If the new subscriber model is a personal license across my machines, that would make the pricing shown on the web site ($5.90/moth) more palatable. I have multiple Audirvana licenses to cover multiple machines that I use exclusively. Otherwise I use the Qobuz player for convenience. I only use Audirvana occasionally when listening to Qobuz with certain DACS. It's the pricing, not necessarily the subscription model that's the critical decision for developers, and their customers.
So, if push comes to shove I'll ditch Audirvana. Qobuz on its own provides significant value for me. But the pricing does, somewhat.įor me, I must now pay Audirvana and Qobuz nearly $20/month, altogether. The move to a subscriber model doesn't bother me. I have used Audirvana for years, with iTunes and Qobuz. So at this early stage I am really like using Studio and will gladly pay the subscription rate if no tedious software issues. I haven't had any problems so far, but they would be a deal-breaker. I'm also concerned by comments relating to issues of compatibility with the MacBook. This is the Benchmark Audio support model which, for me, distinguishes real customer support from the community approach that is merely a convenience to the company. I preferred sending in a question and Damien, et al, responding. Now, what I don't like is the vague support system which seems to rely on the "community". I hope to have more to say on this down the road. The Studio download went fine and, though early days, I am very impressed with Studio over Plus. I am running the Benchmark amp and DAC3L with the LA4 preamp to be added soon. As a long-time Tidal subscriber, I have no issues with subscriptions so long as there is performance value for the investment. I was surprised by the subscription business model and to learn that my current software is now a "legacy". I've used Audirvana for years, but less so over the last several months. I recently initiated the 30-day trial of Studio.
0 kommentar(er)
