HQ Player

I believe HQP is his side gig (I maybe wrong) and has been pointed out it is a one man show as far as I can tell.

Responding to the non-stop questions and support issues on the various forums has to be insanely time consuming for one person. I think a lot of users rely on other seasoned HQP users to get answers since you may catch him relatively quick for an answer or it gets missed in the ether. The software has a pretty large following in such a niche hobby and I think its one of those love it / hate it, love it or leave it that one must decide whether or not they feel comfortable taking it on.

I have yet to upgrade to the v4, which by all accounts is a pretty significant update in so far as SQ and filter/modulators etc... Mainly due to you have to decide (pay for) to use either the desktop version or embedded in either a win or Linux enviro. Its a great application (SQ wise) once you make it work in your setup.
 
I agree that Jussi offers a very good and comprehensive product. I also believe he is a one man show and I understand he is probably busy going in many directions. This I do not and would not hold against him.

My version 3 was purchased about 2-months prior to his release of version 4 (if I recall correctly). There was no information about a new version being released and I was unaware that version 3 would soon be outdated.

My experience was communicating directly with Jussi. I did not and would not rely on second hand information. So I talked directly with him and he told me these things, not second hand. Basically he treated me exactly the same as someone who had used version 3 for six or more years. I felt being that I had just purchased version 3 I should not have to purchase the new release, or at the very least at a very minimal charge. This is how almost every other company out there work. Instead he felt it was ok to say that only the discount he offered to other version 3 users would apply, and therefore making me pay virtually double for his software. He concluded but you can continue using version 3 for as you like.

I also believed that in very short order my version would no longer interface with the other software I use. And so it has came to pass exactly as I feared and make my version unusable moving forward. And this is what I consider making a business decision with no consideration of a customer who has paid their good money for your product. And this is why I have chose to no longer use Jussi's software.

The funny thing is, I was almost willing to actually purchase his updated version if he said there was a performance improvement, even though it would cost me much more than any other customer at the time (version 3 and version 4 price combined). He said there was no noticeable sound quality improvement from the version I owned.
 
Randy Myers said:
That is what I thought. How could someone doing a very specialized product that already has a reputation as being overly complex and picky then offer such poor service?
Click to expand...

Because, Randy, he is clueless about what it takes to be successful in business, in the long term, selling a product to customers, which is...to provide VALUE to customers.

I used to teach Voice of the Customer (VOC) and Product Design & Development in my role as a Master Black Belt in Design for Six Sigma in my biotech companies.

Here is a basic but key equation for any business selling a product (or service): Value = Quality/Price

A lot of companies don't understand, or fail to execute on this simple equation.

Unfortunately, this tends to be even more true with technology-based companies; they are so in love with their own tech that they fail to see or understand customer needs or the value equation. They think that because their tech is "so cool" you should WANT to pay whatever price they charge for it.

I used to get this attitude from the engineers that worked on developing our DNA sequencers and genetic analyzers....

"Look at this, Mr. Genetic Lab Director, our DNA sequencers do capillary electrophoresis with....lasers! And with four different color fluorescent dyes! How cool is that?"

And of course, the genetics lab director doesn't give a rat's *ss about CE, lasers, and fluorescent dyes, he just wants to know "Does this kid have cystic fibrosis or not?". And...he needs consistent quality, repeatible, reproducible, accurate and precise genetic test resuts, day in, day out. He also doesn't want to hear, "Sorry, that kid was mis-diagnosed for CF because....our CE polymer was bad."

I've seen this behavior from tech product manufacturers time and time again. They're so in love with their tech that they forget about...their customers.

Remember...DIVX?
DIVX was a short-lived DVD-Video based format created by Circuit City as an alternative to video rental in the US. DIVX players became available in mid-1998. Customers would buy a DIVX disc at lower price than a standard DVD, but they would only be able to view it for 48 hours (longer viewing required a continuation fee). The DIVX players had to call an account server over a phone line to enable playback, and the disc would not play in standard DVD players.

The only person DIVX was good for was....Circuit City. The reason this technology failed so abysmally was because it did not provide VALUE for...CUSTOMERS.

If Jussi wants to remain succuessful and "in business" over the longer term, he needs to make the product exceptionally easy to use and provide lasting and real value to his customers. Otherwise, folks will walk.
 
astrotoy said:
What is quite apparent, is that Jussi is not a businessman. He apparently doesn't understand how to treat a customer and the value of what that can mean to his business.
Larry
Click to expand...

Bingo.

And...would I want to do business with such a company?

No.
 
Some great examples Puma. Being a Software Engineer and System Administrator I have worked with many developers over the years. The old adage about locking them in the back room definitely applies to many of these. I have had the "privilege" of working with a couple that come to mind... brilliant coders but you never ever want them to talk with customers (fellow staff members). And their applications usually were very complicated for the end users to a point that at times they simply refused to use the product.

I have a different perspective; I am a Software Engineer who also holds a BA in Psychology (really rare I would say) and I have managed stereo stores back in the day. Being both understandable to the people who will use the product and being able to put yourself into their shoes, so to speak, is absolutely critical for long term success and acceptance of your product. Understanding what I would feel if the situation were reversed is absolutely critical in customer service.

Jussi simply does not understand this. How many people will read this thread and think twice about buying his product? I have not bad mouthed him what so ever. In fact I have complimented him on his product. However I have also related a true experience that could have been handled much better than it was. I wish I could relate a happy ending, but honestly it is anything but. I now have software that I paid good money for (one of the more expensive on the market actually) that is now 100% useless to me, and after a very short time. A person able to put themselves in his customers shoes would have realized how absolutely poor his policy was for new customers. A simple change in policy would have resolved the entire situation... something like a time frame that if a new version is released the customer would be eligible for an upgrade to that new version. This is exactly how every other software company that I am familiar with work
 
Randy Myers said:
Some great examples Puma. Being a Software Engineer and System Administrator I have worked with many developers over the years. The old adage about locking them in the back room definitely applies to many of these. I have had the "privilege" of working with a couple that come to mind... brilliant coders but you never ever want them to talk with customers (fellow staff members). And their applications usually were very complicated for the end users to a point that at times they simply refused to use the product.

I have a different perspective; I am a Software Engineer who also holds a BA in Psychology (really rare I would say) and I have managed stereo stores back in the day. Being both understandable to the people who will use the product and being able to put yourself into their shoes, so to speak, is absolutely critical for long term success and acceptance of your product. Understanding what I would feel if the situation were reversed is absolutely critical in customer service.

Jussi simply does not understand this. How many people will read this thread and think twice about buying his product? I have not bad mouthed him what so ever. In fact I have complimented him on his product. However I have also related a true experience that could have been handled much better than it was. I wish I could relate a happy ending, but honestly it is anything but. I now have software that I paid good money for (one of the more expensive on the market actually) that is now 100% useless to me, and after a very short time. A person able to put themselves in his customers shoes would have realized how absolutely poor his policy was for new customers. A simple change in policy would have resolved the entire situation... something like a time frame that if a new version is released the customer would be eligible for an upgrade to that new version. This is exactly how every other software company that I am familiar with work
Click to expand...

Well...I can tell you that I won't be buying his product because of your experience.
 
Engineering vs marketing: There are many classic case studies discussed at business schools on this subject. Rarely you find individuals who are actually good at both.

HQPlayer is not plug-and-play. It is not suitable for everyone, specially not for a person who might be a bit timid around computers.

I bought the HQPlayer Desktop 3 Desktop in September 2018. Seven (7) months later, HQPlayer 4 Desktop was released (April 2019). However 6 months prior to my purchase of the desktop 3 version, HQPlayer had already released HQPlayer 4 Embedded and it was clear to me that the development of the Desktop 4 was already underway. Yet, I did not want to wait and (maybe just as important) I did not want to buy a 1.0 release.

I used Desktop 3 for 2-1/2 years. I only upgraded to Desktop 4 because it has features that are NOT available with Desktop 3.

Let me add that HQPlayer Desktop 3 still runs fine for me. I am listening to it right now actually. So maybe all that Randy might need to do is change some of his HQP settings.
 
It has worked fine right up to now. Seems strange that it all of a sudden would not work... That is not how computers work, therefore something must have changed. I will try reinstalling. Still, version 3 will not continue being supported by other software soon, even if I can get it working again this time. However, the bottom line is that Jussi should have handled it better.

As a follow up. I reinstall the last build of version 3 and even tried an older version, neither one worked. HQPlayer's logo screen comes up and then nothing. The program's main screen never actually comes up. Maybe the version is in conflict with Windows latest security patches?
 
Randy Myers said:
...
Maybe the version is in conflict with Windows latest security patches?
Click to expand...
...

When apps have been running fine and then all of the sudden I get an error message, I immediately check if I am running the latest versions of both the app and the operating system. Most of the time (by a large margin) it is usually that one of them was updated to a newer version and there is some incompatibility with the other. IME this is usually resolved by installing the latest version of both and/or restarting the computer.

FWIW, I understand that since I own two licenses for HQPlayer (HQP3 & HQP4), I am allowed to run two different systems independently (one running HQP3 and the other running HQP4).
 
I thought I had the latest HQPlayer for version 3. I went to his site to see if a newer version is out. I believe he will not update 3 any more. So if it stops working, oh well...
 
In my experience with ROON, JRiver, InnuOS' app and HQplayer, HQplayer is the most transparent and neutral. ROON as a front end with HQPlayer as the back end is a very good combination but HQplayer solo is unbeatable. Also, many (most?) folks use HQplayer's upsampling and filtering to good effect however I don't use either and the sound quality native in excellent. IME all others add and / or degrade to some degree.
 
sb6 said:
In my experience with ROON, JRiver, InnuOS' app and HQplayer, HQplayer is the most transparent and neutral. ROON as a front end with HQPlayer as the back end is a very good combination but HQplayer solo is unbeatable. Also, many (most?) folks use HQplayer's upsampling and filtering to good effect however I don't use either and the sound quality native in excellent. IME all others add and / or degrade to some degree.
Click to expand...

You might consider trying Euphony Stylus as a Roon endpoint, and compare to HQPlayer. There are a number of users at audiophilestyle who feel Stylus is the best sounding.
 
Thanks I forgot that I did give Euphony Stylus a try and I liked my highly optimized Win Server 2019 with HQplayer better.
 
sb6 said:
Thanks I forgot that I did give Euphony Stylus a try and I liked my highly optimized Win Server 2019 with HQplayer better.
Click to expand...

Of course, most are not using a highly optimized Win Server 2019 ;) For something like one of the SGC offerings or a typical laptop I suspect Stylus might sound "better", although there is always personal preference to consider.

For sure using my (relatively) inexpensive dedicated Linux server optimized for Stylus, HQPlayer (trial version) is inferior.
 
I am using HQPLAYER on my linux nuc and love the sound so much that I decided to buy it. But it is nasty, rebuying software that you already own.
 
Alkyogre said:
…
But it is nasty, rebuying software that you already own.
Click to expand...

When you think about it, you typically have to pay for software upgrades.
I recently upgraded to Adobe Photoshop latest version from an older version. They gave me a discount, but I still had to pay for the new version.
Same applies to MS Office and just about any other software.
 
Yes, and no. With o365 you do not... and many/most have gone to subscription. Office, Adobe CC, etc, have gone subscription and always have the latest and greatest... like Roon does.

So I downloaded version 4... It installed and ran just fine. I did not configure it and setup to use with Roon at this point. It did prove that version 3 now has a compatibility issue... I thinking with one of the latest Windows update from what I can tell.

Ok, I got another update. After getting version 4 to run I reinstalled my version 3 and I got it to run. So some how version 4 resolved the version 3 compatibility issue. In some ways it does stand to reason. We will see if in 30 days when the evaluation of version 4 runs out if version 3 no longer works. I will not be using version 4, only version 3 for now. I will probably uninstall version 4 and hopefully 3 will continue working (I am guessing it will).
 
Randy Myers said:
Yes, and no. With o365 you do not... and many/most have gone to subscription. Office, Adobe CC, etc, have gone subscription and always have the latest and greatest... like Roon does.
….
Click to expand...

I also have an Office 365 subscription. I get the latest version whenever it is available but I have a recurring payment every year. I went lifetime subscription with Roon, but otherwise would have had recurring payments as well.

Glad to hear that HQP3 is now working for you!
 
nicoff said:
I also have an Office 365 subscription. I get the latest version whenever it is available but I have a recurring payment every year. I went lifetime subscription with Roon, but otherwise would have had recurring payments as well.

Glad to hear that HQP3 is now working for you!
Click to expand...

On the same track, I still use Office 2016. It gives me all I need. Microsoft continues to support and update it. They always announce a long time ahead as to when they will no longer support a product. Even if they are not supporting it the product usually works fine it simply no longer receives security patches.

If I am going to continue using HQPlayer I am fairly certain that in the not so distant future I will be forced to purchase the new version. The funny thing is I would probably have purchased it by now if he had confirmed that there were sound quality improvements (he said there is not) and if he had handled it differently from the get go. I do feel that HQPlayer does sound better than Roon by itself, I am simply unhappy with how I was treated as a paying customer and my first real experience with his company/product. I know I have to get over it, but when a customer gets mistreated it does tend to stick with them for a long time.
 
Randy Myers said:
If I am going to continue using HQPlayer I am fairly certain that in the not so distant future I will be forced to purchase the new version. The funny thing is I would probably have purchased it by now if he had confirmed that there were sound quality improvements (he said there is not) and if he had handled it differently from the get go. I do feel that HQPlayer does sound better than Roon by itself, I am simply unhappy with how I was treated as a paying customer and my first real experience with his company/product. I know I have to get over it, but when a customer gets mistreated it does tend to stick with them for a long time.
Click to expand...

Hence the reason I didn't move to HQPlayer. Having to continue to purchase a new release. Sure if the new release has some feature(s) that you really wanted, or some huge sound improvement, but a new release to give you what you have, say V3, or if a new release has fixes and you have to purchase a new version for the fixes, well fixes should be free in my book. But if ya like it and it works for ya, enjoy. But the owner did ya wrong in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top