hello, I apologize fow my newbie question,
but I wonder if there is any difference in quality of playback between various players, plugins or decoders..
it's clear, that quality depends on encoder (and setting) which has been used.. but as long as there is a lot of "ways" to encode mp3 file (which leads to different results) is there any noticable differnce in using different players, plugins, or decoders?
ie. does Winamp play (decode) mp3s better than foobar or any other player?
or if I am converting MP3s into WAVs (for burning as audio CD), is there difference if I use LAME or any decoder to do the job?
I understood, there is more plugins for Winamp.. Otachan plugin have been dicussed.. Are there any recommended plugins for winamp? and where are differences if there are any? Which player/plugin/decoder has lowest cpu utilization and so ?

I'll be gratefull for any complex answer if it's possible.. and I hope this is not such as stupid question as I am afraid it might be

thanks a lot for your help and explanations.
Fleapick.

You're going to get different answer depending on who you ask. But my personal opinion is this:

Given a "virgin" Winamp and Foobar (that is, no DSP's, or other effects), both will sound the same. The state of decoding these days is that baring a bug, it's unlikely you would notice any difference. At least they don't to me.

With that said, Foobar has builtin Replaygain, and Winamp doesn't (at least they didn't). I understand their latest release, with the right MP3 plugin does, but it's still not built-in the way it is in Foobar.

Though I don't use it, Foobar does have more options for resampling, and output bit-depth. While these don't inherently make it "sound better", it may make your sound card happy (and happy cards sound better than unhappy ones...).



Yes...generally speaking. But in terms of sound, Winamp doesn't have that many more, and in many cases, the additional DSP's (for example) are redundant, or low-quality.

In terms of DSP's, Foobar has the basic's covered. There are some commercial DSP's missing for Foobar. For example, I miss the iZotop Ozone plugin for Winamp. However, 4Front has a DSP's offering similar features. Plus, the Convolver for Foobar kicks ass, and as far as I know doesn't exist for Winamp.

Many of the plugins for Winamp are visualization related. This is an area where Winamp is clearly ahead of Foobar. But obviously, this has nothing to do with sound.



I don't have a definitive answer. But having previously been a Winamp user, I can say this: For Winamp, if you use Modern Skins, CPU utilization is much higher than Classic Skins. I've noted that Winamp using Classic Skins is comparable to Foobar.

Your questions related mostly to sound. There are other reasons to use one vs. another. I suggest you judge for yourself. Use one for a couple weeks, then try the other. It's not like picking one prohibits you from changing your mind.

You may also want to try the latest pre-beta of RadLight 4. CPU usage is comparable to Winamp/Foobar - its memory usage is even lower.

thanks for answers



What does it really mean for me? I use to run MP3Gain 1.2.2 (track gain, 89dB) over all new mp3s I make, so does built-in replaygain make any sense for me ? and if it does, why is it ?



Well again, I don't really understand the resampling issue. My knowledge only go so far that only way I make my soundcard happy is wiping the dust from it..
So let's start here: I own Hercules GameTheatre 7.1 external soundcard, for encoding mp3 is use LAME 3.90.3 APS, so it makes mp3s at 44kHZ (22kHz for each channel, right). So what is the role of resampling here? How does it work? (has lowpass filter used in APS to do anything with it?)



sure, what I was really asking for was, if there are "sound" related plugins that have been tested and are really recommendable?



what are those used for ?



I don't use modern skins or visualisation plug-ins. I really likes things as simple as possible and instead of "watching" sound I prefer to hear it as good as it can be. This is why I am asking my questions. I followed this forum's recommendations while encoding my music, and I ask (if there are) for any while decoding..




Well now I use Winamp (5.03a) because I am used to it and for the reason I want to use my TV card Remote Controller to control Winamp's playback. But I don't really want to go so far to judge for myself and spend the weeks doing work that did someone before probable better what I would. For me it's like wasting time with LAME commandline options while I know that there are people which spent a lot of time doing their great work with LAME AP settings... you know

Simple Answer:
No

Complex answer:
See Mp3 Decoder Tests, especially the conclusion.

Basically, FooBar 2000, Winamp (except for some broken versions) and more or less all decoders do a perfect job of decoding your MP3s. Some might do a better job of feeding the decoded stream to your sound card, which means nothing if you are burning and even if you are listening you are unlikely to hear.

I would encourage you to use the search function, as this has been discussed many, many times on this board with some very good answers being offered. Also, using search is likely to please board regulars. It's a win-win situation.


Certainly not. You might want to read posts to this board and other resources about how PCM audio works. Simply, both channels are sampled at 44kHz.

There will be no significant difference between a MP3Gain'd track and Foobars replaygain. The difference will be in how Foobar implements replaygain. With Foobar, you can scan any supported format (not just MP3), and it adds tags containing the replaygain information (as opposed to modifying the global gain as MP3Gain does). This also means that with Foobar, you can select which gain is used (track vs album), or even turn it off.



Changing the sampling or bit-depth isn't going to make anything sound better unless your card requires it. There are some cards that prefer 48kHz for example. I don't know if your specific card needs it. Try a search.



Tested? In some formal way? I doubt it. It's a matter of personal opinion on which one you like. The DSP's I mentioned provide things like bass boost, equalization, spacial enhancement, etc... You can find some of the functionality for Foobar using seperate DSP's. For example, Foobar has an equalizer, bass boost, crossfeed (for headphones), Convolver (for spacial effects, plus more), etc... The only thing I miss from Ozone is per track presets (which can change settings on a per track basis).




Then you've eliminated most of the "benefits" Winamp has over Foobar. In fact, from a purely functionality standpoint, Foobar handles some things much better. Like tagging and playlists for example.



No one can give you an definitive answer because it's based on personal preferences and the way you use it. It could be that a specific player supports some feature you can't live without. Or you might just like Foobars minimal interface and features over Winamps. Who knows? You are going to have to do your homework, and try them out.

I searched the forum a read a lot so now.. so I get some answers
so what I was really asking for was for example advice like.. try MAD, or Otachan plugin for Winamp and decide, but most people here use foobar2k and probably thay got some reasons for that

cabbagerat:

I am trying to understand the resampling issue and how PCM audio works, but I haven't found much useful threads or articles (and I believe there must but many).. maybe you could point me to some..

I have found that my soundcard has "20bit DAC for sampling rates on up to 48kHz" what does this tell me ?

btw, I saw the mp3decoder test, but is there any newer than few years or hundrets of version releases?

Pesch's 1by1 ( http://www.rz.uni-frankfurt.de/~pesch/ ) with the relevant Winamp in_xxx.dll's should be one of the lightest players on Windows.

With Ochatans MP3-plugin, Pawlowski's OGG-plugin and Klemm/Case's MPC-plugin you even get replaygain support.

I did a listening test (results and samples are still available):

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/show.php/showtopic/17728