|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
217.39.118.145
I'm currently using Audirvana on a Mac Mini, driving an ES2093 DAC into a tube system. I've always liked the sound - I'm a musician and it sounded the most musical of the software packages I tried 3 or 4 years ago.
But soon to be 2017. For the best sound, should I be sticking with Audirvana or migrating to a different software? If so which software, and would the gains be clearly audible or just marginal?
Follow Ups:
Like Abe and Ivan, I enjoy different players and use PureVinyl for LP replay, LMS for Pandora and Somafm and Roon/HQPlayer for my library, TIdal and a few Internet radio stations.
Each has advantages the others don't for the specific applications for which I use them. If Pandora would open their .api to Roon, I could dispense with LMS. The advantage that LMS still has on the other two is that the streaming content is displayed on the squeezebox for quick view and although Roon can control the squeezeboxes, there's no Pandora integration and that's the majority of background music during the day and what my wife uses and understands. I use the same Acourate-generated room correction filters with all three servers. I do think that Roon with HQPlayer sounds better than anything else I'v tried, so I use that setup for all serious listening, however, I never did spend that much time listening to Puremusic. It sounds damn good with vinyl.
Since the cost is pretty low compared to most electronic components, why not try them all?
Since the cost is pretty low compared to most electronic components, why not try them all?
Agree! The cost for player software is very low compared to what many of us spend on hardware. I think it's human nature to stick with what works for us but it's also fun getting out of our comfort zone and trying new stuff. Heck, with free trial offers there's no risk at all except for a small time investment.
i'm still using 1.15.12, mostly for classical as well, and didn't find any reason to "upgrade", not even to any of the 2 versions i tried: yesterday i tried 2.6.2 and still i don't move... :)
Interesting - I'm on A+ 1.5.12.
So no improvement in sound with the later version?
now i tried voices: lieder, opera, some jazz and liked 2.6.2 a little better;
then i tried several big symphonic orchestras and found a little better dynamics and
some more warmness and bloom...
why don't you download the trial 2.6.2, try with care and post your results?
well, when 2 appeared i asked Damien what should be the difference in SQ, and he said: try by yourself, it's free;
so i downloaded the trial version and after a few days i didn't notice any difference, so i didn't buy the upgrade
later on i did the same... again, yesterday i tried 2.6.2 but was unable to find any interesting difference;
just now, a few minutes ago, i compared again 1.5.12 with 2.6.2 by using my touchstone: classical violin;
this time i used a few of the most challenging allegros from Mozart's Complete String Quartets,
by Quartetto Italiano (especially CDs 1 and 2), and didn't find any reason to buy the upgrade either
since i don't care about DSD, streaming, library manager, and the like, i'll continue with 1.5.12
until i find a convincing reason to pay for an upgrade
curiously enough, the marketing of the last version says: improved SQ,
but they don't say what particular sonic parameters are improved!
I followed your advice and downloaded 2.6.2 trial version on my Mac Pro, which I intend to use as my main system. I have 1.5.12 on my other Mac Mini, in the same room for now so I can switch. While I'm just demo-ing this I don't want to disturb my iTunes setup on the Mac Pro. Thing is the instructions really don't help setting this up.
1. I can play tracks in iTunes but I don't know if they are going through A+ or not - how can I check this?
2. When I open the A+ window and try to load up tracks manually I can't seem to drag or drop them in Finder, and I don't know how to import a track period. This should be straightforward!
and check your settings for your dac, and new up sampling choices, etc.
first you shoud see the player on your screen, like in the pic here
second you should open audirvana preferences on the audirvana plus menu (up, left), click on the right last icon (iTunes), then deactivate everything (3 checks)
finally open itunes, then whatever track you double click on will open in audirvana
for more doubts and full details open the user manual, included on your download
once this works, you should go to the rest of icons on the preferences menu and adjust everything...
Thanks for the tips, paco. I went into Preferences > Library and loaded in some tracks, then compared them with the 1.5.12 on my Mac Mini. I can certainly hear a difference in sound quality. The vocals are smoother, more like HQP. Nice string sound too - smoother. The general sound is more airy and less boxy. And also the detail and instrumental timbre that I like in Audirvana in general is enhanced in the new version - I can hear more going on in the mix. Altogether it has a somewhat wider and more pleasant soundscape - easier on the ear. Probably 5% better, but that's audible.I like it....!! I do think it's a step further. And leaving HQP further behind, as I've configured HQP, which is without DSD since my present DAC doesn't support it. I'd call this a result.
Edits: 12/20/16
you're welcome indeed!
yep, 5%... perhaps...i can more or less agree now; but for your comparison to be fair, you should play both versions of A+ on the same computer!! no problem in doing this, just close one version then open the other, and viceversa; Audivarna allows you to use the same player on 2 different computers, just not at the same time...
also, you should make totally sure that you configured the 2 versions exactly with the same values for each parameter on the preferences menu...
It looks like I'll be committing to A+ and buying a new license unless something else comes along. So next question is whether the sound quality is better in native Audirvana rather than using iTunes for the playlists? I have to say that the A+ front end looks pretty similar to iTunes anyway.The better sound quality I'm getting is with the Audirvana front end. So is there any general consensus that A+ sounds better in native mode?
Edits: 12/20/16
as a former user of A, you have the right to upgrade to the last version for less money than new users; ask Damien for any doubts, he will be responsive and kind, as always... ;)
since you desativated iTunes on the A preferences, it should have no effect at all on your A playing; make sure you configurated everything else OK; also, remember that the tracks you play, go to the computer RAM before playing
i've got a huge iTunes library, and are not planning at all to import it to A; iTunes has a much easier library manager
i've got a huge iTunes library, and are not planning at all to import it to A; iTunes has a much easier library managerAgree. I love the way AV+ sounds and I hear no difference using it in "Integrated Mode" with iTunes managing my library vs letting AV+ do it. There shouldn't be any audible difference because either way, AV+ is bypassing Apple's CoreAudio.
I had AV+ many years ago and when they first came out with their own library management, it was horrible. It is much improved now, and I'm still seeing bug fixes in recent releases, but I still prefer iTunes for managing my library and letting AV+ handle the audio. I'm on AV+ 2.6.2 which I believe is the latest release.
I run mostly Roon these days but still fire up AV+.
Edits: 12/21/16
I agree. BUT. . . I've done a lot of "manual overrides" to the metadata of my music files, and, every so often, an upgrade to iTunes or the Mac OS itself will result in the loss of many of these overrides. It's as if the system and/or iTunes has some kind of distant memory of the old (unedited) metadata, and certain upgrades will cause the metadata to revert back to its old (unedited) form. I'm still digging out from the latest iTunes upgrade (where iTunes can no longer find my files on certain albums and I have to lead it by the hand to show where they are), and it's getting VERY frustrating. :-(
Just in the last couple of days, Bloomberg (I think) had an article about how the Mac has become the ugly step-sister over at Apple, with some engineers being pulled off Mac projects to work on iPhone projects, etc., and other engineers resigning and moving to other companies because they see that Apple no longer seems excited about investing their money in a platform which now brings in only about 10% of their profits. Very sad for those of us with Mac histories going back to the mid-80's and who stuck with Apple even during the darkest days of the 90's.
I haven't noticed the loss of manually input metadata in my iTunes library but I have to admit that I haven't used iTunes a lot since playing with Roon. The cool thing with Roon was that it discovered my iTunes library with no user intervention at all and built it's own database to manage. I believe it also pulls in a lot of metadata from it's own service over the internet. For example, missing album art in my iTunes library magically appears in Roon. ;-)
I read a recent stat that mostly agrees with what you said about Mac revenue being fairly small in the grand scheme of things for Apple, but I also read (and have a chart somewhere) that shows MacBook Pro sales far exceeding other laptops in the past few quarters. But, laptop sales are probably a fraction of what we see for smartphones and tablets these days across the board.
I'm happy with my 13" 2012 MacBook Pro. My wife has a newer 2015. We see no reason to upgrade at the moment as they both work perfectly, like the day we bought them.
My son had a Macbook which went wrong 4 times. Each time he had to wait in a queue for hours to see somebody at an Apple store. Despite all this it was never replaced. That's just wretched. The store staff didn't give a damn.
On the other hand, whenever I've had technical problems the geeks at Apple have been great. But that's undoubtedly a couples of levels up in intellect and culture from store staff. Still - the edict "don't replace" clearly comes from the top.
That may be a UK thing, I don't really know.If one requires technical service at an Apple store, setting up an appointment online is recommended and very easy to do. When you arrive at the store you check-in and either walk right up or wait just a few minutes for a tech. Of course, the stores are always packed with people especially around the holidays. Microsoft launched their own store in the local shopping mall just upstairs and across from the Apple Store. They're never busy so I have to assume their service is better. ;-)
A friend bought a MacBook Pro laptop last year. The bluetooth on it was DOA when he received it. He took it back to the store, a tech looked at it, and they replaced it on the spot. It took him about 10 minutes. Of course that was a brand new unit under warranty. I'm not sure how HP, Dell, Lenovo, ASUS, Samsung would have handled it. They don't have local stores that I am aware of.
Edits: 12/23/16
The old one gave up the ghost after 6 years and 2 months. (I was hoping to wait until the new iMacs came out, but c'est la vie!) The configuration of the new one is shown below.
p.s.: Concerning album covers, I like to disassemble some of my CD's back into their LP components using the LP album covers when I rip the CD's to iTunes. The LP covers often differ significantly from the CD booklet covers when the same albums are reissued. Somehow, I think iTunes doesn't like it when I do this.
Wow! That's the top of the line configuration.
I've been wanting a 21" iMac with 4K display for my office but I just use my 2012 laptop with an outboard HP monitor.
Both USB ports are on their last legs, only one is usable for music now plus the battery is about dead with about 1 hour run time on a charge.
It's the low end unit with only 4 GB memory with 128 SSD (near full) so I certainly deserve and upgrade.
That said, it's still working and sounds SO much better when streaming QOBUZ than streaming using the SONOS connect into the same Audio-GD DAC/Headphone amp.
Andy,
I found a positive difference in doing just that - getting rid of the iTunes interface and using the latest A+ without upgrading Mac OS so that direct mode is still enabled..
From memory, our systems are more similar than different...
Shane
. . . Are you sure your levels were matched when you were comparing all this stuff? That in itself could make A LOT of difference in one's subjective impressions.
Good point about levels - I try to match them but don't go as far as a decibel meter. But the sound is just different, and in a good way fortunately. Just starting on Youtube, and even in mp3 it's better. Not hugely but audibly.
It took a little while to get HQP up and running on my Mac. I got a prompt reply to my emails from Jussi and he sent some follow-up emails with filter suggestions. Full marks for that - this is very impressive customer service. This is just the demo version, but it did have some false starts when trying to play tracks. Jury's out on stability - I'm not commenting since it's entirely new to me and I'm not a software geek, I'm a musician.First impression of HQP in default mode was of good vocals - smooth and pleasant. It didn't take long, however, for me to start missing some of the detail and definition in the orchestral parts in the Janacek opera excerpts I was comparing. The individual instruments - strings, wind instruments etc - were somewhat muffled and lacked both attack and timbral definition. The more I listened the more alarmed I got. I switched back and fore and however euphonic the overall sound of HQPlayer undoubtedly is, the detail and focus of inner parts and low level detail isn't what you can get in Audirvana+.
I'm going to regret not having the pleasant sound to vocals in HQPlayer - they did sound less sharp. But..... the whole sound was less sharp. So after comparing about 5 tracks including some Kim Burrell and Claire Martin I'm pretty sure I'm going to stay with A+. It's not perfect but I haven't heard anything better yet. It has the best level of overall musicality and that's what counts for me - I listen to a lot of opera and orchestral detail and timbre is not negotiable!
I haven't, however, had time yet to try out Jussi's other filter recommendations, so this may not be the last word. I also have Audirvana 1.5.12 and it may be the case that Ver 2.0 has better SQ again. But that's my preliminary impressions.
Can anyone else give me a direct comparison between A+ and HQP? I'd like to hear other listeners' impressions, particularly on orchestral and opera.
Edits: 12/19/16
Playback software can only go so far in playing back the typical 16 bit, 44100 Hz CDs. Improvement in one area usually means degradation in another area. I listen to a lot of choral music and I often wish the vocals were better. Computerized reconstruction may be our biggest hope in the future.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Humility is the true mark of genius. Just get used to it."
-Anonymous
Edits: 12/20/16
I upsample everything to DSD 128.
I use poly-sinc-shrt-mp, ASDM7, Bit Rate limit of 49152000,
Vol Max 0db, Vol Min -6 db ( Jussi's recommendation for up sampling to DSD128),
Pipeline DSD, SDM pack Dop.
It also upsamples DSD64 to any of the higher rates (2x, 4x)
without conversion to PCM.
No one else does that, all others convert to PCM first.
No problems at all operationally.
That being said, my Sony HAP Z1 bettered my Lampizator and Mytek Dacs, by no small margin, in direct comparison using same files playing at the same time.
The Sony is too big (deep) for my equipment rack in Den System,
I only use it in Living Room System.
I've been searching for a replacement open Back Rack ( Cabinet, actually).
I feel I wasted the $ on the Mytek and Lampizator Euforia.
I can't wait for Sony's replacement, Z2???
"Vol Max 0db, Vol Min -6 db ( Jussi's recommendation for up sampling to DSD128)"
Sorry, but as an official reseller of the HQPlayer I know for sure that this is not Jussi's recommendation.
He always recommends Vol Max -3 dB. This is to avoid digital clipping in many recordings and to allow for upsampling.
I would also recommend at the same time to enable +6 dB gain for DSD (in DFF/DSF setting menu).
OldmkVI as in Selmer I presume, so another musician?
I'm presently using an ES9023 DAC which doesn't do DSD. However, I have a Soekris I need to install, and that should do DSD. Maybe that will change things. Don't know anything about DSD yet.
Had another listen this morning. Once again struck by how smooth the vocals are in HQP. They're less euphonic in A+, but more defined. And that's it really - definition. A+ is more focussed. Listened again to some Janacek opera. Voices probably better in HQP but the orchestral instruments are less in focus - going towards a bit mushy. Much easier to pick out the timbres of flute versus oboe versus clarinet in Audirvana. They're a bit of a blend in HQP. It's disconcerting. So for all its sweetness, the harder but more defined focus of Audirvana is still the one I want to listen to. It just gets more details in the arrangement right, so the music makes more sense overall. Audirvana was always strong in instrumental timbre - that's why I originally preferred it to Pure Music and Amarra.
OK, 'using' is not exactly what I'm doing, but at least it's loaded on my headless Mac Mini with the hope of someday figuring out how to get it to play nice with my 'library' which is in iTunes and also how to get it to play nice with TIDAL and QOBUZ.
Hopefully soon.
the Direct Mode being disabled on AV+2.6.1/Mac Sierra.
I also use Decible, along w/MC21, HQ, and Korg Audiogate/DS Dac 100.
They all have their uses...
Well, I compared MC 21 , AV+, ( no Direct Mode) and HQ.
Still prefer HQ.
Such is Life.
Selmer?
I thought it was The Cartier Edition?
Selmer Mark VI. Started in 1954 or 5, ended in the 70's ( I think) when they came out with the MK VII.
So they are ALL old , at this point!
THEM, not me...
until the early 60's.
For your Entry-Level playing pleasure.
I used a Bundy Tenor a few times early in my early Classical Tenor career!
The ones I see on ebay are all plastic or have plastic bell and barrel and as I see on the internet the Selmer student instruments with the Bundy name sold in the mid to late 50's were mostly resinite but they did make the Bundy in wood as well.
My teacher was a stickler for tone and would never have allowed a plastic clarinet or a Rico reed to enter his studio!
Hello Andy,
As I'm somewhat new to the whole CA concept, as I've only been doing it since last March, yet having gone through JRiver | Decibel | A+ as tied to my Mac Mini ( 2012 vintage ) which had been optimized for an audio only unit, I tend to view the JRiver software for Mac as an afterthought, and whereas the actual owner of A+ does in fact use a Mac Mini as opposed to some sort of more expensive dedicated Music Server says a lot from where I sit, and then seeming that A+ was created with Mac in mind from the start, well let's just say I'm riding it out as I find in " my system " it's more transparent and organically balanced then said version of JRiver, as well as HQPLAYER.
On the Roon side of things, I've yet to sample......., as I'm not quite sold upon having to be forced to use a NAS, especially having invested in a couple of 1 TB ScanDisk SSD units.
But once again, other then the fact the designer of A+ is still working out a few issues on integrating a means of converting from PCM to DSD on the fly, that doesn't put to much of a load on the Mini's CPU as the current version does, sonically..........., I find it's a simply wonderful sounding audio software program that should only get better in time.
Right now I have a huge music library in iTunes and running Audirvana. I have a small apartment and just listen in the one room at present. So the only thing that would tempt me would be significantly better sound quality.
The impression I've got from reading a lot of posts is that HQPlayer has the edge on A+ for SQ. This gets complicated by several factors - e.g. DSD versus PCM. I have a Soekris 1021-05 DAC I'm waiting to connect up, and not sure how DSD fits into all this. I don't know enough about DSD and how it's implemented.
Andy,
Once again, and as I often put it........, I can only speak on the truth as I hear it. As Abe has pointed out HQPLAYER is a dog as far as how it integrates with ones music library, and then there's the part about how does one select the best sounding filters settings for their particular dac?.
From what I've gathered, it's a very very nice software for getting the best from DSD files, or in my case by merely upsampling them from PCM to DSD 128, and while some are more prone to like one over the other, I tend to reside somewhere in between......., as I can and do live with both upsamplings of DXD 705 and DSD 128 and couldn't in life live without either.
"On the Roon side of things, I've yet to sample......., as I'm not quite sold upon having to be forced to use a NAS, especially having invested in a couple of 1 TB ScanDisk SSD units."
I'm not sure what you mean. I have SSDs on my Mac Mini. I run Roon. I do not have a NAS.
Hello Abe,
As I was merely going by a few postings I've spotted here and CA, it seemed as if everyone was whom was tired to a MicroRendu and Roon seemed to use both Ethernet and a NAS type of storage device, which I'd prefer not to use either.
As someone whom is an apartment dweller, I can't go around having holes drilled into walls coming from our bedroom ( where the cabling service resides ) to the living room, nor like looking at extra footage of cabling ran along the floorboards. Yet I guess in hindsight I've to look closer prior to making said statements.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
In it's simplest implementation Roon does not need a network or NAS. You can simply install and run Roon on your PC/Mac and interact with Roon on your PC/Mac computer screen. No network. No NAS.
If you have a Wifi network you can then use the Roon App on a tablet (iPad or Android) and use the portable tablet to interact with Roon and control your music remotely from the tablet.
Thanks Abe.
I'll look at Roon much much closer then, as I merely misunderstood how it worked........
The only downside for Roon that I see is it's yearly subscription cost, unless you pony up and pay a one-time lifetime license fee. I'm on the pay each year plan until next summer. I'll either subscribe again for a year or pay for the unlimited lifetime license.
Thanks again Abe.
I'm finally getting a feel for both Roon and microRendu:
http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/roon-headless-on-a-nas-with-the-microrendu-initial-forays/
It seems I've a few more options worth looking into after all.
Interesting article / review. Thanks!
The author probably assumed that he needed a NAS for his Roon system so that's the route he took. And since he installed it on a NAS he was of course forced to control it remotely. Most NAS don't attach to a keyboard, mouse, monitor like a PC. Hence his bold type: (ATTENTION: ROON CONTROLLED BY REMOTE DEVICE) .
This doesnt' tell the whole story. One can install Roon on any PC/Mac and use that PC/Mac to control Roon and have it's output drive a DAC that is directly attached to the PC/Mac. I can control Roon from my local Mac keyboard, mouse, LCD monitor AND I can also control it remotely using the Roon App on my iPad or iPhone.
But wait, there's more! I leave Roon running on my Mac in the office but not playing music in the office. I have the microRendu network streamer down in the basement and I take my iPad down there and direct Roon to stream and play music through the microRendu in my basement system instead of up in my office.
But wait, there's more! I can have Roon play in both locations (office & basement) simultaneously..... I can play the same tune or different tunes in each location.
So, in these scenarios my Mac Mini in my office is in fact acting like Network Attached Storage. The music files are stored there but they are being streamed over my network down to the basement microRendu.
The Roon license allows for one Roon Server/Core, but you can have as many 'end-points' as you like. I also stream my music library from the office Mac Mini to our bedroom or family room systems via the small AppleTV boxes in each room. Roon also supports streaming via Apple AirPlay protocol.
So Roon is very flexible. Some folks like to use a dedicated NAS and that works great. But you do not have to use a NAS and you do not have to control Roon with a remote device.
Your welcome Abe.
Back to listening, as well as learning ( as it the one area where one never stops growing ) thanks to guys like you and Mercman, I'm getting there.
IMHO, there is nothing wrong with Audirvana Plus (or Pure Music) as they both sound great and are very versatile with settings to improve sonics. They've been around for a while now but many audiophiles feel the need to have something new and different. To my ears they are both excellent but I slightly preferred Audirvana Plus.However, I never liked how AV+ or PM handled my music library. I have always used them in iTunes integrated mode using iTunes for library management and AV+ or PM to handle the audio. Having iTunes for library management also allowed me to use the iPad Remote app from the comfort of my listening chair, a must have feature for me.
I started experimenting with Roon and HQPlayer to see how well they would handle my music library and to see if they offered the flexibility I needed to manage two of my systems.
I maintain one library on my networked Mac Mini in the office system and also have the microRendu streamer down in the basement setup.
I run Roon on the Mac Mini in my office which directly drives my Mytek DAC over Firewire and I control it with the Roon app on my iPad. I also have the networked microRendu streamer down in the basement. The microRendu is RoonReady. I can use the Roon app on the iPad to 'direct' where the music is to be played (office or basement). Roon also sounds great and it handles my existing music library with no alterations or drama. It discovers my music, provides rich metadata including album art, and it has a well laid out user interface. It looks good on the iPad screen and offers a great way to interact with my music. And, it just works. And it sounds great.
Roon will also integrate with HQPlayer. Unfortunately IMHO, the library management in HQPlayer is a complete dog. It's very ugly, not intuitive and appears to be just an after thought. However, I can run Roon as a 'front end' to HQPlayer. In other words, I can use the metadata rich and very nicely laid out user interface in Roon but have the audio improved a bit with HQPlayer, keeping HQPlayer hidden out of view where it belongs.
HQPlayer offers several options for audio enhancement but it can also be a CPU resource hog depending on how it's being used. I've run Roon with and without HQPlayer and find both scenarios to sound excellent. I slightly prefer it with HQPlayer, especially for certain sample rate conversions, but for the time being I'm just running straight Roon.
Bottom line: What you have is excellent. But it's fun to play with new stuff, especially if it offers additional capability to make ones system a joy to use.
Edits: 12/19/16
If you are on Sierra, there's a problem w/AV+, Direct Mode no longer works.
I don't know how important that is sonically, but I no longer use it.
JRiver MC 21 is good, but HQ Player does more than any other player I have, and I always use it.
2 CH only.
for Audirvana Plus on my headless Mac Mini. Yet to figure out how to set it up.
I'm always late to the party. :-(
Our local Audiophile Society had a 'shootout' using a highly modified Mac Mini owned by a guy who worked for Apple and a number of DACs plus various software and, sad to say, from my point of view JRiver sounded better than either Roon or Audirvana. In fact, Roon was last in the view of many in attendance but I still have will not give my $$ to JRiver.
Regards Roon, the guy running the various players on his Mac partially blamed himself as it seems Roon comes with default settings which may NOT be the best for everyone's taste and those who take time to optimize the setting claim it sounds great.
I have heard Roon sound quite good at shows, etc. and many of the rooms at RMAF this year were using Roon. Plus many who use the uRendu prefer Roon to LMS.
If I ever get a uRendu I may end up with Roon for stored music playback but I will likely still require LMS to stream QOBUZ.
Good luck and do keep us posted if you decide to 'upgrade' from Audirvana.
Hi Ivan303 - I'm used to reading your excellent music posts as a rule, but here we are in software....There's a big buzz about Roon, but I'm simply interested in software. Like Chris from Lafayette, I have a considerable library in iTunes so Audirvana is convenient, but I'm willing to consider other options if they actually sound better.
So JRiver is better sound than Audirvana? Many posts claim JRiver is pretty average.
HQPlayer seems to be the sound quality most rave about. Any experiences with that?
Edits: 12/19/16
and settings.
In fact, I think it was Amarra not Audirvana that I heard as the person doing the demo was using Amarra because of its room correction suite?
Once you start adding room correction, all bets are off when comparing software for sound, as you are never going to be able to comapre apples with apples.
I'm going to be happy with Audirvana as I believe it handles TIDAL and QOBUZ and works with iTunes which is my main library.
Just a matter of finally getting it set up properly.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: