I read your opinion. I don't share it. I hear no difference whatsoever between either one on my Teac UD-501 plus HA-501 with AKG K701 and Beyerdynamic DT800 Headphones. Hence, with sound quality out of the equation, JRiver wins hands down on features.
Like I said in my reply to Lorspeaker, I couldn't tell the difference between either one. Having said that, JRiver's MC20 could potentially sound better than Audirvana if DSF/DFF/SACD sounds better than PCM on your DAC, by setting the output format to DSD or 2xDSD if your DAC supports it. That way, PCM will be sent to your DAC as DSD...
I quote:
MC19 adds the ability to output any audio as DSD (or 2xDSD) to a DSD-capable DAC.
The argument for this new feature is that a DAC might do a better job with DSD than PCM. Certain DAC chips are always running in DSD mode and any incoming PCM will get converted to DSD by the DAC. If you instead do this conversion with a computer, you may be able to achieve higher quality.
JRiver does not have data to substantiate this argument. It is based on conversations with DAC manufacturers. Testing would be interesting.
I downloaded JRiver to hear for myself, relative to Audirvana. I use a late 2013 MBP retina going either (A) direct to the headphone jack or (B) connected via USB to a Fostex HPA3. This goes out to (1) ATH ES10, (2) ATH-900X, or my small Marantz MR603 system with Dali Zensor 1 speakers. Test tracks include full CD quality AIFF, FLAC, then, 256 and 128 AAC.
First impressions...On my MBP retina system the JRiver user interface is kind of junky-looking, the program is clearly not native to OSX and it may be running in some kind of simulated mode...the menus and other components are rendered in a lower resolution than native apps, and so it looks a bit pixelated and junky from the start. If it is running in some sort of layered mode then it may affect performance relative to its native OS (windows?). Audirvana, on the other hand, seems to be running as a proper native software package and it is rendered in full retina resolution. I should also say that I usually use Audirvana in direct mode INT, and I noticed an option in JRiver for INT as well. In some searching around their site, it wasn't obvious what kind of processing is used in JRiver, the guys at Audirvana seem to be more transparent in revealing the guts of their software.
OK, so that was a shorter test than I thought! I couldn't get JRiver to output audio via USB to my Fostex, so I only had the direct headphone jack to use for comparison. I ran out of time to try other fixes. It is strange, since this works fine with every other app (including Audirvana) on my system, JRiver is the first app I can remember trying that couldn't hook up. Audirvana was running in 24-bit/88.2kHz and I cycled through similar settings in JRiver in the preferences.
So...was there any difference playing direct to my headphones? The answer is definitely yes. I could only use my ATH-ES10 (I don't have the adapter handy for the HP jack for the 900X at the moment). These headphones cover the spectrum pretty well, and tend to be excellent at bringing out very rich and textured electric bass guitar tones. In very basic terms, the JRiver sound seems to have good separation but it doesn't have the same chrome smooth shine at high frequencies that Audirvana's processing engine brings to the sound. One thing I really noticed was how natural echos sounded in live recordings, they were rendered cleaner by Audirvana, including Glenn Gould solo Piano (French Suites) and some Howling Wolf live performances. However, I think in some tracks the smoothing and processing of Audirvana can tend to blend things slightly, and in these cases I notice slightly better separation in the output from JRiver...I heard this on some of the CD tracks from Red Hot Chili Peppers By the Way, where some blending was noticed between lead and background vocals.
In any case, I think I will stick with Audirvana Plus...it just works, particularly with USB output in direct INT mode. I also like the cleaning up that Audirvana can do at high frequencies, the frequency spectrum goes to silky fine texture instead of fizziness. I don't dislike JRiver, and the user interface seems like it could be cool, I just think the developers have not spent the time to make it compatible with a MBP, both in terms of the interface (e.g., pixelated low res text and menus) and the hardware functions (e.g., USB-out). I'll be very willing to try it out if a more developed version becomes available in the future.
I'm an analytical person. I need objectivity, unbiased & in depth observations and experience before I make decisions. I just couldn't dismiss something if not all the facts are known to me.
I just think it's funny how those who are opposed to jriver often say stuff like, 'shorter test than expected', and when it becomes clear that the 'A sounds better'-argument doesn't hold any water, the discussion invariably turns to non-essential and subjective arguments about the looks. Some would even go lengths to come up with a sizeable amount of text for the sake of the appearance of thoroughness, while in fact, they probably didn't spend more than 2 hours (if that) evaluating... Which suggests it's a religious thing.
Which is fine by me. To each his own. I spent well over a month on my evaluation of jriver, just to make sure I didn't miss anything. It is a complex piece of software in terms of all features that it offers, and basing a decision on 'first looks' is kinda meh...not my cup of tea. Also, if you don't get it all to work at first you could, you know, check their forums or even -gasp- talk to their developers to see if you missed something obvious. A comment like "I couldn't get JRiver to output audio via USB...so I only had the direct headphone jack to use for comparison." is just plainly absurd. If I read a line like that in any review I seriously start to question the writer's intend of an honest comparison.
What I also like about it is that it comes in Mac, Windows and Linux flavours. It can be remotely controlled (iPad, iPhone, Android, Web), which makes comments about MC's interface kinda moot imo. It also has an awesome DNLA server. Why just the other day I read about some guy who had a mini (Linux) server in his car (connected to a cigaret lighter 12v output) running jriver, remotely controlling it over bluetooth and enjoying High Res music in his car. Just one example of it's usefulness and how it is light years ahead of Audirvana in terms of usability.
Is the interface native on mac? Nope. Would I like one? Absolutely, but since I'm using Jremote for the most part to control it it's just not much of an issue to me and I can enjoy all those features that I have come to appreciate and rely on... features which Audirvana doesn't have and probably won't have for a long time, if ever.
...A comment like "I couldn't get JRiver to output audio via USB...so I only had the direct headphone jack to use for comparison." is just plainly absurd. If I read a line like that in any review I seriously start to question the writer's intend of an honest comparison....
Sorry, but I use a Mac precisely because I don't want to hack and debug everything all the time, and if I pay for a piece of software then I simply want it to work. Why should I have to spend valuable time (which I don't have) to have dialogues with the developers, search through forums, sign-up for (yet) another account, etc.. I don't have time for it, and those are my demands as a customer, feel free to consider them unreasonable if you wish...
Sorry, but I use a Mac precisely because I don't want to hack and debug everythingall the time, and if I pay for a piece of software then I simply want it to work. Why should I have to spend valuable time (which I don't have) to have dialogues with the developers, search through forums, sign-up for (yet) another account, etc.. I don't have time for it, and those are my demands as a customer, feel free to consider them unreasonable if you wish...
Your style of thought in this regard is irrational. The exaggerations in your first line are evidence of that. While you probably (reflexively?) used those words to add weight to your explanation, you seem to underestimate the style of thought of an analytical person.
Also, if you're so pressed for time, as you claim, why are you wasting it on this discussion? You haven't added anything useful so far. You shared a long text, which, while you intended it to be a direct comparison between Audirvana and JRiver Media Center, ended up being an admission of incompetence. Time wasted in my opinion.
Using Audirvana+ 2.0.4 with iMac. I'm in shuffle mode and have to keep hitting command-L to have it show what's playing in the list. Is there a way to get the list's focus to follow the song being played?
I'm using Audirvana+ v2.0.4 on iMac and have a 96/24 file feeding WA7. But, my Mac shows that it's setting a high of 48k. If I switch that to internal speaker, it switches to 96k. Why? Is it something with A+? Mac? WA7?
One of the issues is that I just experienced what others have. I'd synced some new music from iTunes, so I thought maybe I would have that problem. Just bought two albums and synced those. All the music disappeared from A+ except those two albums. Trying a re-sync at the moment. Using A+ 2.0.4 with iMac.
I tried a few apps and settled on Audirvana Plus v2.0.6 for the moment. Sounds good, and accepts Audio Units filters, which is very important to me as I want to use 24 bit parametric EQ in my audio pipeline. It also plays every file type I have (mp3, aac, flac, ape, SACD iso, dsf, dff) I am not interested in using iTunes at all so I just use the native Audirvana mode, which does everything I want, but there are some small bugs.
Tried Vox, but there were too many issues. Tried JRiver, but the interface was so awful. Other than the interface it seems capable.
Using Audirvana+ 2.0.4 with iMac. I'm in shuffle mode and have to keep hitting command-L to have it show what's playing in the list. Is there a way to get the list's focus to follow the song being played?
Hello all,
I am new to Audirvana Plus and currently running v2.0.8. My experience has been very positive thus far. I evaluated Amarra, BitPerfect, and a couple of other players before settling in on A+. The one thing that I decided early on was not to sync the iTunes and A+ libraries. I have thousands of tracks in my iTunes that I have collected over the past 10+ years and it has varying recording quality and quite frankly some junk that needs to be cleaned up.
With A+, I setup a separate directory just for hi-res albums and organized it by Genre. While A+ is not feature rich like iTunes, I found it very helpful in cataloging, searching, and meta-tagging the tracks for easy playback through filtering.
I am interested to hear from those that are using A+ on what tricks they are using to improve the experience with the player? I am currently waiting on the remote control app.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
