zoom25 said:

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.

Click to expand...

I'd like that feature too.

Unfortunately my library isn't with iTunes since I listen to albums in DXD, FLAC, and DSD formats and I don't think dropping $190 for those playback options in Amarra is really worth the price. I'm sure the sound quality differences aren't that big either and I think it would be a better choice for me to just save the difference in money for something else that would make a larger difference in sound quality (e.g. headphones or more music).

just curious..how much better in sound is the amarra over the audirvana..
welcome any personal views. Just throw it out. 

lorspeaker said:

just curious..how much better in sound is the amarra over the audirvana..
welcome any personal views. Just throw it out. 

Click to expand...

I've been auditioning music players for the last couple months, Audirvana, Amarra, and JRiver. I've also got Bitperfect, VOX, and the FLAC plus music player on my iPhone. IMO Amarra 3.0 wins in the best sound category. It's fuller, warmer, and has a more natural/analog type sound. Audirvana+ sounded more clinical and less engaging than Amarra, but still very nice. JRiver's music organiser is first rate and it plays FLAC and DSD without a hitch. JRivers sound is pretty good but not on pair with Amarra and Audirvana+. Bitperfect is better than nothing if your using iTunes. For a super simple music player, and free, VOX isn't half bad at all.

lorspeaker said:

  just curious..how much better in sound is the amarra over the audirvana..
welcome any personal views. Just throw it out. 

Click to expand...

 
For me Amarra has better resolution throughout the FR. Better bass kicks and much better tracking. Mids are more neutral and so you can really get a sense of what's going on. Audirvana in comparison in intimate and a bit too smoothed over. You probably wouldn't realize this if you have been using Audirvana for a while like I had since 2010. Although after a month of using Amarra, Audirvana doesn't really compare for me. It's a bit bland and lacks the ability to grab the music by it's balls. For me I noticed the difference in sound reproduction within minutes. 
 
A lot of people here equate the pricing, performance, U.I., library and technicalities, which is fine and justified of course. However, to me there are two reasons why I absolutely cannot go back to Audirvana (at it's current sound).
 
1) Sound merit - More resolution, transparency, neutral presentation etc. I find Amarra the more technical player but that isn't the reason why I can't go back to Audirvana
 
2) Fun & Engaging - This is THE reason why Amarra has gotten me. I sincerely tried to go back to Audirvana to see if I could get used back to it, but couldn't do it. The main reason I listen to music or get different players isn't to see which one is the most technically advanced in it's programming or features. It's for how much fun I can get out each time I hit play. It didn't make sense for me to go back to something that wasn't as fun in comparison. Also, by fun I don't mean to insinuate coloured FR. I find it rather neutral in FR and presentation of elements (vocals, instruments, soundstage). It just happens to be that I have a lot of fun every time I listen.
 
Amarra comes with a 15 day demo period, so I definitely suggest you try it out. It's free and effortless to download.
 
Also, the Amarra SQ app for streaming is really good as well and shares the same sound as Amarra 3.0. In a way, the Amarra SQ at $29 is more important to me with all the videos and audio streaming I do.

u guys are seeeeriousss...my pocket just knelt down to beggg me.

Oh another thing I don't like about A+ 2.0 is that if you view your library in list view and you double-click a song to play, the entire list gets added to the playing cue instead of just the 1 song.

I'll probably hold off on buying the upgrade from A+ 1.5 until the UI gets patched up since I find it hard to use for what I do with my music playback flow.

currawong said:

  So far so good. Glad that it can load iTunes playlists as that makes management a heck of a lot easier.

Click to expand...

 
whew..my playlists on Itune will be ported over ...comforting.  
ok i will wait a month for bugs to be fixed..n hopefully the price to come down. 
Dun see y i should be paying MORE than current signons 
 
Will check out the AMARRA too.. ouch$$$
(will AMARRA grab over my ITUNE playlists too??)

When I switched to a Mac last year I tried various music players. I don't remember the specifics in sound quality but I remember I felt I like Amarra and Audirvana + were pretty much on par just differently flavored. My preference was for Amarra but and despite the clunky and glitchy UI I was almost bought it until I found out it didn't do gapless with FLAC. I'd be curious to try it again if this has since been rectified in the latest version?

Anyone using A+ know how the settings below would affect the sound in the iZotope advanced parameters (ignoring the upsampling which would be set to none in both configs)....
2nd screen shot is standard fresh install config.
 
I could not find much in the manual about these 5 slider settings....

 

lorspeaker said:

   
whew..my playlists on Itune will be ported over ...comforting.  
ok i will wait a month for bugs to be fixed..n hopefully the price to come down. 
Dun see y i should be paying MORE than current signons 
 
Will check out the AMARRA too.. ouch$$$
(will AMARRA grab over my ITUNE playlists too??)

Click to expand...

Amarra plays iTunes in hi res but I prefer turning off iTunes and porting AIFF hi res directly onto the playlist.  My only experience is with Pure, Bitperfect and FLAC.  Amarra can be bought at a discount, seek and you will find 

For folks on JRiver, JRiver 20 for both Mac and windows is live!

kiats said:

For folks on JRiver, JRiver 20 for both Mac and windows is live!

Click to expand...

I must say the sound of the JRiver 20 upgrade on my MBP is growing on me.

does it actually sound any different than JR 19?  or are the changes more functional?
 
If it does sound different, how would you describe the change?
 
thanks

elnero said:

  When I switched to a Mac last year I tried various music players. I don't remember the specifics in sound quality but I remember I felt I like Amarra and Audirvana + were pretty much on par just differently flavored. My preference was for Amarra but and despite the clunky and glitchy UI I was almost bought it until I found out it didn't do gapless with FLAC. I'd be curious to try it again if this has since been rectified in the latest version?

Click to expand...

I don't think I have problems with gapless playback on Amarra. I run it natively only nowadays. All flac files. I have multiple continuous/mixed albums so gapless playback is a must for me. I am sure I would have noticed that by now. I'll confirm for you later when I get home.

bixby said:

does it actually sound any different than JR 19?  or are the changes more functional?

If it does sound different, how would you describe the change?

thanks

Click to expand...

For myself. I find that it's more transparent and detailed. Slightly more musical too. But I think it best you DL it for the 15 day free trial and have a listen for yourself. That way you can decide if it's worth your while to update to version 20.