But also if some topic is about Winamp and/or decoding, word "foobar" should not be so sensitive. Almos every thread where "foobar" is mentioned, after that second post contains 99% surely word Zealot.

You may discuss it but please don't promote/praise it.

Just to avoid the impression that HA is the foobar forum. It's an open-minded forum that happens to host the foobar forum but it isn't it and should not look like it.

EDIT: typo

What would you have us do then? If someone asks what's the 'best player' of course we're gonna tell them the one we think is best. If we didn't find it best, we wouldn't be using it. Just because the magority of users on this forum use foobar2000, doesn't automatically make it zealotry.

this is in the set of rules of doom9 forum but fits what you are saying karmakillernz:
"Do not ask "what's best" because this question cannot be answered objectively. Each and everyone has their own view about what's best in a certain area. The best is what works best for you!"
So a "what's the best player" topic shouldnt be there to begin with. but if it is it should be closed for the reason mentioned above or else only trolling will come out of it, IMHO.
of course you can always ask why player X can be considered better than player Y but all answers should follow rule #8 otherwise it comes back to trolling again

This is completely un-scientifical
And if you have been paying attention HA takes its pride in being a very scientific forum.
This is not the way we are meant to approach things here.

Instead of something so vague as "What we think is best", perhaps something more empirical such as "Poll: What audio player do you use, and why?" Then, anyone could compare the numbers, and then read each person's explanation for more details. No accusations of "zealotry" or bias if it's just each person responding with their own "vote" and explanation.

Also, it would address the effect that I think some non-foobar2000-users feel that foobar-users are "ganging up" on them (which is when accusations of zealotry often begin). Many people responding to one person's question might make that person feel like they're being "blind-sided" by foobar users en masse, but if a simple poll results in more foobar2000 votes than any other player (as such polls here have), then no one can cry "zealotry".

Right?

Kind of off-topic, but as this thread doesn't look like it will die out soon, I'm posting anyway. Admins, please feel free to split this thread if you think the thread has gotten out of hand.

Isn't foobar2000 hosted at HA precisely because it's a high-quality audio player? It's being hosted here because it's easier to point people to an audio player here instead of somewhere far away, isn't it?

If the above is true, then why shouldn't people promote or praise foobar2000 here if they have valid reasons to do so? Questions about mass-tagging, mass-replay-gaining, gapless mp3 playback.. these are all likely to result in foobar2000 being mentioned, and it would be unwise to ommit foobar2000 in such discussions.

I agree "thread hijacking" is bad (sorry for being off-topic..), but I think I've observed someone react harshly even to not-off-topic suggestions concerning foobar2000. IMHO, if somone is having trouble with an audio player, then IMHO it is definitely on-topic to suggest an alternative.

Just MHO.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/show.php/showtopic/11317

Not very informative.

Yes, and you seem to know exactly why is foobar2000 a superior player, but it is the same case as with EAC. It has some very specific superiorities, but some members when they recommend both softwares seem to just be "promoting" them as some kind of magical, came-from-above programs that can do it all.

There are a lot of misconceptions around about both programs. The most common one is that both of them will produce better sound than anything else. And this is just not true.

People should know when to recommend any of these programs, and when to recommend something else, like Winamp of dbpoweramp.
In some cases anything will do.

"Best" is really subjective. And it will always be.

True, but that poll left out what I'd consider a very important question at the end of the topic title "...and why?"

To make it more meaningful, follow "What audio player do you use?" with one of the following...

- "What are your top three reasons for using it?",
- "What are your three favorite features?", or
- "What are your top three priorities for choosing an audio player?"

Anything that could help someone reading such a thread (n00b or otherwise) decide what's the best for their own needs, that's the kind of value that should be sought IMO. You can't completely prevent conflicts from breaking out now and then, but hopefully you could reduce the troll-factor.

I don't think all that explanation is necessary all the time. I mean the guy probably just wanted some suggestions so he could try the other players for himself. Instead of telling him why he MUST use this software, just suggest an audio player.

The aforementioned "zealotry" can be quite helpful to someone like myself--it saved me some time and headaches, and I would never have even looked at eac/foobar and the ilk if I was hunting for something along those lines at a download.com. I'd say the majority of people here, even silent ones in the learning process such as myself are trying to find the best stuff out there, bei it a codec or advice about headphones. When I realized that a knowledgable majority generally espoused certain things from foobar to not touching lame presets when you thought calculus was witchcraft. I'm grateful for being set in a pretty good direction, and the fact that so many people here do use generally the same handful of tools means that when someone asks a legit question, there will be a critical mass of people at least passingly familiar with the software and might be able to answer them in a sentence. Obviously it's great to discuss a variety of products, but it's also nice to get something approaching a consensus answer on "what's the best XX..." by some of the most knowledgable people around not trying to make money from their answer.

actually explanation shouldn't be necessary at all if a little research was done, since most questions like this have already been answered many times

Actually, on the very day that HA went down, I planned to write a post to complain about the increasing anti-foobar2000 attitude I experienced on this board.

While HA was down I had some days to think it over and decided not to do this. But still, I definately agree with what askoff wrote.

It seemed to me like everytime anybody recommended foobar2000 (even in situations where it's perfectly acceptable - I remember a thread were the OP asked about high quality/precision MP3 decoders in players), somebody else jumped in and said "here are the foobar2000 zealots again", as if it's a crime to recommend foobar2000.

IMHO it should be perfectly acceptable to recommend or mention it if you have rational arguments to back it up and if it's relevant in the thread you're posting in.

AFAIK, I never "promoted" foobar2000, or try to force anybody to use it.

Ok, I agree there. Maybe that wasn't the best way to put that. What I was trying to say was that we all use a certain player for a reason, that is because we like the x, y & z features of it. Yes, posts that say nothing but "foobar2000" are pretty much worthless, and they should be backed up with specific reasons, but the point still remains that usually, most people will recommend the player they find to be best for that particular use.