Tell us why have you chosen foobar2000, or why don't you like it |
This is NOT a tech support forum.
Tech support questions go to foobar2000 Tech Support forum instead.
See also: Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service.
![]() ![]() |
Tell us why have you chosen foobar2000, or why don't you like it |
Jun 15 2004, 18:02
Post
#76
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 15-June 04 From: Breinigsville, PA Member No.: 14688 |
Well, I've been a supporter of Winamp for several years. I've heard about Foobar2000 for a while but several days ago, I decided to download & try out Foobar & I love it. Last Saturday, I got rid of Winamp in favor of Foobar2000. First of all, this program isn't full of crap like Winamp is & best of all, Foobar is more stable than Winamp & uses less memory. The Winamp versions which I have used are Winamp versions 2 & 3 but I don't like Winamp 5 cause it's full of stuff which I would probably never use. This is the main reason why I like Foobar. Foobar isn't full of stuff which I would never use.
But the main reason why I got rid of Winamp (version 2.91) is that it would lock up frequently & it wouldn't allow me to stream audio from the Internet (it would lock up when I stream). This post has been edited by EugeneE3RD: Jun 15 2004, 18:10 |
|
|
|
Jun 15 2004, 19:36
Post
#77
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 134 Joined: 12-June 04 Member No.: 14643 |
I have been a user of Winamp since I got to know about it (about 3 years ago), I loved the skinning-possibility...that's what I liked.
Now I am more of a geek, and I continued to use Winamp, til version 5 came, it was buggy, slow, and froze many times a day.... Then I got my broadband, but only on my slow computer, we haven't fixed network yet, it is only 300 mhz. I tried Winamp, but it was way too slow for my computer, even with classical skins. I remembered Foobar2000 from when I tried it 1 year ago, but then I hated it, it was soo ugly. I downloaded it, and first I hated the playlist-formatting, but after a few days, I had downloaded a few formattings from that formatting site, and then I loved it. I loved how you could have multiple dsp plugins at the same time, not just one as in Winamp. I have programmed in C++ earlier, but it never went anywhere, I just wrote a few console programs that did nothing fun, but I started with foobars playlist-formatting, and then I was caught. I installed Foobar on my fast computer, even though it can handle Winamp. +: Great sound quality Always looks like mine WindowBlinds theme Advanced Title Formatting File Converter FreeDB All the great plugins Not eating resources Nice and helpful people on the forums Highly customizable Starts in like 3 seconds, Winamp starts in 20 Tab-playlists Recording - No video playback |
|
|
|
Jun 16 2004, 14:55
Post
#78
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 151 Joined: 12-May 04 Member No.: 14050 |
I'm also a converted Winamp user. WA 5 is a bit buggy and Foobar uses less memory.
The only thing I don't like about Foobar is that I still haven't gotten my media keys to work, wich worked well with Winamp. |
|
|
|
Jun 16 2004, 15:49
Post
#79
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 167 Joined: 25-December 03 Member No.: 10688 |
I'm sure I could have come up with more good reasons for loving Foobar2000
This post has been edited by WarBird: Jun 16 2004, 15:51 |
|
|
|
Jun 17 2004, 15:50
Post
#80
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 224 Joined: 6-January 04 Member No.: 11006 |
This seems to be like a hymn to FB2K!
Ok...my pro's and con's: + the careing community (THX to all of you) + the typical things like DSP's, quality, simplicity + I used it for quite some time now without complications!!! + components or in other words...plug-in's (without it Foobar would b dead!!) ------------ - no simple/advanced mode for newbies: predefined settings (i.e. eq, formatting strings) - terrible "Preferences" window; from the point of usability - NO useful documentation/help/description of SDK or components AT ALL - it's supposed to be most flexible but some ideas are just called BAD (like cover art in ID3) - standard icons..uhh kiddie style! [sorry but doesn't really fit the simplicity concept] ---i like it--- JD //edit: one more con This post has been edited by John Doe: Jun 17 2004, 16:16 |
|
|
|
Jun 17 2004, 18:56
Post
#81
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 8 Joined: 17-June 04 From: Hungary Member No.: 14735 |
I don't use it because it can't handle DirectX/VST plugins.
There isn't Adapt-X like plugin for foobar2000, or any direct support. I can't live without "iZotope Ozone" plugin, without it, all sound is "crappy". Every other is absolutely perfect! |
|
|
|
Jun 17 2004, 22:59
Post
#82
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 17-June 04 Member No.: 14743 |
ok, after using Winamp for - well, it's so long, I don't remeber - ..., I changed two days ago to Foobar 2000. I already experimentated with a little bit with title formating and other options... and now Foobar is my (default) audio-player! Here my first impressions:
+ simple, understandable, logical design + Album List - better than Winamps library, because of: + title formating / strings. Now I'm able to sort my Albums in the Album List by year ([1992]Opiate, [1993]Undertow, [1996] AEnima, [2000] Salival, [2001] Lateralus, not AEnima, Lateraus, Opiate, Salival, Undertow + fast + free + often new releases, as I observed it + playing shoutcast + tabbed playlists and so more things that I just don't remember now Anyway, there remain some things that should be improved, are negative, are missing: - ugly interface. Well I don't want skins. But these Icons (play, stop, etc.) and this visualizer (grey on grey???!!!) are horrible. - there should be more buttons - e.g. open / close Album List or Options-Menu in the toolbar. I tried foo_tunes, but don't like it somehow - maybe it should somehow be possible to integrate the album list into the main window. I use it very often. So have it nearly always opened. I don't need the playlist to be as wide as my screen. There is enaugh space for the album list.... Hope you understand what I mean! |
|
|
|
Jun 17 2004, 23:22
Post
#83
|
|
![]() Group: Banned Posts: 1131 Joined: 19-September 02 Member No.: 3407 |
A wolf in sheeps clothing. What I mean is, foobar looks so simple/streamlined at first sight, but when you look deeper, you realise how powerful it realy is.
|
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 10:49
Post
#84
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 117 Joined: 11-March 04 From: Russia Member No.: 12658 |
QUOTE (Columbo @ Jun 17 2004, 01:59 PM) - ugly interface. Well I don't want skins. But these Icons (play, stop, etc.) and this visualizer (grey on grey???!!!) are horrible. - there should be more buttons - e.g. open / close Album List or Options-Menu in the toolbar. I tried foo_tunes, but don't like it somehow Try ui_columns by musicmusic, if you haven't tried yet. This component supports real columns, different foreground/background colors for visualizer and this plugin is alot cooler than foo_tunes and less crappy. For now here version 0.1 is available, but there're links for 0.1.1 beta version on ui_columns forum thread at HA. -------------------- stimulating the audio nerve directly
|
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 11:14
Post
#85
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 43 Joined: 9-November 03 From: French Riviera Member No.: 9744 |
why i love Foobar2000?
+ > kernel streaming, strong ATH noise shapping dithering + > masstagger, rename files, and freedb + > simple formatting string + > few memory RAM usage + > musepack and vorbis native core -------------------- [FONT=Arial][SIZE=1]la vie est faite de morceaux qui ne se joignent pas.
|
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 14:25
Post
#86
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 17-June 04 Member No.: 14743 |
QUOTE Try ui_columns by musicmusic, if you haven't tried yet. This component supports real columns, different foreground/background colors for visualizer and this plugin is alot cooler than foo_tunes and less crappy. For now here version 0.1 is available, but there're links for 0.1.1 beta version on ui_columns forum thread at HA. I had tried it before... Now I tested it again. Chagend the colours of the visualizer. And somehow these columns are quiete good, though the simple look of the playlist was ok for me... And columns are very ugly, when I listen to a http-Stream, because then nearly all of the columns are empty or there are questionmarks... For now I will use cloumn_ui... And it was quite difficult to change the colours of the paylist (216216216|555555555$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(103,136,201),$rgb(028,062,125))|$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(103,136,201),$rgb(103,136,201))|$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(204,208,212),$rgb(103,136,201))) now... I'm not a programmer, it was not easy for me to get my blue (stolen from Winamps default skin...)... But thanks for your hint, yandexx. It would be really cool, if they would implement the album list into the main-window, as it is discussed in the thread you gave a link to... |
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 17:22
Post
#87
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 40 Joined: 9-May 03 Member No.: 6492 |
I have yet to find a better tool. Nothing I know comes close to it.
Clean, simple, fexible and powerful. Enjoy! |
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 20:36
Post
#88
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 74 Joined: 3-April 04 Member No.: 13211 |
foobar is THE BEST.....with my 5.1 setup nothing can touch it.....with all the DSPs and 24 fixed point with dithering.....it's hardcore....and the playlist formatting and everything u can customize!!!!! theres no reason for anything else!
|
|
|
|
Jun 18 2004, 22:23
Post
#89
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 134 Joined: 12-June 04 Member No.: 14643 |
I agree to JEN, it is more powerful than it seems to be, the orginal title-formatting looks like crap.
It sounds better than winamp with my 4.1 setup, even better than winamp with the sound enhancer that takes 45 % cpu, foobar takes 0% for me (!!) |
|
|
|
Jun 19 2004, 06:33
Post
#90
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1075 Joined: 15-October 03 From: Memphis, TN Member No.: 9323 |
I don't use it much at present. I may switch to it eventually. Right now I mainly use it as the swiss army knife when I'm trying to do something with a tune and I don't have any specific program to do it.
My main objection is that it starts out overly simplistic and takes way too much effort to make it actually have a useful interface. Okay, configurability = good, but I think foobar takes it a bit to extremes in this aspect. If it looked good and was more usable from the inital install, I might use it more. But the interface to a new user consists of a list of songs that you put into it and a few buttons. Not even a EQ or volume control or anything. Look, I don't want to have to reinvent the wheel and design my own music player here. Give me a nice interface that does everything I want it to do. Make plugins have logical locations in the menu hierarchy instead of being all over the map. Organize, man. It's just too chaotic for everyday use and I don't want to spend all my time changing the way it works. -------------------- http://ottodestruct.com
|
|
|
|
Jun 19 2004, 16:13
Post
#91
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 470 Joined: 26-October 01 From: Germany Member No.: 352 |
QUOTE (John Doe @ Jun 19 2004, 01:34 PM) I researched in Trillian as well. About the components problem: I edited my post...but Foobar exists of components so the headline "Components" is rather imprecise because you'd expect ALL comps to be gathere there or not? (It's really difficult to put myself in a 1.timers place!) What is more important; to sort the prefs by origin or by function? JD i was only thinking of "general" components listed under components in prefs. input/outpus etc. are already handeled different, as they are more "part" of the main functionality. regards; ilikedirt |
|
|
|
Jun 19 2004, 17:06
Post
#92
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 9-December 03 Member No.: 10327 |
I have one main gripe against foobar, It almost destroys the whole good impression I got of the program, why oh why does it strip the the tags you don't write to? That annoys me alot, I understand why people want it do it, but why not let the user choose, instead of forcing him to strip the tags?
AtW |
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 17:17
Post
#93
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 2340 Joined: 28-August 02 Member No.: 3218 |
- no bloat no unnecessary visual gimmix
- modular - replaygain, some plugins I need - I know the dev loves his product an I am heard if I report things |
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 17:44
Post
#94
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 117 Joined: 11-March 04 From: Russia Member No.: 12658 |
QUOTE (Columbo @ Jun 18 2004, 05:25 AM) QUOTE Try ui_columns by musicmusic, if you haven't tried yet. This component supports real columns, different foreground/background colors for visualizer and this plugin is alot cooler than foo_tunes and less crappy. For now here version 0.1 is available, but there're links for 0.1.1 beta version on ui_columns forum thread at HA. I had tried it before... Now I tested it again. Chagend the colours of the visualizer. And somehow these columns are quiete good, though the simple look of the playlist was ok for me... And columns are very ugly, when I listen to a http-Stream, because then nearly all of the columns are empty or there are questionmarks... For now I will use cloumn_ui... And it was quite difficult to change the colours of the paylist (216216216|555555555$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(103,136,201),$rgb(028,062,125))|$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(103,136,201),$rgb(103,136,201))|$if(%_isplaying%,$rgb(204,208,212),$rgb(103,136,201))) now... I'm not a programmer, it was not easy for me to get my blue (stolen from Winamps default skin...)... But thanks for your hint, yandexx. It would be really cool, if they would implement the album list into the main-window, as it is discussed in the thread you gave a link to... see here, columns ui formatting strings database There you will find winamp-look(s) and many other simple and very advanced configs to import into columns UI. -------------------- stimulating the audio nerve directly
|
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 17:55
Post
#95
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1099 Joined: 18-March 03 From: Oslo, Norway Member No.: 5569 |
QUOTE (ATWindsor @ Jun 19 2004, 06:06 PM) why oh why does it strip the the tags you don't write to? I write APEv2 and ID3v1 with foobar2000, and all ID3v2 tags are left alone. Neither modified, nor deleted... |
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 19:23
Post
#96
|
|
![]() Group: FB2K Moderator (Donating) Posts: 4219 Joined: 24-February 03 Member No.: 5153 |
Discussion about preferences redesign split to here.
-------------------- http://foosion.foobar2000.org/ - my components for foobar2000
|
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 19:58
Post
#97
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 101 Joined: 9-December 03 Member No.: 10327 |
QUOTE (upNorth @ Jun 20 2004, 08:55 AM) QUOTE (ATWindsor @ Jun 19 2004, 06:06 PM) why oh why does it strip the the tags you don't write to? I write APEv2 and ID3v1 with foobar2000, and all ID3v2 tags are left alone. Neither modified, nor deleted... If you don't install id3v2-support, that is true in my case too, but if i do, I loose the tags, besides, that still leaves the problem of writing the RG-info to the id3v2-tags without stripping the APE-tag. AtW |
|
|
|
Jun 20 2004, 22:18
Post
#98
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1099 Joined: 18-March 03 From: Oslo, Norway Member No.: 5569 |
@ATWindsor:
But all sane people use either Apv2+ID3v1 or ID3v2+ID3v1, don't they? Sorry, I couldn't resist, because IIRC you said in another thread that you wanted all three tag types. Thus it occurs to me as a self inflicted problem, caused by, at least to me, unnecessary redundance. The purpose of my last post, was to point out that your claim wasn't the whole truth, that's all. I also expected the ID3v2 plugin to cause it, as I don't use it myself. I understand your problem though, and as most things in foobar can be configured to suit personal preference, even if everyone else might find it useless, that's not the case here. Btw: As this is off topic, I won't discuss this any further in this thread. |
|
|
|
Jun 21 2004, 17:12
Post
#99
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 21-June 04 Member No.: 14812 |
I'm YAWC (yet another winamp convert). Been on winamp for well, nearly 6-7 years now and figured it was time for a change. After seeing SO many screenshots of foobar on neowin.net I figured I might give it a go. I really like how it fits in EXACTLY with my theme. Also, the past few winamp versions havent exactly been 'compatible' with my machine, with 5.03 basically not working at all.
The only real 'beef' I have with foobar would be the lack of a media library as such (like winamps). I'm used to having my music seperated first by artist, then by album, but being able to combine multiple albums should I choose to. I may swap back to winamp at some stage, but for the time being i'm loving this new app on my pc |
|
|
|
Jun 21 2004, 20:38
Post
#100
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1317 Joined: 4-January 03 From: Finland Member No.: 4418 |
The closest thing to the Winamp media library in foobar would be the album list or foo_dbsearch.
If you use foo_dbsearch, you can do something like this: If you want to search for 1980s music, you'll just search for %date%=1980, then if you can't decide what to listen and want to go for some genre (ie Rock), you can just add there %genre%=Rock (so the pattern would be %date%=1980 %genre%=Rock). If you still can't make your mind and use for example the %rating% tag, you could still add a %rating%>4 to get all 1980s rock songs that you have rated over 4 Oh, and to search for music made in the whole 1980s decade, you could use either %date%~198 (yes, no zero there) or %date%>1979 %date%<1990 This post has been edited by anza: Jun 21 2004, 20:43 |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th May 2013 - 02:59 |