Mac OS X Music Players - alternatives to iTunes
Sep 9, 2014 at 4:09 AM Post #2,251 of 3,495
oh...was there a mailer to the existing Audirvana users? just stumbled onto this thread..
i am reasonably happy with the old version..
cept the on off freezing of my songs as i switch betw them in double quicktime. 
Maybe the memory of my mcAir is maxxed out. :p
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 4:16 AM Post #2,252 of 3,495
 
....so new buyers get it at $74 and long-term supporters get it for $113 total basically ?

 
hmmmm.... i am feeling sorry for myself already. 
tongue.gif

 
Sep 9, 2014 at 4:58 AM Post #2,253 of 3,495
So far so good. Glad that it can load iTunes playlists as that makes management a heck of a lot easier.
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 5:18 AM Post #2,254 of 3,495
Can A+ 2.0 stream to bluetooth speakers ?  I know it degrades the sound, but so far I have only streamed via system audio to my travel BT speaker.
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 7:54 PM Post #2,255 of 3,495
Hm...Audirvana Plus 2.0 doesn't seem to open files directly from Finder. That is not good news....

If you view your library in list view, scrolling in a long list can lag. If you scroll like you would with inertia scrolling (just let the scroll wheel roll on for a while), the scrolling stops after a certain point, instead of continuing.

cept the on off freezing of my songs as i switch betw them in double quicktime.

That happens to me with A+ 2.0.




Off-topic, the sync progress is in the top-right corner of the app.
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 8:05 PM Post #2,257 of 3,495
most important, is there a marked sound improvement on the new 2.0? 
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 8:29 PM Post #2,258 of 3,495
Does it have a mini-player like iTunes ?

Not that I can see from the options.



most important, is there a marked sound improvement on the new 2.0? 

To my ears, I'd say yes. Instrument separation seems slightly better with a blacker background and the soundstage seems deeper to me (being more three-dimensional than two-dimensional compared to the Audirvana Plus 1.5.12). To me the bass also seems to hit a little deeper and a somewhat harsh sound isn't heard with 2.0 (upper-guitar notes and female voices).




Test song of choice:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umohQECJ_rc[/video]


Again these are just my impressions. All of the audio settings are the same between the two versions, so I don't know if what I'm hearing is placebo, or if the difference is really there. XD
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 9:04 PM Post #2,260 of 3,495
LOL, now the 80's clunky receiver type thing GUI is gone, I want to keep 1.5.x !!!
It's grown on me, what can I say
tongue.gif
 
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 9:26 PM Post #2,262 of 3,495
Hmmm... now that A+ 2.0 has its own library interface, are there plans for a separate remote control module?
 
Sep 9, 2014 at 11:41 PM Post #2,263 of 3,495
 
I'll hold off, there were a few 1.5.x revisions that were a bit wonky if I remember. $39 a bit steep for the upgrade....so new buyers get it at $74 and long-term supporters get it for $113 total basically ?

 
checkg my records...i paid 49bucks  a year(jan2013) back. so my damage will be $88
 
Sep 10, 2014 at 12:23 AM Post #2,264 of 3,495
  Hmmm... now that A+ 2.0 has its own library interface, are there plans for a separate remote control module?

 
That was my next question: how do I run this on a headless Mac Mini?
 
Sep 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM Post #2,265 of 3,495
I just want to be able to drop files from folders (CD albums) in Audirvana 2.0 to add to the library like I've been doing so far with every library and/or player. As far as sound is concerned, Amarra 3.0 still in the lead IMO. With my focus shifting to streaming, the library aspect of 2.0 isn't worth much. So when I do need to occasionally play local files, I'd rather use Amarra 3.0 natively and get better sound.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top