JRiver User Discussion

[Nikhil]

If the mods would approve, I would like to start a JRiver Discussion thread on here for all of us who are JRiver users. For those who would like to know, JRiver Media Center, or JRMC is a multimedia application that allows the user to play and organize various types of media on a computer running Windows or OSX

Website: JRiver Media Center software

JRiver Support: Support

For those just getting started here is a good place to start:
Getting Started - JRiverWiki

 

[Raghav_K]

Great,

Please explain how this differs from itunes or foobar...

Thanks

 

[spirovious]

I always prefer Foobar over JRiver.Whenever I tried to use it,it has disappointed me with not giving clean,perfect sound.Whether its analog or digital out.It will be interesting to know others experiences.

 

[Nikhil]

LOL! Guys I was hoping this was going to be a thread for JRiver users ...
Anyway I will answer questions asked:

Great,

Please explain how this differs from itunes or foobar...

Thanks

Google is your friend. But since you asked, JRMC vs iTunes:
Both are media centres but JRMC has a lot of full blown features that are not available on iTunes. For PC users, JRMC definitely sounds better IMO. JRMC will play almost any format that you throw at it especially flac and other new formats like ape etc which are not supported in iTunes. The JRMC library is a feature rich tool that helps you categorize your collection in many different ways. It also supports libraries sitting on a network or NAS box. Networking features are also very strong.

Visually iTunes looks better and works very well out of the box. iTunes also does some things well like integrating with existing Apple hardware such as iPads, AppleTVs etc. iTunes has limited supported for uncompressed formats (ALAC only).

These are just the few I can think of from the top of my head ...

I always prefer Foobar over JRiver.Whenever I tried to use it,it has disappointed me with not giving clean,perfect sound.Whether its analog or digital out.It will be interesting to know others experiences.

Each PC is a very unique setup which can almost never be replicated. Too many variables like chip set, Hard disks, memory, OS configurations etc so there is probably a good reason that Foobar is working well in your setup. Its also free so big VFM aspect here. Maybe you might spot something from other comments that come up.

Cheers!

 

[Shivam]

I have been interested in the two computer setup and even after a long discussion in another thread, I could not understand the advantage. Can someone explain it to me (instead of saying that it sounds better/worse) ?

 

[hydra]

Another JRiverMC user here. I was a hardcore Foobar2000 guy for a few years, and I did dabble with JRMC once or twice in between. Once I tried JRMC v17, there was no going back.

As to whether JRMC does any DSP in the background or not (I don't mean the DSP functions of JRMC), I have no idea. But it sure makes music sound much better, esp. in the lower registers.

Those who cannot make out a difference between Foobar2000 (with WASAPI) and JRMC (with WASAPI Event Style), please try playing Jennifer Warnes's "Way down deep" (from The Hunter) on their setups. (Please use a CD or a FLAC ripped from a CD for this.) There is a very defined bassline in this song, and the difference between how bass is handled between the two software is very clear to see from how this bassline is reproduced. With Foobar, the bass is all over the place, completely out of control, boomy and reverberating. But with JRMC, the bass is in perfect control, you can actually hear the twang of the string pluck behind the bass, and there is no boom or uncomfortable reverberation. You don't need a high-end setup that resolves extremely well to hear this: I could make out this difference with PSB Image B6s and a NAD326 (fed by Music PC > Rega DAC). With Foobar, the cupboards in my room used to reverberate along with the bass. But with JRMC, there is no such reverberation.

If this difference was caused by some kind of background DSP in JRMC, I'm all for that manipulation.

 

[hydra]

I have been interested in the two computer setup and even after a long discussion in another thread, I could not understand the advantage. Can someone explain it to me (instead of saying that it sounds better/worse) ?

Shivam, you must be referring to the 2-machine JPlay setup, not JRMC. I don't think JRMC has such a setup, with one machine being on hibernate mode.

But a JRMC machine can be used as a client, with the storage being on a separate machine. I personally use a HDD in the same machine for storage. I find it simpler and more cost effective.

 

[hydra]

... The JRMC library is a feature rich tool that helps you categorize your collection in many different ways. It also supports libraries sitting on a network or NAS box. Networking features are also very strong.

...

To add to this, one big advantage with the JRMC library is that we can tag (and organize) WAV files just like we do FLAC files. Foobar can't do this with WAV files, and I'm not aware of any other popular players that can do this (I'd love to know if other FMs have come across such players).

dbPowerAmp can embed tags onto WAV files (via the CD Ripper, or the Tagger), but these tags can't be read by Foobar.

 

[manniraj]

I have tried JRMC 17 & 18 for couple of weeks after using Foobar since 2 years but went back to Foobar + WASAPI for convenience. The reason being that my music-pc is headless and I use a iPhone/Android tab/phone to control the playback and hence the UI of these apps should be good/useful. The JRMC official app is pathetic when compared to the Foobar and this clinched the deal for me. Otherwise as Hydra pointed out the bass was crisp and clean on JRMC when compared to Foobar but not sure whether any DSP was being used in the background.

 

[Nikhil]

Shivam, you must be referring to the 2-machine JPlay setup, not JRMC. I don't think JRMC has such a setup, with one machine being on hibernate mode.

But a JRMC machine can be used as a client, with the storage being on a separate machine. I personally use a HDD in the same machine for storage. I find it simpler and more cost effective.

Actually it does support this functionality. Jplay was just a plugin that was supposed to have given some sonic benefits. JRiver and Jplay have since fallen out with JRiver openly calling Jplay a hoax etc.

Anyway the way it works is that one PC works as the Control PC and the other is the Audio PC which is directly connected to the setup. This separates the Audio PC from doing any non-audio related activity, keeping it dedicated to audio and hence there is less drop offs etc. In my setup when I am working on my computer which works as the Control PC, typically I will have Outlook running for all my emails, Internet Browsing and JRiver MC handling all my media. My wife accesses media off the same PC in the bedroom via wifi (movies, etc). A well implemented network is recommended with a good router + switch to handle network management.

In JRiver this is called "Zones" and is accessed under the Tools > Options > Media Network menu sequence. You can have multiple zones so you could send video to one zone and audio to another zone and/or multiple setups. Very powerful feature of JRMC.

 

[Shivam]

Actually it does support this functionality. Jplay was just a plugin that was supposed to have given some sonic benefits. JRiver and Jplay have since fallen out with JRiver openly calling Jplay a hoax etc.

Anyway the way it works is that one PC works as the Control PC and the other is the Audio PC which is directly connected to the setup. This separates the Audio PC from doing any non-audio related activity, keeping it dedicated to audio and hence there is less drop offs etc. In my setup when I am working on my computer which works as the Control PC, typically I will have Outlook running for all my emails, Internet Browsing and JRiver MC handling all my media. My wife accesses media off the same PC in the bedroom via wifi (movies, etc). A well implemented network is recommended with a good router + switch to handle network management.

In JRiver this is called "Zones" and is accessed under the Tools > Options > Media Network menu sequence. You can have multiple zones so you could send video to one zone and audio to another zone and/or multiple setups. Very powerful feature of JRMC.

If I have a PC with only the basic operating system with only the needed services and JRiver then will there be any advantage to shifting to a two computer setup ?

 

[thx911]

I'm using JRMC ver 19 mostly for listening to background music and Foobar for serious listening. I like the UI and library feature in JRMC, makes it visually easy to browse & search your library. Subconsciously i'm inclined more towards Foobar than JRMC without any objective reasons. But i'd be keen to hear from FMs that use the HP remote control that JRMC use to sell not too long ago, which they have stopped now.

 

[Nikhil]

If I have a PC with only the basic operating system with only the needed services and JRiver then will there be any advantage to shifting to a two computer setup ?

Shivam,

This is a very subjective question. A well implemented PC can play JRMC standalone and is being used by many. The two PC setup offers the option of an isolated dedicated PC Transport which in theory is a better solution since the Audio PC can be optimized for audio playback. You will have to try it out and see if there is a difference in your setup.

Best Regards.

 

[hydra]

If I have a PC with only the basic operating system with only the needed services and JRiver then will there be any advantage to shifting to a two computer setup ?

I'm using a dedicated machine too.

I have just the OS (Windows 7 Home Basic) and JRMC loaded on an SSD (that acts as the boot drive). Nothing else, not even anti virus, is installed.

The music storage is on a separate 3TB HDD in the same machine.

 

[Shivam]

I'm using a dedicated machine too.

I have just the OS (Windows 7 Home Basic) and JRMC loaded on an SSD (that acts as the boot drive). Nothing else, not even anti virus, is installed.

The music storage is on a separate 3TB HDD in the same machine.

So now to reframe the question - What exactly causes the sound quality to improve in a two computer setup compared to one computer ?

(By asking this question, I am taking it for granted that the sound improves on having the two computer setup.)

 

[manniraj]

So now to reframe the question - What exactly causes the sound quality to improve in a two computer setup compared to one computer ?

(By asking this question, I am taking it for granted that the sound improves on having the two computer setup.)

I hope you would have read the thread from "bhagwan" regarding the JPlay 2 PC setup which had lots of fireworks on the improvement of the sound quality. If you believe the JPlay guys forum where I think the discussions are there on how the 2 PC concept enhances or improves the sound then you are game as it involves lots of tweaks and also the dedicated PC as a transport and the other PC actually controlling it on the network. There are people who believe in this setup as well as equal number of people who think its just a marketing gimmick. I think you can judge only once you hear and also have a highly resolving system to get the difference

 

[hydra]

My (theoretical) understanding of the 2-machine concept is that:

- A 2 machine setup separates the "player" (the device that actually plays the music & sends digital signal to the DAC) from the "server" (the device that stores the data).

- This way, the player needs to just "play". This machine needs only those services necessary to collect the data (from the server) and play it.

- It can use an SSD and so with judicious hardware choices, we can eliminate all moving parts from the player. That would make for a silent machine (also doable with a single Music PC and a NAS in a different room). And anecdotally, SSDs supposedly sound better than spinning disks. *shrug*

- The "player" can be in 'hibernate' mode when it plays. This further reduces the number of services running on the player. Again, this is supposed to result in better sounding music.

I've never done this setup, so I really don't know how much better it can make things. This would really be quite expensive to setup up right, I think. Esp. since the JPlay people seem to prefer using lots of memory and i5 based systems (for both player and server).

 

[spirovious]

Each PC is a very unique setup which can almost never be replicated. Too many variables like chip set, Hard disks, memory, OS configurations etc so there is probably a good reason that Foobar is working well in your setup. Its also free so big VFM aspect here. Maybe you might spot something from other comments that come up.

Cheers!

I agree.Still my PC has Xonar D2X and still JRiver did not impress me over Foobar whether its analog out(D2X) or Digital out.
I went recently to FM house where he claimed JRiver as superior(digital out only).When we seriously did A and B between foobar,he soon admitted that Foobar was sending clean data with darker background than JRiver.I find JRiver sound little congested.

 

[bhagwan]

I have been interested in the two computer setup and even after a long discussion in another thread, I could not understand the advantage. Can someone explain it to me (instead of saying that it sounds better/worse) ?

Sir,

I use 2 machines.
To my ears the difference was just too much.
How do I make you understand.
You will have to go to the J Play Forum & make sense of it - technically speaking.
All I can do is offer my house to you - come & listen & then decide.
I too am not a techie - I do not know how it works - nor can I set or tune it - a dear friend does all this for me - I lust listen & say what I prefer - simple.

There has been a new change - all have moved out of Win 8 to Windows Server & they say it sounds better - I have not done it - so I have no comments.

 

[bhagwan]

I'm using a dedicated machine too.

I have just the OS (Windows 7 Home Basic) and JRMC loaded on an SSD (that acts as the boot drive). Nothing else, not even anti virus, is installed.

The music storage is on a separate 3TB HDD in the same machine.

Perfect;
Way to go.
Just try and install win 8 & play it back - keep all things the same.
Install a dual boot - & that way you can try win 7 & win 8 - do the experiment & see what you find.
There is 1 more thing you can do - also install the free J Play on your machine.
Listen to it & then form an opinion.
If with a single machine you find an improvement - at least you know you are on the right track.
If not - there is no down side - there was no cost involved.
At least you know - after having done the test in your set up - on your own.