A pole to end it all: Foobar vs. Winamp

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: Anubis
Originally posted by: Glitchny
foobar = one of the ugliest GUI ever

yep and its not skinable and offers nothing more then winamp allready does, ive used winamp for ever, started in 98 its always been solid

and Winamps GUI >>>>> * GUI
I don't understand this obsession with dark, unintuitive, ugly, skinned UIs. Foobar2000 makes more sense to me than Winamp does... Maybe it's because I keep my screen covered with stuff that I'm working on, so whatever media player I use had best be able to make its primary functions available through a right click menu on the system tray (yes, Winamp does this too, but the stupid skinned interface is wasted on me).
 

Fritzo

Lifer
Jan 3, 2001
41,920
2,161
126
WMP10 is great. No where near as bad as WMP9, and no where NEAR the same class of craptastic software as Realplayer...
 

Zap Brannigan

Golden Member
Oct 14, 2004
1,887
0
0
Do any players have a superior sound?

For instance does Music Match sound better than WinAmp or foobar et cetera?
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: Zap Brannigan
Do any players have a superior sound?

For instance does Music Match sound better than WinAmp or foobar et cetera?
Of all the players, Winamp and Foobar2k have special plugins that are supposed to make MP3s sound better. With my SB Live and crappy headphones, I haven't been able to notice a difference. With a studio quality DAC and expensive monitors, there's a chance you might be able to tell.

Anyway, I use Foobar2k because of the no-nonsense interface and lack of fugly skins, not because it produces higher quality sound than WMP10 or some other media player.

Edit: and if you have enough money to afford $3000 for monitor speakers and amp, and another few thousand for something with "Apogee" on the front, then you probably have enough money to have a few 300GB hard disks to store all of your CD collection in FLAC or even WAV, and thus this discussion is rendered meaningless. :)
 

Zap Brannigan

Golden Member
Oct 14, 2004
1,887
0
0
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
Originally posted by: Zap Brannigan
Do any players have a superior sound?

For instance does Music Match sound better than WinAmp or foobar et cetera?
Of all the players, Winamp and Foobar2k have special plugins that are supposed to make MP3s sound better. With my SB Live and crappy headphones, I haven't been able to notice a difference. With a studio quality DAC and expensive monitors, there's a chance you might be able to tell.

Anyway, I use Foobar2k because of the no-nonsense interface and lack of fugly skins, not because it produces higher quality sound than WMP10 or some other media player.
Thanks for the reply!

I don't use MP3's because I am a sound snob! LOL

 

Insomnium

Senior member
Aug 8, 2000
644
0
0
Foobar.

I've used Winamp 5 in the classic setting for a long time, and Winamp 2.xx for a long time before that and never wanted to switch to foobar because I too thought the interface was ugly etc. Then I dl'd the latest version to fool around with it, made it look pretty, and now am never going back. Foobar is THE player if you sincerely care about your music collection. I have a boat load of full classical albums ripped to Vorbis as well as rock, etc, and Foobar is just amazing when you customize the playlist display to your liking (which is super easy). And of course, it has a lot of "audiophile candy".

If you have a load of random mp3s off the internet and not full albums, use Winamp. If you rip your own music and have a nice collection, use Foobar.
 

Gurck

Banned
Mar 16, 2004
12,963
1
0
Originally posted by: Zap Brannigan
Do any players have a superior sound?

For instance does Music Match sound better than WinAmp or foobar et cetera?

Kernel streaming and ASIO are ways of bypassing the windows mixer which processes audio, making it sound more dull / muddy in the opinion of many people. I don't believe winamp supports either, though it may via a plugin. foobar2k has native KS support, and ASIO via a plugin.
 

Baked

Lifer
Dec 28, 2004
36,052
17
81
Depends on which sound card you have, and what format you encode in. I have a chaintech av710 and do FLAC, so I use Foobar. Excellent combo. Optical out to AOS Piccolo DAC > Headsave Home-Vibe > KOSS KSC75/Audio-Technica A900.
 

gizbug

Platinum Member
May 14, 2001
2,621
0
76
foobar. But I hate the play functions for some reason. If I put it on random, it always repeats all the songs when its done playing them.
Where did you get that UI plugin? Foobar hasnt been updated in ages =( Wonder why
 

Anubis

No Lifer
Aug 31, 2001
78,712
427
126
tbqhwy.com
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
Originally posted by: Anubis
Originally posted by: Glitchny
foobar = one of the ugliest GUI ever

yep and its not skinable and offers nothing more then winamp allready does, ive used winamp for ever, started in 98 its always been solid

and Winamps GUI >>>>> * GUI
I don't understand this obsession with dark, unintuitive, ugly, skinned UIs. Foobar2000 makes more sense to me than Winamp does... Maybe it's because I keep my screen covered with stuff that I'm working on, so whatever media player I use had best be able to make its primary functions available through a right click menu on the system tray (yes, Winamp does this too, but the stupid skinned interface is wasted on me).

dark because i HATE bright colored things on the computer they hurt my eyes, i skin every forum i visit dark because its easier to read....
the skin is pretty easy to use, I dont know how you get unintuitive out of it, seeing as its ALWAYS on top it fits nicely right over te top bar of whatever is open on that monitor, i dont use the sstem tray or tray icon because having it always on top if faster, and i can always see whats playing
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: gizbug
foobar. But I hate the play functions for some reason. If I put it on random, it always repeats all the songs when its done playing them.
Where did you get that UI plugin? Foobar hasnt been updated in ages =( Wonder why
For random, try foo_shuffle. I don't know if it protects against duplication, but I've been w/o it now for a few months (I originally got it for the history feature that shuffel has, so I can play random and still go back), and have noticed the included one doesn't do as good of a job spreading out the music played.
 

jelifah

Senior member
Dec 6, 2004
241
0
0
Winamp

Will foobar CONVERT FLAC to mp3? Or will it simply play the files? What file would you use to convert from FLAC to mp3?

- Jel
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: jelifah
Winamp

Will foobar CONVERT FLAC to mp3? Or will it simply play the files? What file would you use to convert from FLAC to mp3?

- Jel
It does it fine. You use LAME. Check the diskwriter options. I wish they'd have it tag them with the default command lines, but it'll do the conversion.
 

Zontor

Senior member
Sep 19, 2000
530
0
0
Foobar (using winamp plugins :))

Got sick of winamp - too slow / recent security issues / core team gone.....
 

Gurck

Banned
Mar 16, 2004
12,963
1
0
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: tweakmm
Originally posted by: toekramp
k, foobar sucks, the interface sucks, everything about it sucks
Except for the wicked sound quality.

how wicked could it be?

Pretty wicked :p I definitely noticed a difference between kernel streaming and directsound on my Dark Side of the Moon flacs -> av710 -> Senn 280s.