Amarra 3.0 vs. Audirvana


Hi,
I have been happily using Audirvana to play my hi-res files on my MacBook Pro. The easy integration with your iTunes library is great. I tried earlier versions of Amarra and found the interface to be clunky and the program itself to be buggy and crash-prone. It's also expensive. But I'm wondering if any of you have used the two programs side by side and can vouch for relative merits in terms of sound quality.
rebbi
I have been using A+ for quite awhile now and have been happy with it using a MacBook Pro.  I just downloaded the latest version, 3.5.x and it is hands down better than any of the previous versions I used in terms of sound quality.  I don't know how they did it but the music is clearer and more organic sounding.  It's like I upgraded my DAC.   Anyone else have this experience?

thanks for the heads up on a new ver being available. apparently setting the app to check for them weekly is not enough, or it was just a timing glitch.

I don't have extensive history with A+ and only migrated fromn 3.2 to this latest release, A+ 3.5.

In this update process one facet of operation did need to be added/downloaded following the install. size optimizer ?? it announced the need for it and handled its incorporation seamlessly.

a secondary installation process gets addressed as well with the install migrating its data out of the downloads folder and into the Apple Applications folder which Apple deems necessary to have this step done manually most all of the time. it was a relief to see Audirvana maker attend to this part of the setup as an option during the update.

I felt copying and pasting the orig key code to facilitate the update a needless step, but well, OK. it is what it is.

the existing A+ remote control mobile app automatically integrated itself to the new itteration via a six digit code, which once more was smooth and uneventful.

overall, it makes me wonder why the update process requires one to manually download the newer ver rather than have the app itself handle the whole of the process. perhaps this is an Apple thing.

I'm using a iMac 27in. 5K retina w/24GB RAM and i5 quadd core CPU running at 3.6GHz.

As for the credibility of any increase in sonic performance over the 3.2 ver, I gotta admit 3.5 does seem more incisive and transparent.

knowing a new itteration existed I ran thru a fav playlist using 3.2 first, then went thru the update process and repeated the playlist thereafter.

Vocal harmonies for example were made more individual and demonstrated greater separation with more space about them. Sonic cues gained more visibility and distinction.

the sound stage seem more expansive and as such appeared better arranged at least latterally..

this ‘new’ perspective on the music was delivered seemingly without regard to the file types. lossless and lossy files were presented simalarly, making one question which file type (lossy or lossless) was in play, as I don’t always discriminate when compiling a playlist, having various file types segregated from one another.

in the end, I’d say it provides noticeable improvements across the board sonically speaking. the update process itself however needs a bit more tweaking

do the update! SQ does get a boost.
@blindjim Thanks for confirming my initial impressions of the update.  I just have not had much time to listen since updating but am excited about the positive changes.  It's almost hard to believe since everything else is the same! 
Enter your text ...Yes, sonically improved though making it more intuitive to use especially if or when compiling playlists would be outstanding.

that, and a bit more info on how best to configure other settings for bit perfect playback .

lastly, aligning it to aid iTunes when playing files solely thru it alone.

so far I'm mystified on these finer points in A+ preferences/settings.

any pointers would be severely welcomed.