I didn't install foobar2000 until recently because I was hearing complaints about how it was difficult to use etc. but when I finally installed it, it was a dream come true, a media player with out the bloat, fixes music files/tags, converts files to different formats/multiple format support, and it provides an easy to view list of your music. Another thing I like about foobar2000 is the fact the user interface is so simple, reminds me of the good 'ole windows 3.x days/95.
Why do people have gripes about foobar2000?
- Thread starter Philippine Mango
- Start date
Probably because - to use Foobar to the extent of its abilities - it CAN be a little fiddly. The whole internal database and all that.
It's worth doing, to be sure! The ability it gives you then to browse your entire media library by genre, artist, date, etc (and tag info) is REALLY cool...and it's a lot faster than WMP's version of that ability.
Still, even if you are just using it as a player and still using Windows Explorer as your sole sorting mechanism...it does still work very well.
It's worth doing, to be sure! The ability it gives you then to browse your entire media library by genre, artist, date, etc (and tag info) is REALLY cool...and it's a lot faster than WMP's version of that ability.
Still, even if you are just using it as a player and still using Windows Explorer as your sole sorting mechanism...it does still work very well.
I'm a iTunes user myself.
Sure it's probably not an audiophiles first choice, but...
1. Looks great
2. Organizing is beautiful
3. Real time search (I know many of this, but whatever) is awesome
4. Sharing songs on your network is also a really nice feature.
#4 is actually what made me jump from winamp to iTunes.
Sure it's probably not an audiophiles first choice, but...
1. Looks great
2. Organizing is beautiful
3. Real time search (I know many of this, but whatever) is awesome
4. Sharing songs on your network is also a really nice feature.
#4 is actually what made me jump from winamp to iTunes.
daniel1113
Diamond Member
- Jun 6, 2003
- 6,448
- 0
- 0
daniel1113
Diamond Member
- Jun 6, 2003
- 6,448
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Shawn
I still don't know how to use all the featuresbut I like it because the sound quality exceeds any other mp3 player i've used.
foobar myth #1
WhyTF do you need a sorting mechanism other than directory structure? I've never understood that. What else is there that you could possibly look for a song based on other than Genre=>Artist=>Album=>Title?
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: Shawn
I still don't know how to use all the features
foobar myth #1
QFT. It's been proven again and again that foobar sounds same as winamp. It's even in foobar FAQ. Kernel Streaming stuff is just placebo.
because not everyone is software savy? You need to find a plugin to have a volume slider. I can bet you 85% of the ppl out there would be baffled by this concept (talking about in general.. not the AT community).
Originally posted by: jEct2
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: Shawn
I still don't know how to use all the features
foobar myth #1
QFT. It's been proven again and again that foobar sounds same as winamp. It's even in foobar FAQ. Kernel Streaming stuff is just placebo.
nope.
So if I want to share a playlist with iTunes, I can do it in two clicks. To do the same in foobar, I have to
(a) create new directory
(b) copy all the playlist files into it
(c) in all liklihood create a new playlist file (since presumably the files before were spread out over multiple directories since they were by different artists
(d) Share the directory in windows
(e) provide the UNC address to someone else who needs to get the files.
So I the end, I've wasted a couple of more minutes and now have duplicate songs gunking up my system. The sheer beauty of iTunes is that the UI makes common tasks completeable with one or two clicks - at the expense of some bloat, but really with 3 GHz of power and 1 GB I'm not exactly concerned over ~60 MB footprint
Shawn
Lifer
- Apr 20, 2003
- 32,236
- 53
- 91
Originally posted by: jEct2
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: Shawn
I still don't know how to use all the features
foobar myth #1
QFT. It's been proven again and again that foobar sounds same as winamp. It's even in foobar FAQ. Kernel Streaming stuff is just placebo.
I've tried all of them and Foobar sounds the best and WMP sounds the worst. They are not going to claim that theirs sounds better since they cannot prove it. And I'm sure if you have a sh|tty setup with sh|tty onboard sound it wouldn't sound any better. If you don't think it sounds any better, first get a real setup, then turn Kernel Streaming on. Believe me, if it didn't sound better I wouldn't have switched from WinAMP.
Originally posted by: Shawn
Originally posted by: jEct2
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: Shawn
I still don't know how to use all the features
foobar myth #1
QFT. It's been proven again and again that foobar sounds same as winamp. It's even in foobar FAQ. Kernel Streaming stuff is just placebo.
I've tried all of them and Foobar sounds the best and WMP sounds the worst. They are not going to claim that theirs sounds better since they cannot prove it. And I'm sure if you have a sh|tty setup with sh|tty onboard sound it wouldn't sound any better. If you don't think it sounds any better, first get a real setup, then turn Kernel Streaming on. Believe me, if it didn't sound better I wouldn't have switched from WinAMP.
I was looking in the options for kernel streaming and I couldn't find it. All I could find was null output (the rest were clearly not kernel streaming). Any ideas on how I can get it to do kernel streaming?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter