HQPlayer v4 released

The way I use inputs is through RME ADI-2 Pro. This way I can get convolution engine (digital room correction) for analog inputs (vinyl etc) as well as all upsampling and convolution for digital sources using coaxial and optical S/PDIF as well as AES/EBU. On the optical input, I have Google Chromecast Audio dongle connected (through Toslink), so I can play all kinds of sources like Spotify and Tidal from various mobile devices through all the normal processing.

There are various options for possible input devices depending on OS used and what is precisely wanted.

1 Like

Thank you Jussi! I appreciate your reply.

Sorry for the newby questions. I run Roon and HQ Player from a Windows 10 PC. I am trying to use an analog source (vinyl) and have HQPlayer apply room correction and upsample the signal.

If I understand what you described this is what I would have to do:

  1. Use the an ADC (like the RME ADI-2 Pro) to convert the analog signal to digital. To do this, I connect an analog output from my phono preamp to an analog input of the ADC.
  2. Then I connect a digital output from the ADC to my PC. (I plan to use an optical connection).
  3. Then HQPlayer can use that digital signal to apply digital room correction filters, upsample the signal (to 512DSD in my case), and then output the upsampled digital signal to my DAC (T+A DAC8 DSD).

A couple of questions:

  • What setting do I need to change in the HQPlayer software to tell it to use the optical signal coming from the ADC device to my Windows 10 PC?
  • Is this only possible with HQPlayer v4 or can it also be accomplished (perhaps not as well) with v3?

Some pre-amps, like mine still have “tape” or “recording” output (and input). This would be also suitable for the purpose. This way you can also bypass the HQPlayer chain if you want and support multiple analog sources.

I would recommend using USB if you use ADI-2 Pro, otherwise you improse some extra limitations. Using USB also enables to use the digital inputs of ADI-2 Pro for other things (it has optical and coaxial S/PDIF plus AES/EBU).


In HQPlayer 4 Desktop there’s input device selection in the settings dialog. Then in the HQPlayer main window, in the source URI field you’ll have items with “audio:” schema at the beginning.

This is new feature in v4 and not available in v3. You can have both versions installed in parallel, so you can use the free v4 trial to test these things out if you already have v3. Note that both share the same setting file, and v4 stores some extra information there. Thus, it is better to modify the settings using v4 only when both are installed in parallel. However, v3 should remove any settings made by v4, but some things may start looking inconsistent in v4.

I just found out about V4. I don’t spend much time in the Roon forum.

Unfortunately I purchased my v3 just about a year ago.

While I can appreciate that you are a one man operation and need to make money I do not believe ticking off paying customers is a good thing. Word of mouth is your best sales tool, however after reading this thread I probably won’t any more.

I want to make it clear that I like HQPlayer and feel it sounds better then Roon alone.


What is with the attitude?

I run the IT department for my company; I am also a programmer. Therefore I know maintaining two versions is not that taxing at all, unless you went back to the drawing board. I know you didn’t.

I deal with many software companies, have for years. I have never seen one talk like I have seen in this thread. Many times they are selling software that people use professionally to make money. Even they have good customer care.

Also, your price is way out of whack. One of our small editing software packages that is used for creating documents cost $250. It then has a price of $23 a year and you will get any and all updates including major version releases. Therefore you would have to go 9 years to equal your “upgrade” price. If any software went 9 years between major version updates they would be long gone.


Oh gawd…not another expert telling someone how hard it is too maintain there own product. I am a programmer too…well, I used to be anyway…and I have no idea how hard it might be to maintain multiple versions of Jussi’s product over multiple platforms. It sounds like a real pain in the you know what to me.

If you don’t like Jussi’s upgrade policies or how he provides support, don’t buy his product…

1 Like

2 posts were split to a new topic: HQ Player and Linn DSM

A post was merged into an existing topic: HQ Player and Linn DSM

There ya go, the minute you say anything critical about something all the fan boys come running out of the weeds…

For the record I did not say that I knew how hard it was for him, however I did indicate that the base code is probably quite similar and therefore should not be that hard to maintain… however that was the very minor point…

Jussi should heed what I pointed out… a company like his depends 100% on word of mouth… this thread has cost him sales… period… I think he is smart enough to understand the meaning of my post…

I also stated that I like his product but in pure business sense if for nothing else, he did not do himself any favors in this thread…

Maybe try actually reading the entire post before going crazy…

1 Like

Oh, I read the entire post. You weren’t trying to help Jussi. It was condescending and not useful to anyone. But hey, you keep doing what you’re doing…

HQPlayer Desktop v3 was released May 31st 2013 and had free updates since, so it will have about seven years of updates, so on average people have got 3.5 years. And I think I never changed the price during the seven years. (it really should have got annual inflation percentage increases though which amounts to about 20 EUR to the net price or 25 EUR on gross price) Upgrade from v2 to v3 wasn’t free either. v2 went only from June 30 2009 until May 31 2013.

Of course development tools, hardware (DACs etc), measurement equipment, servers, internet connections and everything costs. More there are users, more server bandwidth is needed, etc. Better tools mean better product as well.

I think quite a lot of audiophile hardware price is much more way out of whack. But it doesn’t bother me so much that I would run around forums writing that I don’t like their prices or upgrade policies.

1 Like

I listened. HQPe 4 Ubuntu minimal 18.04.2 with Roon server, hardware in profile. I listened to material 44.1/16 bit, Roon/DSP-> DSD256 (smooth minimal phase) vs. Roon/HQPe-> DSD256 (poly-sinc-short-mp / poly-sinc-ext2 ). I liked the Roon/DSP variant more - a more open transparent natural sound with an extensive detailed scene - well heard on Clifford Jordan/Live at Ethell’s audiophilic live recording. In my opinion, Jussi was very interested in mathematics at the expense of the naturalness of sounding.

Jussi, I do not disagree in that if people have had the software for six years it is a semi fair upgrade price, although still on the higher end of the spectrum.

However for people who only discovered the software a year or so ago, such as myself (I assume this is a common occurrence) or even more to the point the person who purchased your software a month ago then this really is an extreme upgrade price.

Every software company I deal with makes exceptions for those who have not used their product for a long while and allows for reasonable upgrades.

Honestly the easiest way to handle this appears to be having a small annual subscription if you will. Some call it a maintenance fee. Such as the one I used as an example. Their $23 a year covers any any all upgrades including major version revisions. You are not required to pay the annual maintenance but then you are not eligible for the upgrades. On your own financial side it allows for a more steady income then counting only on new purchasers.

So people who have only used your product for a short time do not pay the same as those who have used it for the previous six years.

Or like Roon does, offering the one time expensive lifetime fee. A big cash input up front but you will never have to pay again. The folks behind Roon have told me the one time lifetime sub is something they have considered doing away with because in the long run it is not in their best financial interests. But it was a way of getting a needed cash flow to start.

So while I agree with your assessment that an upgrade every six years it is a reasonable price, but I also contend that it is not reasonable for the new customer and building a long term relationship. This is an issue that software companies have dealt with for years. The small annual subscription appears to be the model that most go with. It is all about perceived value.

So while the customer that has used your product for six year should not have an issue with the upgrade cost, those that have had it for a year probably will and those that have had it for a month or two definitely will.

Again I like HQPlayer a lot. I actually considered not continuing with it after seeing the upgrade price however comparing back and forth with Roon straight I do enjoy the sound more with your software. But try to consider my point of view. I have used your software for one year and to continue with your most recent product I now am ask to pay more than my original purchase price. Even though I consider the original price somewhat high I considered it reasonable for what your software does. A year later paying an additional $200+ is very much a hard pill to shallow.

1 Like

I could add such as an alternative, with 120 EUR net price (without taxes) per year with minimum of one year subscription. But it would also have quite steep development cost of implementing management of the subscription in first place. So that would halt all other development for quite a while.

I think that one year has been good bargain, and nothing stops you from keep using it for coming ten years either. It doesn’t stop working unlike subscription would.

For me, naturalness is correctness. So technical correctness cannot be traded for perceived “naturalness”, they must coexist.

Just like I cannot accept distortions of some tube and solid state amps. Amplifiers must be perfect in both objectively and subjectively. Perfect technical performance combined with perfect sound.

If you like something else more, by all means, use that instead! :slight_smile:

Ok, so I understand there is a development cost with going to a subscription based product. You cannot compare all products, such as Roon’s subscription :).

I don’t disagree that HQPlayer is worth it’s price. It certainly is, however paying 180% additional one year later is considerable.

For the time being I will continue using v3, but might consider v4 in a little bit. One of the reasons I wanted to know exactly what the improvements are. Not being pointed towards a list of features on a website. But instead, here is what has changed in v4 and why you may want to upgrade.

As example, many people would not consider support for remote apps being important because most of us use Roon as our controller. I literally have yet to find a list of what has changed in v4 versus the latest iteration of v3.

Nothing forces you to switch over to v4 now, you can do it later as well.

And it is not 180% :wink: if you compare price of v3 and price of v4 with 20% upgrade discount. v3 is also still available so you can easily compare.

Feature set of v4 is not static, just like it wasn’t for v3. If you look at the front page you can see what changed over time for v3. So the differences today are not the same as they will be in the future.

That’s listed on the front page and also in the release announcements (Twitter/Facebook)… Differences grow larger over time.

What is most important is sound quality. The features are almost irrelevant. HQPlayer for me is literally the playback engine, all interfacing and controls are from Roon. I venture that I am not alone in using it this way.

Therefore pure and simple, are there any sound quality performance improvements in v4? Are any planned? Sound quality improvements achieved through code optimization allowing cuda cores to work more efficiently; something like that would certainly qualify, for example.

Sometimes I personally like to get things like Spotify, or other applications work through HQPlayer. And have the features like digital room correction working for analog sources like vinyl.

It depends on personal preferences if these are seen important or not.

For your use case, you get slimmer player because large portion of the GUI has been split out.

Some efficiency improvements yes, how much it makes difference depends a lot on your system, configuration and use cases.

I don’t know which category you would put things like 1x/Nx filter configuration.

Of course there are lot of new things planned that will appear over time. Just like things did for v3. They won’t appear in one large shot, but instead one at a time. Having Desktop/Embedded/Pro on the same line now enables these across the board.

Vinyl, things like that, no. However a slimmer playback engine. Maybe.

Are you saying when installing you have the option to not install the GUI? I assume the settings section would be there in order to setup filtering and up-sampling, etc.

That would interest me. When Roon separated to Server install, later to be called Roon Core and having GUI and controller only on your controlling device it made a huge difference.

You see, this topic is very personal. It is hard to come up with description relevant to one’s priorities…

Desktop always has some amount of GUI, if you want to get rid of it, there’s the Embedded. But the part dealing with browsing and controlling playback from HQPlayer’s library has been split out and made look and feel better while allowing remote control.

Now there are two things slightly like Roon Core, HQPlayer 4 Desktop and even more so HQPlayer 4 Embedded.

While HQPlayer Client (bundled as a separate item with HQPlayer 4 Desktop) works with either HQPlayer 4 Desktop or HQPlayer 4 Embedded. So you can decide to use either Roon as source, or even more optimal, HQPlayer 4 Desktop or Embedded playing a source directly (one extra layer cut off).