Downloaded and installed Audirvana last night. It’s been playing music since then. I’ll do comparative listening tests vs Roon at the 25, 50, 250, 5000 and 1250000 hour marks to ensure the software is adequately burned in.
11 Likes
I don’t know, I hear 5million hrs is the sweet spot for burn in on software, it’s why the cloud streaming services are so popular these days… 
S/if it wasn’t apparent 
10 Likes
Here is the 25 hour burn-in test results!
Audirvana is a freaking finger twister when I try to type it. It’s starting to irk me. From here on out, I’m just using A+. kk, thx, bye.
First off, I dug around the two interfaces to ensure settings were the same. I am running Roon basically stock, as the only settings I have ever configured were for the Bifrost 2.
Roon settings:
.
Settings for A+:
Ensuring no volume leveling, up-sampling, DPS, EQ, VST3, or other sound related settings were different between the two players, I can confidently state that my initial impressions are that:
-
There is no sound difference that I can hear when both are run in exclusive mode.
-
Roon’s interface is vastly superior.
-
Audirvana crashed 3 times on me during use. I think the issue is that A+ does not enjoy changing settings while playing back music at the same time. I was experimenting, see below.
So, I tried to see what could make A+ sound better than Roon. I turned on upsampling, volume leveling, turned exclusive mode off and back on again, I disabled DSD and/or MQA processing, enabled DSD and/or MQA processing… basically everything in the A+ menu that I thought could make a difference, I tweaked it.
What I DIDN’T do was run Roon in non-exclusive mode through Windows 10. I’m not going to intentionally gimp Roon just to make A+ sound better.
Oversampling confirmed
So, enabling up-sampling and “preserve album dynamics” did have an audible effect while DIRECTLY comparing playback to Roon. Note - I can’t say it was always different, or that it was a bad different, or even a good different. Sometimes it just sounded a little softer. Sometimes it felt less engaging. Honestly, I think I can chalk up the differences to mismatched volumes thanks to turning on the ReplayGain. When it was disabled, it made noticing any perceived differences way harder.
Basically, I think the differences are completely in the realm of placebo and confirmation bias plausibly being the only difference between the sound of these two programs on my system. I may have heard differences, but I don’t know if I really did, and while I don’t think I did, it’s possible they were there. I’m committing to that answer. Maybe.
I think the long and short of it is, for me, if there IS an improvement in A+'s sound then either
A) I’m deaf and can’t hear it, or
B) The improvement is so small that I won’t be giving up Roon’s user experience for A+.
Audio chain is: PC > Bifrost 2 > ECP Ravenswood 3F > ZMF Auteur Ltd (Cocobolo).
Source files were all CD ripped FLAC or uncompressed WAV files at 16/44.1 or were streamed from Qobuz.
Some of these songs were used for evaluation: https://open.qobuz.com/playlist/2568985
11 Likes
I think these things fall into the realm of being that final 1-3% improvement realm (arbitrary % so don’t go quoting me lol).
Getting off plane…I’ll try and revisit later…
Waiting for luggage… So, I think (not a scientist or engineer) based on my limited experience in this field/world…that software based players fall in the realm of DACs…but, further removed and even less of a difference in sound difference.
But, that being said, they still can have a noticeable difference, for better or worse.
One thing I’ve found that helps me personally to spot a difference is total immersion for preferably a week, than switching back to the previous norm I’ve established. I can usually, but not always spot smaller changes.
Once again this is just my experience and not without faults or bias. Also, I have not done this with Roon and Audirvana. Any above statements are based off audio memory (which humans are notoriously bad at on the averages).
I’ll probably pick up Audirvana here soon, I like Roons service, but my actual FLAC collection wouldn’t do its service justice.
8 Likes
I started with Audirvana back in 2017 (v2), I’ve had a free upgrade to the latest version ever since. I recently spent some additional coin on converting my lic from Mac-only to cross-platform so I could install on Win 10.
I enjoyed Audirvana very much until, as my media library grew, I noticed constant hangs with the software loading the library. My media library is stored across a bunch of USB 3 external HDD drives and my music rig is a MBP 2015 (i5, ssd, 8gb ram) and only runs Audirvana. Anyway, the hangs became such a problem that I was forced to look for alternatives and found Roon.
Roon does not hang at all and can very happily manage large media libraries. Media library management (or purely loading the damn library) was the only reason for me to switch. I don’t notice a huge difference in the sound - other than Audirvana does sound marginally smoother, marginally, I have noticed that but it’s really a secondary consideration.
I still run both - it’s just that Audirvana merely plays from Qobuz or Tidal and Roon plays either of those + my media library. Having used both for a couple of years, Roon’s interface/library management and UX seems signifcantly more mature, it’s very stable for me. I have Roon Remote installed on an old iPad for when I’m in full relaxation mode and want to untie myself from the PC. Although, Roon is a fully fledged music server and it is expensive, so I think feature comparisons to Audirvana are a tad unfair - they do different things and have different objectives.
Perhaps Roon will incorporate support for other players in the future, like they already do for HQPlayer, so those using Audirvana and the like can plug-in to Roon as the processing software while Roon handles everything else. I don’t know how likely that is but it’s possible I guess.
4 Likes
Comparison Roon vs. Audirvana (latest versions as of Jan.14 2021)
Equipment used
- Win10 laptop with local music library
- Burson Audio Conductor 3X Reference
- Empire Ears Legend X
- proprietary Burson WASAPI driver
Preconditions
- Roon & Audirvana use the same proprietary Burson Audio driver
- Same song/passage is played over and over again on both apps to discern audible differences
Restrictions
While you can have both apps open at the same time with the same song/progress,
it is only possible to play from Audirvana while Roon runs in the background NOT vice versa.
Roon complains that another app is using the output device. So instant switching is not really possible but requires to restart at least Audirvana (which, in stark contrast to Roon goes quick).
Personal conclusions
Sound Quality
When I first played the song on Audirvana, then on Roon, I was sure to hear a discernable difference.
Audirvana playback, to my ears, sounded more full and musical in contrast to a leaner, cleaner representation on Roon.
However, after switching back and forth several times, I am not so sure anymore. I believe they sound the same. This to me is no surprise as, in my case, both use the output via Bursons proprietary driver.
I do believe though there can be differences when using the “onboard” outputs from Audirvana and Roon: When I first used Roon with the Burson, Roon automatically used it’s own ASIO driver. After switching to the WASAPI driver from Burson, I noticed quite a difference in sound quality: The Burson WASAPI driver sounds a lot better.
So I guess it’s really up to what driver/output method is used and if your DAC manufacturer has a proprietary driver.
Price/Usability
I don’t care as I was lucky to be gifted a lifetime Roon license, but would have never paid a ridiculous 699 $! For that price you can get a very nice piece of equipment. I think Roons prices are outrageous,
at least for my use case. I could live without many of Roons features as I care only about the ultimate sound.
That being said, Audirvana clearly lacks in terms of the user interface design and handling of album infos. But: When first starting Audirvana, it helped me to get set up whereas I still struggle to find stuff (like EQ etc.) on Roon. As context: I am UX/UI designer myself and know good and bad interfaces when I see them.
Roon
(+/-) sound quality dependent on output/driver
(+) nice and clean album representation
(+/-) modern but cluttered interface
(+) many options (maybe too many)
(+) correct display of album art/info
(-) navigation can be complicated
(-) horizontal library scrolling awkward when using a desktop/laptop
(-) many “hidden” options that are hard to find
(-) very long startup time
(-) very very expensive (699$ for lifelong license)
(-) license can only be installed on 1 machine (ridiculous at that price)
Audirvana
(+/-) sound quality dependent on output/driver
(+) lean, readable interface
(+) “natural” vertical library navigation (scrolling)
(+) setup wizard helps you get started quickly
(+) no “hidden” options
(+) quick startup
(-) interface performance is slow (when navigating library)
(-) interface design could be more modern
(-) album art/info not always displayed correctly
(+) a lot cheaper than Roon (96$ at the time of writing)
(+) 2 parallel installs possible
11 Likes
Roon integrates well with Sonos. I don’t know about Audirvana. Does Audirvana have the database that helps with music discovery? I find I read Roon as much as listen with it.
2 Likes
I believe not. It’s just a player. Which for me is enough. I like to discover new music too, but not for almost 7-fold the price.
2 Likes
I try to be simple and objective since I’ve read some unkind reply in the thread.
If you need the extra functions included in Roon (organising a streaming library is a good example) simply go with it and you won’t regret.
Otherwise save money and use Audirvana.
I use a MacBook and use Roon, Audirvana and Amarra.
I perceive some differences but each service/app is great and has a good quality sound (as flaws).
Roon is the best for organize your library.
Audirvana sounds to me better (to my ears, no science sorry, just my ears).
Amarra has a very good equaliser in comparison to Audirvana and I like it when I need to equalise music from my Mac (better for the way I equalise, no absolute statement. Better for the subject who’s writing).
Choose what you need more and be sure each way you’ll have great sounds.
I hope this helps
3 Likes
At that price you can buy a lot of music effectively 
4 Likes
I got the Roon Black Friday 3 months at $1 deal, along with free trials for Audirvana and JRiver. I ended up paying for Audirvana.
I can see why people love Roon, but I don’t think I’m the target audience, because I do almost all my listening at my desk, so I just need a music player on my Windows 10 PC with a good interface, and I didn’t think that Roon gave me anything over Audirvana to justify the additional expense.
Interestingly, JRiver was the front runner at first, but I got really annoyed at how it handled albums with multiple artists, shoving them into a ‘Multiple Artist’ folder. I’d prefer my music player to use the Album Artist (if I’ve used it) or else the Artist.
Over time, I found that I subconsciously “reached” for Audirvana more than the other 2, so I based my purchase decision on that.
12 Likes
Anybody use audirvana and roon recently? Upgraded to 1.8 and noticed it sounds “worse.” More specifically, it sounds very thin compared to audirvana (made my Clears sound bright and lean). I’m not really into the whole this software sounds better than this but it was just something I noticed. I was wondering if anybody experienced the same thing…
1 Like
I’d let the dust settle with Roon 1.8. I think there will be some “unbug releases.” Audirvana sounded better to me in v1.7. I tested it (Roon 1.8) to see that it worked and went back to my other stuff. Sounds like a few angry folks on the Roon forums, but it’s typical for the big Roon rollouts.
Most of my listening is done via Aurender server or Bryston transport with the files supplied via NAS or attached. Software is not as powerful, but the sound is superior.
2 Likes
Yeah I found audirvana did sound better vs 1.7…but not by much compared to 1.8
Anyway, good advice on letting the dust settle!
1 Like
By the way, have you tried hqplayer? I’ll probably do a free trial and see if I like it myself, but was wondering if you (or anybody) has experience with it and like it…
Yes, Version 3 with my imac. I used it through Roon for awhile. There is a learning curve. I think Audirvana sounds better than Roon head to head. HQ Player would probably even that out.
I’ve been using other hardware outside of Roon, and like the music sound presentation better.
1 Like
How do you think the Aurender sounds compared to Roon? I have only tested it a couple of times about 2 years ago and I remember liking it. Would you use Aurender over Roon if you could only choose one?
IMO, Aurender by a good margin, Second would be Bryston BDP-2 IAD using MPD. Both better (Than) Roon in my rig. This comparison is using the same DAC, a W4S DAC2v2se Anniversary. The internal DAC on the Aurender A10 is also excellent (dual mono AK4490).
You can also use Roon RAAT with the Bryston, and can cast Roon to the Aurender.
Anecdotal evidence seems to be piling up that streaming, even standard 16/44, is not as consistent and bits-is-bits as it seems like it would be.
It’s hard to isolate where the differences lie since most of the time it’s not known exactly what master the stream is starting with.
I’ve started a cd-ripping project recently and I found myself asking “Why does this cd rip sound better than I remember from streaming?”.
I don’t have any level-matched A/B comparisons or anything that organized. It just seemed like the cd rips were better which I wasn’t expecting.
Thanks, I’ll probably check out the free trial!
Kind of miss the sound of Amarra though. Last I heard it I liked the sound of it over both roon and audirvana. Unfortunately, that piece of software is unusable.
1 Like