music were too low, so they pushed (or have been advised to push) with tours and concerts.

 

I have the feeling that some big names in music, especially those "mature" with a recording heritage, are trying to squeeze as much money as possible lately. Not because they need absolutely money – they are already wealthy. Rather, because their heritage value is dropping. It seems to me that all this started prominently since the streaming boom.

 

Almost a rush. Sell anything you can, before the value fades: vinyls, collection albums, books, movies/documentaries...

 

I could be wrong. Just a feeling.

 

Another thing: we're speaking of big names now. What about minor players? They never made big figures with records, let alone through Spotify et similia.

 

As said, I'm not against streaming per se. It's an extraordinary music showcase.

 

Anyway, I'm going OT: this thread is about Audirvana.

[Martini]

51 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Audirvana does a great job of hosting Audio Unit (AU) plugins, the Mac specific format (rather than VST format typically used in Windows).

 

There are a dizzying array of options, from free to huge bucks.  I have several that I have used over the years, but have been using these for quite some time and like them:

 

https://ddmf.eu/iieqpro-equalizer-plugin/  (min phase)

 

https://ddmf.eu/lp10-linear-phase-equalizer-plugin/  (linear phase)

 

Bill

I've been eyeballing Fab Filter https://www.fabfilter.com/products/pro-q-3-equalizer-plug-in. It looks like a powerful program that is not too difficult to use. But it's not cheap either... so still looking. I've been messing around with REW, and while it doesn't offer any export to AU, it at least gives an idea on what needs to be addressed and how much. Plus, the price is more than fair!

[Bill Brown]

5 minutes ago, Martini said:

I've been eyeballing Fab Filter https://www.fabfilter.com/products/pro-q-3-equalizer-plug-in. It looks like a powerful program that is not too difficult to use. But it's not cheap either... so still looking. I've been messing around with REW, and while it doesn't offer any export to AU, it at least gives an idea on what needs to be addressed and how much. Plus, the price is more than fair!

 

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

 

Bill

[Martini]

3 minutes 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

Nice to know and understand that.  👍

[The Computer Audiophile]

59 minutes ago, Marco Klobas said:

I'm wondering how much would they have earned by selling their music instead.

 

In a way, this is kind of like wondering how much a horse and buggy manufacturer would be making if cars weren't invented :~)

[bbosler]

1 hour ago, Martini said:

I've been eyeballing Fab Filter https://www.fabfilter.com/products/pro-q-3-equalizer-plug-in. It looks like a powerful program that is not too difficult to use.

I have used it as a plug in when I was doing Pure Vinyl, and probably still own the license if I could find it. I thought it was very transparent and is very powerful. I abandoned it when I got Audiolense and paid Mitch to design some room correction filters for me.. not inexpensive  either in the world of software, but the results are impressive. A key difference is Audiolense will do time alignment (phase alignment) and the Fab Filter just does EQ. Doesn't FF offer a free trial?

[Marco Klobas]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

In a way, this is kind of like wondering how much a horse and buggy manufacturer would be making if cars weren't invented :~)

 

I see your point. 🙂

[arlese]

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.

[arlese]

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.

 

[arlese]

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.

[bbosler]

8 minutes ago, arlese said:

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

 

I just turned 65 and one of the great pleasures I get from this hobby is discovering new music. Different strokes - different folks

 

8 minutes ago, arlese said:

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

 

Given an artist gets a few cents from streaming compared to a few dollars (I hope)  from selling an album I'm hoping they will continue to offer them for sale. I still buy vinyl and that seems to be holding steady if not expanding so I am optimistic it will continue.

[greyscale]

How is Studio to be made available?. Email or via A+ 3.5 Update??

[RunHomeSlow]

Deadline is coming fast. I'm sure everyone here will backup their 3.5 version and database before being updated.

If you don't know how on a MAC:

 

Create a new folder on the Desktop, Call it Audirvana 3.5 or whatever. In it, create a folder name Playlists...

First, export all your playlists to that folder you just created on your Mac. Yes, one by one :(

Close Audirvana.

Drag out Audirvana of Applications folder while maintaining 'option' key on the keyboard and drag it to the 3.5 folder,

this will make a copy of the software. After, copy the 2 preferences files in your Library with 'option' key also.

Copy with 'option' key the .sqlite file (your database) to the new folder on Desktop.

If you have you serial your can put it there too :)

 

Apple hide the Home Folder in User Library at some time depending on OS System…

When you have clicked your Home Folder, and cannot see the Library Folder in there,

just do a ‘‘cmd J’’ to show the folder settings preferences and see at the bottom…

click Show Library Folder and then you’ll have access to the rest forever.

 

Go to User… Home Folder… Library… Applications Support… Audirvana Folder… and copy the .sqlite in it

 

Go to User… Home Folder… Library… Preferences…

copy com.audirvana.Audirvana-Plus.plist and com.audirvana.Audirvana.plist

 

[Josh Mound]

Very intrigued by this. Audirvana has been my main player for years. What I can't find on the website, though, is more about the playback and system optimization options. Are "Direct" and "Integer" mode still things? If not, what's replacing them? Would love to hear more.