Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nwboater]

At the AVS Forum JRiver owners thread http://www.avsforum.com/t/1352282/jriver-media-center-owners-thread/810#post_22749374  there has been a bunch of grumbling about MC18. Don't know if it's best for JRiver to try to do some damage control, or to ignore it.

Hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas!

Rod

[mojave]

I just tried to help user djwobbrock here at JRiver.

I've thought about posting at AVS some of the features I like that have been introduced in V17 and V18.

As someone that uses JRiver for hours each day and uses it for OTA TV, music, and movies, I just don't understand some of the complaints. I certainly don't have any issues mentioned and I "support" five friends/family members that use JRiver and rarely get any complaints about JRiver. If I do get a complaint, it is about the lack of a feature or not understanding current features rather than any bug.

[JohnT]

Thanks for helping out with the AVS forum guys.  I'm sure we can get the remaining issues sorted when we get back to the office next week.

[astromo]

Doesn't seem much sense in whining about MC's functionality in a place that is effectively off the grid.

Rod, great work for waving the flag and pointing out that the way to be part of the solution is to constructively contribute to the developer's own forum.

There are some aspects of MC that I'd like changed to provide better, straight-out-of-the-box functionality and have posted to suit. However, I respect the development teams silence or outwardly appearing lack of action on the matter because the "development opportunity" can be worked around due to the flexibility designed into the software. Hence, it's low priority.

From observation of various forum threads here, it's clear to me that critical issues get quick attention from the key people. Some of these people are other software users who contribute in a community minded fashion. I'm grateful for that additional horsepower.

I also respect that JR is working to a business plan with a finite set of people and resources that, while it's influenced and guided by user input, the decision for executing specific aspects lies squarely with JR. This is as it should be. The software's development would be outright chaos if development used a method of knee jerk response to user wishes.

I've yet to find a piece of software that's perfect and MC is no exception. However in terms of capability against functional requirements for the money, MC is a clear cut winner.

In the meantime, I'll keep enjoying the product and its output while the development steadily keeps on. Thanks and keep it coming   

[JimH]

Thanks.  Well said.

[astromo]

Thanks.  Well said.

You're more than welcome. Thank you for the work you and the rest of the JR team do.

I'd like to point out that the purpose of my post was not to curry favour or to be a run of the mill sycophant. Hopefully, it was reasonably balanced and matter of fact. If your product didn't deliver overall, you simply wouldn't sustain your user base. Simple customer behaviour in response to service / product quality and the associated economics would eventually take their toll. The product's performance speaks for itself, else you wouldn't get this kind of word up:
http://hometheaterreview.com/jriver-media-center-software-reviewed/

I was simply seeking to point out that there are a lot of us out here who see the bigger picture..  

[preproman]

from the looks of it.  Most people on the AVS thread are looking for mostly sonic improvements.  How much more sonically can be improved is my question.

[Bizarroterl]

Doesn't seem much sense in whining about MC's functionality in a place that is effectively off the grid.

I don't follow this.  Are you saying AVSForum is off the grid?

There are really 2 ways to react to users complaining.  One is to dismiss them as whiners and the other is to do what you can to address the problems they're having.  One makes you better and the other does the reverse.    Kudos to the JRiver staff for resisting the dismiss impulse and making the best they can when there are complaints.

[BartMan01]

I don't follow this.  Are you saying AVSForum is off the grid?

I think that was just a poor choice of words - pretty sure he meant it in the context of JRiver support (it exists here, not there).  Kind of like going to a general car forum and posting an issue about Fords and then complaining that no one at Ford is helping you.

Some of the 'complaints' in that thread show a complete lack of understanding of the basic differences between open source community development and development by a going business concern.

[glynor]

I think that was just a poor choice of words - pretty sure he meant it in the context of JRiver support (it exists here, not there).  Kind of like going to a general car forum and posting an issue about Fords and then complaining that no one at Ford is helping you.

That was how I read it too.

[leezer3]

from the looks of it.  Most people on the AVS thread are looking for mostly sonic improvements.  How much more sonically can be improved is my question.

I'd love to point them in the direction of some of the head-fi geeks then 
As far as I'm aware, there's nothing else JR can do to provide sonic improvements, other than the highly questionable antics of JPlay etc.

-Leezer-

[astromo]

I don't follow this.  Are you saying AVSForum is off the grid?

I think that was just a poor choice of words - pretty sure he meant it in the context of JRiver support (it exists here, not there).  Kind of like going to a general car forum and posting an issue about Fords and then complaining that no one at Ford is helping you.

That was how I read it too.

BartMan01 and glynor got the intent and spot on with the comment about context - that's the issue. The limits of text communication. I tried to get this across by using the word "effectively". Enough of semantics .. let's get back to the good stuff.

from the looks of it.  Most people on the AVS thread are looking for mostly sonic improvements.  How much more sonically can be improved is my question.

I'd love to point them in the direction of some of the head-fi geeks then  
As far as I'm aware, there's nothing else JR can do to provide sonic improvements, other than the highly questionable antics of JPlay etc.

-Leezer-

On that note Leezer, if you haven't seen it then I'd recommend this piece for you to reflect upon:
http://www.computeraudiophile.com/blogs/mitchco/jriver-vs-jplay-test-results-156/
Always makes me glow warmly inside when I can point to some hard evidence. Feel free to use as you see fit when you're dealing with the "head-fi geeks". If you're really motivated, you (or anyone) could always repeat the test and offer up a 2nd set of results. For my money, I'll take "Difference signal between the two music players is at -90 dB" as some confirmation that MC sounds as good as anything else out there.

It certainly gives me a basis for not worrying about the JPlay plugin to MC.

[kstuart]

JRiver sounds as good as anything out there simply because it does so - not because of some pseudo-science feel-good slogan like "bits is bits" or "all software players sound the same".

Some other players do not sound as good as JRiver, and I'm pretty sure that is because the developers believe those slogans, and so they don't improve parts of the code that "should not make a difference".  In reality, general purpose computers that run Windows or MacOS, have a lot of processes that run at the same time as audio, and the hardware is not designed for real-time audio playback, but instead is designed for "computing" - processing information.   That is why different computers do most things faster or slower than other computers.  JRiver and the other players that have better sound quality, all strive to improve the audio playback code, without preconceptions.

Note that mitchco of Computer Audiophile, who posted the comparison, is also a sophisticated listener, who also listened to both players as well doing the mathematical comparison.