Is there a big difference in quality using Audirvana or JRiver?

[trcns]

I am using JRiver on a dedicated PC from last three years for my music listening and I do sit down and play my music for an hour or two. Now I started reading about Audirvana and people's comments are leaned towards Audirvana for serious listening.

 

For me switching to Audirvana means is buying a MAC computer, and re-doing my play lists, is it worth?

[One and a half]

The recent comments on Audirvana are well justified. The SQ has taken another step toward the 'better', not quite sure how Damien Plisson works that magic, but it works.

 

Yes, Audirvana + is only available on OSX and that requires an Apple computer, or if you're the masochistic type, a hackintosh is also a solution, albeit hit or miss there.

An Apple computer can also virtualise a Windows, even Win10, very well indeed, so if OSX is not to your comfort level, you have another Windows machine to work with and the machine won't be a brick. I lean towards Windows just because I'm used to it, but OSX is like built for left handers, everything is there but in a different spot. Besides, Google is a big help and many around here use OSX, so problem solving is at hand.

 

Suggest a ubiquitous Mac Mini, the i7 model with 16GB Ram, SSD hard drive or the hybrid SSD and spinning drive depending on the library size. Others may offer a solution to playlists, I don't personally use them, just an album to drag and drop.

 

For Jriver, well, they will tell you it doesn't matter which player you use, they sound the same. Yeah well, my ears don't follow that philosophy, I listen to Audirvana + a lot more than Jriver these days, although HQ Player is my go to on Windows 7 at the moment.

 

I need to tell you the library management on A+ still has holes in it very much a WIP, the indexer is slower than Jriver and metadata for one, and auto updates on a network share don't. If you drag an drop an album, then the library management may not be an issue for using A+. If you have metadata up to date in Jriver, there's usually not a difficult problem for A+ to import. The exception is DSD. Jriver 20 did not alter the metadata in DSD files, so used MP3Tag and that big job is over now.

 

Is the change to OSX and Audirvana worth it. (Pause) I would say yes.

[One and a half]

Further to playlists, Version 2.2.1 of A+ has support for m3U playlists. Jriver should export these?

[xsajohn]

Windows vs Mac is always a touchy subject here - religion and all that. I own both - 2 Macbook pros with Audirvana and 2 windows PCs with the likes of Audiophile Optimizer, HQplayer, Jplay and JRiver, Roon, Fidelizer.

 

For me it's a wash. Depending on the latest version/upgrade of the various players, I find both Windows and Mac OS X can sound very good. (You can also tweak the hardware ad finitum with Linear, regulated PSUs, cables, SSDs etc.)

 

But then half the pleasure of this hobby is in the experimentation -so I'd say play away and let your own ears be the judge!

[Foggie]

I think you need to decide which platform suites you best and stay with that or if you are tech savvy enough and have the means to try mac / win then by all means do so. It's the only way you can find out for yourself what works in your system. I don't think any one platform is so superior to make someone change over completely. Again unless you have the means and time to try for yourself.

 

That being said, I have recently gone the other route. I tried Jriver 21 (mac) for the first time and it is a very different animal for sure. I have been using A+ as my primary as well as the latest version with remote and it is great. The SQ with the latest version is fantastic but is still a work in progress though.

 

My main reason for trying Jriver is the PCM > DSD capability (A+ cannot) and library mgmt/remote abilities. If PCM to DSD isn't a concern, then A+ with remote is highly recommended.

 

As far as sound quality between the two - hard to say a this point. There is a difference for sure and what sounds better to me that has BOTH good library mgmt and remote capabilities - I'm still figuring out.

 

For me though, I think the user experience/workflow is a very important factor and for many, that extra .01% of sound quality trumps the user experience. I for one am growing weary of it

[trcns]

I am using JRiver since last three years, I use bdpoweramp for ripping and metadata. I create my playlists in excel and than convert into text and change the extension to m3u. The community support is great always there to help.

 

Changing to MAC means $2000 to $3000 for new laptop plus converting every thing over. Though I am planning the add SSD hard disk in my pc which is just $400. I am not using DSD music today but I just purchased Aesthetix Pandora eclipse which is capable of playing DSD without converting to PCM. I also tried Fidelizer with JRiver which makes no difference. If difference between the two is .01% than question will be is it worth?

[YashN]

Why not try HQ Player on the PC?

[sdolezalek]

I would agree with Yash. Try HQPlayer first. Yes, it is more difficult to learn and has a user interface that is nowhere near as easy to learn as JRiver or Audirvana, but a lot of people around here (myself included) think it is the best sounding of all the players when properly set up and when you apply upsampling. If you can't hear a difference between JRiver and HQPlayer then you probably wouldn't hear the benefits of Audirvana either (and you save yourself the money of buying a Mac).

 

I use both PC and Mac platforms (using Roon and HQPlayer on my Windows machine) and (Audirvana and Roon) on my Mac. To me, both HQPlayer and Audirvana sound better than Roon and all three sound better than JRiver, but the first two benefit from upsampling and less aggressive filters and the differences between Roon and JRiver are slight (although i much prefer the roon UI)

[trcns]

If all of you believe that Audirvana + sounds better than I will switch, skipping all other options. I asked this question because every time I go to a high end Audio dealer for sampling they are with MAC and either Amara or Audirvana +. There five people who answered my question, Can all five agree on "Audirvana + sounds better than JRiver"? So I could justify buying MAC MGXG2LL/A?

[EuroDriver]

Which DAC are you using ?

 

What is the spec of your audio PC ?

 

At the present time, if you can be happy with the HQ Player interface, then HQ Player on Windows 10 doing PCM to DSD conversion can give you SQ way ahead of MAC OS with the same software, and better than A + which can't do PCM to DSD

[coot]

I have five players of which I prefer A+ 2.x. That said, after years of jumping through the technical hoops, I am tired. My new Aurender N100H will be here next Thursday. Can't wait to leave (most of) that fuss behind.

 

Happy Birthday to me!

[trcns]

I have Micentosh mx121, w&b 802d speakers, krell s1500 amp and tar lab cables. Connected to a PC lenovo Q180 via bell canto ulink. Using jriver with .flac bit perfect music. But there is no satisfaction I have. Now I am looking to buy Aesthetix Pandora Eclipse.

[jriver]

I am using JRiver since last three years, I use bdpoweramp for ripping and metadata. I create my playlists in excel and than convert into text and change the extension to m3u. The community support is great always there to help.

 

Changing to MAC means $2000 to $3000 for new laptop plus converting every thing over. Though I am planning to add SSD hard disk in my pc which is just $400. I am not using DSD music today but I just purchased Aesthetix Pandora eclipse which is capable of playing DSD without converting to PCM. I also tried Fidelizer with JRiver which makes no difference. If difference between the two is .01% than question will be is it worth?

Speaking for JRiver, I wouldn't recommend switching to Mac if your concern is audio quality. The quality will be the same, in spite of what some people will say.

[Mystic]

Speaking for JRiver, I wouldn't recommend switching to Mac if your concern is audio quality. The quality will be the same, in spite of what some people will say.

 

I wouldn't expect any different answer from you to be honest. In my Mac system A+ definitely has better SQ than JRiver. I have read though that the JRiver for PC is better sounding than their Mac counterpart, but I have no way to test that.

[jriver]

I wasn't comparing Audirvana with JRiver. The comment was addressing Mac vs. PC, and there is no inherent difference when using JRiver.

 

Not that anyone who disagrees will be persuaded by testing, but Mitchco did a nice job of proving this:

 

Computer Audiophile - JRiver Mac vs JRiver Windows Sound Quality Comparison

[jriver]

If you are comparing players, you should make sure the volume levels are equal. A very small difference will sound better.

[Mystic]

I wasn't comparing Audirvana with JRiver. The comment was addressing Mac vs. PC, and there is no inherent difference when using JRiver.

 

Not that anyone who disagrees will be persuaded by testing, but Mitchco did a nice job of proving this:

 

Computer Audiophile - JRiver Mac vs JRiver Windows Sound Quality Comparison

 

Alright, but the name of the thread...[h=1]Is there a big difference in quality using Audirvana or JRiver?[/h]

[speavler]

Audirvana 2.X on a mac mini booted from flash memory card, internal hard drive unmounted, CAD optimization script enabled, music streamed from NAS.

 

At a very minimum, try out Fidelizer on your PC.

[jriver]

Alright, but the name of the thread...[h=1]Is there a big difference in quality using Audirvana or JRiver?[/h]

 

The OP, trcns, also talked about whether he needed to buy a Mac to get better sound. There are a lot of Mac users here and they seem very vocal about their choice. Sometimes this comes across as being an endorsement of the sound quality of a Mac.

[Paul R]

Slow down a bit my friend. Why would you want a laptop for a music server? A $699 Mac Mini is perfectly well suited for that, can can run OS X, virtualized Windows, or Windows native on the machine with no OS X at all. It can run headless and you can control it right from your laptop. You want SSD? it is readily available at good prices, internal or external. Or USB3, or Firewire.

 

Doesn't matter a bit, the Mac will handle them all.

 

You can order that $699 Mac Mini (i5 @ 2.6ghz w/Turboboot to 3.1ghz) with 256g of PCIe Flash storage instead of a spinning disk, and 16gb of RAM, for $1,099. If you need more processing power, $300 more gets you a 3.0gz QuadCore i7 w/turboboost to 3.5ghz.

 

Add in a terabyte USB3 portable disk (or whatever size you need) and that will hold, playback, and manage a fairly hefty music library, and sound really great with JRMC *or* Audirvana+ *or* Amarra *or* HQPlayer *or* Windows and JRMC *or* ... well, you get the idea.

 

Also, I personally do not hear much of a difference between JRMC and Audirvana+. A little, yes. Mostly *different* though, not at all sure it is *better*. And not enough to get me to change operating systems if I really liked JRMC on Windows.

 

 

 

I am using JRiver since last three years, I use bdpoweramp for ripping and metadata. I create my playlists in excel and than convert into text and change the extension to m3u. The community support is great always there to help.

 

Changing to MAC means $2000 to $3000 for new laptop plus converting every thing over. Though I am planning the add SSD hard disk in my pc which is just $400. I am not using DSD music today but I just purchased Aesthetix Pandora eclipse which is capable of playing DSD without converting to PCM. I also tried Fidelizer with JRiver which makes no difference. If difference between the two is .01% than question will be is it worth?

[Gonzbull]

I think A+ is great. I haven't touched a PC in the last 12 years at least so sorry for the bias. I own and operate a small recording studio and Macs just work. Hate being a slave to the Apple Monster but it just works for me.

I'd recommend a 2012 Mac Mini with as fast a processor as you can afford if you don't want to go new. Chuck in an SSD and max the RAM.

External HDD for music storage as mentioned before.

Good as Gold. We'll close enough.

[zackthedog]

As others have said, the Mac Mini is a terrific, versatile little machine. I love mine, and can switch from OSX to Windows easily, which allows me to use any software I want.

 

That said, a very cheap experiment would be to try HQ Player on your current machine. Download the trial software, don't bother with setting up a library. Just drag and drop some FLAC files into the main window. Set the preferences to the highest upsampling rate your DAC will handle, set the filter to "poly-sinc" and the the diher to "TPDF" for starters. See if you hear an imporvement.

[Skeptic]

JRiver just added the option to switch dither from their "bit-exact dither" (a misnomer in my opinion) to TPDF dither in 21.0.7 for Windows.

I assume this option will also appear in the Mac/Linux builds shortly.

This should finally address any lingering quality concerns about JRiver's playback engine.

 

Not only do I think it's ridiculous that someone would consider buying a new Mac just for a single music playing application (assuming they were not already looking to buy a new computer) I also don't think that there's any advantage to it.

If anything, playback seems less robust on OS X compared to Windows - I use Windows desktops and Apple notebooks.

And JRiver makes more sense once you have more than one computer, especially if you're using more than one platform, as you can buy a master license and run it on everything.

[Paul R]

JRiver just added the option to switch dither from their "bit-exact dither" (a misnomer in my opinion) to TPDF dither in 21.0.7 for Windows.

I assume this option will also appear in the Mac/Linux builds shortly.

This should finally address any lingering quality concerns about JRiver's playback engine.

 

Not only do I think it's ridiculous that someone would consider buying a new Mac just for a single music playing application (assuming they were not already looking to buy a new computer) I also don't think that there's any advantage to it.

If anything, playback seems less robust on OS X compared to Windows - I use Windows desktops and Apple notebooks.

And JRiver makes more sense once you have more than one computer, especially if you're using more than one platform, as you can buy a master license and run it on everything.

 

Opinions are like certain anatomical parts, everyone has one and they all smell bad to most everyone else.

 

I would point out, Apple has never had a Blue Screen of Death - until people starting boot camping Windows on them...

[Skeptic]

I would point out, Apple has never had a Blue Screen of Death - until people starting boot camping Windows on them...

As I said, I use both Windows and Apple devices.

 

The Mac equivalent is a Kernel Panic.

Prior to that, it was the bomb. Classic Mac OS was horrible.

 

BSODs are as uncommon as Kernel Panics these days and typically indicate faulty hardware.