For those of you that use WinAmp

[Gooberlx2]

For me, it's all about the media library.

I think it looks more efficient, searches faster, and doesn't have all the useless crap like "online spotlight" (which is MCE, I know) or whatever web junk is in WMP.

Also winamp will remember how I've sorted my columns, and open to the last "view" I was looking at, where WMP does not. Which all go to "ease of use", imo.

I'd try foobar, but I don't care to take time to learn a new program when this one works just as well without problems.

But it's all a matter of taste. Hell, I'm sure there's someone out there who actually like the realplayer or musicmatch interface.

 

[thomsbrain]

i use it because it just works...

but i stopped using it for video because it chokes on half the stuff i throw at it, and when you close it, it disappears, but the process is still running so you have to kill it in Task Manager. i use Media Player Classic for my videos now.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: Mo0o
The skinning feature is waht I like most. I always have my winamp skin match my windows VS

WMP does skins as well

Most skinners make skins for winamp though.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: ming2020
For simplicity,

WinAmp 2.79 > *

It's probably just me, but WMP will forever feel like bloatware to me.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: phray

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Baked
Foobar2K >*

I used to use foobar, but went back to winamp. I don't remember why, but Ive never had any problems with winamp so why use anythign else?

i tried foobar for a while too, but it asploded every time i tried to load all of my mp3s. i did like the minimalistic interface, but if it can't handle my humble ~40gig mp3 collection then it's not for me.

i cant imagine myself loading up all songs in one gigantic playlist. you do know what columns_UI is right?

 

[Cristatus]

Originally posted by: Dulanic
Cause Ive used Winamp forever, it does everything I need, has all the functions I use. I use shoutcast alot to listen to internet radio, I honestly listen to that more then my MP3s now.

oh noes! i forgot about shoutcast! guess i'm going to have to keep winamp installed then

 

[MDE]

IMO, Winamp does audio best, WiMP does video best. It's a forced habit by now, I could probably consolidate my media playing into one or the other.

 

[TitanDiddly]

The minimized MMD3 skin, and I don't like WMP for audio. That and occasional shoutcast listening.

 

[mpitts]

I use WinPlay3.

Wait.. That was 10 years ago.

 

[Cristatus]

Ok, let's put it this way: if you can find plugins/codecs and almost anything for Winamp, how come i can't ever get my videos to work with it properly? And why do most other people use WMP for videos?

 

[So]

Originally posted by: MDE
IMO, Winamp does audio best, WiMP does video best. It's a forced habit by now, I could probably consolidate my media playing into one or the other.

Same here. I have a friend who is trying to convert me to TheCORE media player for video.

 

[Hyperblaze]

I like using winamp.

Do you have a problem with that?

 

[Slickone]

Does Foobar 2000 not support MP3Pro? I can't seem to find this out.
I'm using Foobar Light.

 

[cKGunslinger]

QCD for teh win!!

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: Slickone
Does Foobar 2000 not support MP3Pro? I can't seem to find this out.
I'm using Foobar Light.

not sure on that... i suppose you might need them for some reason, but ifi would have to rip something for home and portable it would have to be flac and ogg/vbr mp3

# Audio formats supported "out-of-the-box": WAV, AIFF, VOC, AU, SND, Ogg Vorbis, MPC, MP2, MP3, MPEG-4 AAC
# Audio formats supported through official addons: FLAC, OggFLAC, Monkey's Audio, WavPack, Speex, CDDA, TFMX, SPC, various MOD types; extraction on-the-fly from RAR, 7-ZIP & ZIP archives

 

[Shawn]

I used to use Winamp because it had better quality. I now use Foobar because Foobar sound quality > *.

 

[Shawn]

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: Dulanic
Cause Ive used Winamp forever, it does everything I need, has all the functions I use. I use shoutcast alot to listen to internet radio, I honestly listen to that more then my MP3s now.

oh noes! i forgot about shoutcast! guess i'm going to have to keep winamp installed then

Foobar supports soutcast.

 

[slpaulson]

Originally posted by: VanillaH

Originally posted by: phray

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: Baked
Foobar2K >*

I used to use foobar, but went back to winamp. I don't remember why, but Ive never had any problems with winamp so why use anythign else?

i tried foobar for a while too, but it asploded every time i tried to load all of my mp3s. i did like the minimalistic interface, but if it can't handle my humble ~40gig mp3 collection then it's not for me.

i cant imagine myself loading up all songs in one gigantic playlist. you do know what columns_UI is right?

Some people such as myself just prefer having everything in one playlist. I've used columns ui but I still prefer winamp.

I have it set to shuffle through my whole playlist. I have the jump to file plugin installed. If there's a particular file I want to play or enqueue I just hit j and type it in, and it searches as you type much like foobar does.

 

[Cristatus]

Here are two quotes from the Foobar's Website:

Which output: DirectSound, waveOut or Kernel Streaming should I use?
It is recommended to use default settings (waveOut), it should be safe to use anywhere. DirectSound may give better performance (less CPU overhead), especially under Windows 2000, Windows XP or newer, but there shouldn't be any audible difference between the two. In certain rare cases, Kernel Streaming may produce better results than DirectSound/waveOut (if for some reason you need data sent through digital out to be bit-identical to source stream); but bit-identical results with DirectSound have been reported on soundcards capable of mixing multiple streams in hardware (with hardware mixing enabled in DirectSound settings). Please note that Kernel Streaming is an experimental feature, it has known issues and using it is *not* recommended unless you have a major reason to - most of perceived "sound quality differences" between DirectSound and Kernel Streaming are related to the fact that Kernel Streaming usually bypasses windows volume control / wave volume slider. Also, Kernel Streaming works only on Windows 2000, Windows XP or newer.

Does foobar2000 sound better than other players?
No. Most of "sound quality differences" people "hear" are placebo effect (at least with real music), as actual differences in produced sound data are below their noise floor (1 or 2 last bits in 16bit samples). Foobar2000 has sound processing features such as software resampling or 24bit output on new high-end soundcards, but most of other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.

Now, I don't know if any of you guys have used the excuse that Foobar sounds better, but even the developers of the program say that it is only a placebo effect.

Those two questions can be found here

 

[Calin]

Originally posted by: logic1485
Why do you use WinAmp? I use WinAmp, but am considering switching over to WMP, because it has pretty much the same stuff, but also better integration with the buttons on my laptop's chassis.

Why do you use WinAmp, and not WMP?

I have no laptop, and I hate all the copyright/copyright protection that is written into Media Player.
On the other side, Winamp does everything I need (well, almost - adding subtitles to movies would be fine), and does this from the 2.8something version. I still use the 2.95 version

 

[Allio]

Because I can fit everything I could ever want into not much screen real estate?

Foobar needs a lot of customisation to look any good, and then it runs like crap with colums_ui. ANY lag in a music player is pretty much unacceptable on a reasonably modern CPU.

Don't even get me started on WMP.

And you 'I'm so happy with 2.78/2.91, I can't stand all that BLOAT they added in Winamp 5!' lot are just retarded, but suit yourselves

 

[BillyBatson]

well i use winamp in 2.x skin support with a skin i have had for 5+ years! i also disable any sort of video playback
just simple to use this way, nothign special, good sound, small desktop footprint, nice features like crossfade, like the simple small visual, has small visuals IF you have a party or something lol

 

[edro]

I will continue to use Winamp 2.x for a while. It has CDDB, lyric lookup plugins, it's fast, sleak, and it does the job quickly.

 

[psiu]

Originally posted by: ming2020
For simplicity,

WinAmp 2.79 > *

It's probably just me, but WMP will forever feel like bloatware to me.

Well, I use 2.91, but the idea is the same.

Oldversion.com has what looks to be be every version of winamp ever. It's a LOT.

 

[edro]

Originally posted by: psiu

Originally posted by: ming2020
For simplicity,

WinAmp 2.79 > *

It's probably just me, but WMP will forever feel like bloatware to me.

Well, I use 2.91, but the idea is the same.

Oldversion.com has what looks to be be every version of winamp ever. It's a LOT.

2.78 here