No need to apologize and I certainly won’t try to mock you either. I genuinely don’t understand why they can sound so different when they’re both bit perfect and played over (almost) the same gear.
But note that Roon is played through a Sonic Transformer server while A+ is played off my MBP, wirelessly. So it could be a RAAT vs UPnP thing.
Frankly, from an engineering POV, I don’t really care. What bothers me is that I’m struggling to get the best of both worlds. I’d rather use Roon all the time.
From what I understand Audivarna has quite a few tweaks to manage os resources and keep noise jitter down down. How much of that factors in I don’t know.
Audirvana reduces these activity peaks by stabilizing and limiting processor activity, and by pausing other application activity and hidden tasks on the computer. It does this with an extended buffer memory which makes it possible to smooth and perform upstream most processes such as audio decoding. During playback, CPU activity is maintained at less than 0.5 percent of capacity. In addition, Audirvana takes priority over processor usage, and allows you to manage authorized or unauthorized tasks on your computer during playback (using SysOptimizer in MacOS and the Fidelizer tool under Windows).
Measurements are all fine and good but bare no relation to real world operation. If you went by measurement alone then a lot of DACs would sound the same yet they don’t.
I happen to use Audirvana 3.5 quite a lot. I can stream from HighResAudio (HRA) and use my Oppo 105 as an UPNP streamer. The Oppo 105 cant be used with Raat over my network.
I need the Oppo as ripping device for SACDs. With Audirvana it gets a better use.
Soundwise I don’t notice any difference between Roon and Audirvana. But sure if you apply Room correction or SOX, then things get different.
My two pence. In my setup and to my ears, subjectively my order of preference when using my desktop setup with DAC connected direct via USB from my core.
Roon with HQP upsampled max PCM
A+
If using RAAT over the network to any other device Roon beats A+ in my house.
Both really cool bits of software and if only one existed I would still be a happy camper.
I had exactly the same experience: I had Roon for a year but Audirvana just adds more life to the sound. I found the same with HQPlayer on Roon. However, the cost of Roon subscription plus HQPlayer was too much for me. So I use Audirvana (and hope that they fix many of the quirks).
BTW - I use Audirvana with Windows which does not have the system optimizer, etc. So really can’t tell why the sound is so much better.
Are all other things on your system absolutely identical and only Roon/A+ different, or is there something else (no matter how minor/irrelevant you might consider it) which changes?
There are so many variables in playback systems that I find it difficult to be dogmatic about SQ for different audio playback platforms. For instance, I recall the profound difference when I moved from Roon Core on my PC to a Nucleus and thinking “Wow, what a step up in SQ.” I subsequently changed a few things in my set-up – adding an Audioquest Niagara 1000 for power conditioning and a Keces P8 LPS to power my Nucleus and switch – and each was incrementally better.
For amplification, I moved progressively from a Devialet Expert 200 to a Lyngdorf TDAi-3400 to a Devialet Expert 220 Pro. With the Pro, I recently discovered that one may enhance SQ by disabling DPM or dynamic power management: another incremental step in SQ.
So, in the end, I am really satisfied with Roon and don’t care to experiment with other software platforms, as I have in the past. Your mileage may vary!
As an observation Audivana seems to have slightly more 'air" than Roon. Anybody else notices this? I’m using a Mac Mini and Perfectwave DAC via Ethernet.
Are you comparing Audirvana 3.5? This is the critical point. Up to this point, I would have agreed with you but Audirvana just moved the goal posts with this latest update. I find it shockingly better than Roon - and this actually bothers me as Roon is far more convenient to use (and I love the radio).
I’m only mentioning this to the Roon community because I’m really hoping the Roon team can rise to the challenge and up its game for the next update. I’d be happy with zero functional ‘improvements’ if Roon can only match Audirvana 3.5 for sound quality.
Agree that Audirvana challenging Roon. My audio system is very revealing and neutral as it can be and of course I rely on my ears and sound preferences.
Both programs were on pair while I used to play them using my Mac mini but things turned even slightly in favour of Roon once Nucleus + arrived and took place in my system.
Sometimes, depends I am in mood for Audirvana sometimes for Roon style of presentation. Cooler or warmer, airy or colourful.
