I'm sure I'm not the only one with this problem. I just can't seem to find an audio player that does everything I want! I've tried foobar2000, dBpower AMP, Deliplayer, itunes, Windows Media Player, Winamp, J River Media Center, Real Player, Jet Audio..etc, and they all have features I love, but none have ALL the features I love. So, I'm here seeking advice from you guys--maybe you know a player that can do all the stuff I want.

Here are the features that are most important to me:

Be able to sort the files in the library by filepath.

Very quick to navigate, even if you have tons of files (Windows Media player is the worst in this regard).

The currently playing track will always be highlighted and displayed in the library, instead of only in the Now Playing area.

Fast and easy to navigate and sort by Artist, Album, Genre, bitrate..etc, and can display content by context (like itunes, when you click on an artist, only songs by that artist will show).

Can encode/decode various audio formats like FLAC, MPC..etc.

Can rank files by how much you like them (I wish foobar could do this).

Skin isn't too bright (I HATE how bright itunes' display window is--it hurts my eyes. You can only skin the UI, but not the actual display window).

Some form of replaygain or volume matching function.

Can display Asian languages correctly.

So, have I described an impossible beast that does not exist?

Errm.. I'm not sure how far you want to go with this, but in foobar you can sort your playlist entries by their play count (foo_playcount) or manual rating (foo_quick_tag) or generate a playlist with songs rated X and above (extended playlist generator) etc.

What sort of "ranking" are you looking for?

Everything here can be done in foobar2000 with several plugins. I don't know if the author of foo_playlist_tree ever corrected the bugs that would cause non-englisgh languages to fail with it, but if he did, then that would be a step in the right direction for you. Be warned, this plugin is unstable, and has crashed for me on serveral occasions (it usually happens whilst adjusting options, and not in day-to-day use).

This is the only feature, which fb2k (i think) cannot do. Maybe playlist-tree can do it, but i suppose no.

Another feature which fb2k cannot do (yet) is database autoupdate(monitoring certain directories for changes).

- Lyx

Have in mind that "all_in_one" solutions are not always perfect!

I think you can do that with $if(%_ISPLAYING%,$rgb(255,0,0)) or something like that...

hmm foobar certainly can highlight/indicate the song playing in a playlist even if another is selected/highlighted, also i don't know about asian language support but i believe foobar does everythig else.

Many people look at the default foobar look and thing yuk, foobar actually has amazing configurability which ive just recently realised myself after some time using, with the columns_ui and many more plugins which enhance foobar beyond recognision and functionality.

I really can't think of a feature i would add, i think only making it easier to configure, but how that could be achieved i dont know..

foobar can list music by genre, and also list by context? Which plugins do that?

When I said ranking the files, I meant like how itunes, WMP..etc use stars..

I think you should probably spend some more time looking into each player. Looks like you've missed quite a few og foobar2000's features/components.

Here is a screenshot of my foobar (as an example):

Some of the features seen above:
- Rating (added from context menu or by shortcut key. The blue bars)
- Playcount
- Favmeter (calculated from rating and playcount. The red bars to the right)
- Indicator showing recently played tracks (notes)
- Replaygain
- Album list sorted by genre
- Chronologically sorted playlist
- Chart playlists generated for some "sort genres"*
- Playlists generated for some "genres" and "sort genres" ("metal", "punk"...)


(*) "sort genre" is just a broader grouping than "genre". Added as a custom tag.

edit: minor language improvement
edit2: typo

@upnorth:

You certainly know how to get a retro-look into a hi-tech UI *g*

- Lyx

very nice ... how did you achieve *all* that?

@upNorth
The playlist format you are using is excellent. Can you please share it

That's really awesome!

The problem is, one would have to try all these different plugins and scripts and experiment, and MAYBE eventually be able to configure foobar to something he wants. What ever happened to ease of use and intuitive UI? For starters, I don't even know HOW to get foobar to look like what you did to it. Not every music lover is a techie guy who gets off on scripting or hunting down plugins in obscure places. Sometimes, we just want something to open up on the screen and actually work. I'm willing to try different things with foobar, as I've done some custom stuff with it before, but like I said, there are a number of different plugins for foobar that do similar things--HOW do I know which one actually works, and works well?

If you want everything without actually putting some work into it, then good luck finding perfect solution. I know J River's Media Center is awesome for database management, but some things you ask are not as important to everyone: "The currently playing track will always be highlighted and displayed in the library, instead of only in the Now Playing area" or “Can display Asian languages correctly”. I too have character problems with my language on most major players, but I accept it that majority is made for English language and cannot complain about it.

I use Foobar2000 and I wouldn't mind putting a few hours into it to get it work exactly as I want. Not all people want/need things you might prefer s I doubt you'll see something that combines everything you want. I'm sure we all could list of things we want to have in our favorite player, but since that's not the case we all use multiple programs, if there is something missing from the one we use the most.

Love the setup, upNorth... do tell us how you achieved it, if you can.


Edit: Spelling and completed last sentence in first paragraph.

Thats the price to pay - if you want easy of use, then there are lots of instant-satisfaction players out there.

If you have special needs, then either code a player yourself, wait for someone else to code it, or use foobar and accept the steep learning curve to build your own player. Agreed, some preferences are more difficult than necessary... and there is a lack of a central layout management plugin.

But overally, there are only 4 choices:
1. be average and use a player for the average-joe
2. find a player which is designed especially towards your taste/needs
3. learn how to code and prog your own player
4. use a toolbox (fb2k) from which you can build your own player without coding it - then it will be difficult, but not as difficult as coding your own player

If you think that you can do it better than 1., 2. and 4. (and many tried before) then pick number 3. instead of whining. Another option would be paying someone else to do the work for you.

Thats how the world goes - either don't expect much and don't put effort in - or expect more and pay the price. There is no free lunch.

- Lyx

I can totally relate to this guy's frustration with foobar.

It is presented as a great, extensible player that trumps everthing else.
Conversions, play lists, databases, format compatibility, customization, etc.

It has it all, and you think you've finally found the best tool ever....

Then you install the loaded 'special' edition of the program, with a ton of plugins built in and you get.....

The ugliest, most bare bone player known to man. And you sit there at your desk wondering why you even wanted to try this thing. Where are all the awesome tools, skins, conversions, etc? It's not like it's improving how your music plays back, so why go through all the pain to customize and code your layout?

Winamp has a crap load of plugins and skins, etc... that will get conversions, ipods, and all that working. And you don't have to spend a thousand years trying to find out where how to get the plugin you just installed to show up.

There is a limit to how much BSing we want to do to listen to our music. For me foobar2000 was over that line. Especially since it doesn't change the listening experience one bit.

Back to the rebirth of the original badass player for me, Winamp 5. May the original team always be proud of what they built before AOL screwed it up with version 3 and politics. (Thank goodness V5 came out, it redeemed the Winamp name in a lot of people's minds.)

The foobar2000 thing reminds me of the whole shell replacement scene. Where you get NextStep clones and had to edit config text files to position your icons instead of dragging them. You can't tell me that's a better way. It's just not. This sort of customization is the kind of thing you have to do when the software is experimental and not meant for normal people to use. One day they will have a proper configuration tool and 'the common man' will be able to realize the power of the product. Until then people will continue to use real player, media player, itunes, winamp, musicmatch, etc. and why not? You shouldn't have to build your own player to have something that looks decent and makes playing the tracks you want easily.

Foobar highlights everything that is good, and bad, about open source.
The thing is infinitely powerful and can be developed for without limit.
But it is also lacking the usability that the majority of people require.

/dual

Bad luck for you then. Seems like you will need to continue to dream about your optimal audioplayer.

Someone asked if something like this and that does exist.

People said there is one app which can do this - but it requires some effort.

You dont want to spend the effort - fine, then stay with what you've got - but then don't complain, because you don't have any right to - or did you pay for something?

If you want something which doesn't exist, then either code it yourself, or pay someone to code it....... wait a min, i forgot: you don't want to do that, right?

I'll say it again: There is no free lunch.

- Lyx

If you don't want to bother customizing your own layout, its not like loads of people haven't posted screenshots of their settings and made the settings themselves available for use. For the price (exactly free, with no ads or spyware to deal with) I think foobar is great. It's also still in beta stage.

You're plainly nuts. Surely it's the other way round - foobar gives a properly extensible architecture, where winamp gives you 'skins'. I swear nobody with an ounce of UI knowledge ever built a winamp skin. All chrome buttons here and naked anime girls in the background, but the same shite ui with the same problems.



It's not open-source.



This is where we agree. It's all very well having the great architecture but I have to customise installs for all my friends I convert to foobar. The benefits over wmp that they usually use are obvious, but a beginner can't personalise foobar easily. A good start would be to maybe bundle the album art panel, columns_ui and a decent panel visualisation (??) into a 'give me a music player' install configuration. Prompt the user to add music directories at the first startup, lock the playlist by default from being edited and I could save myself some time

If you want something pretty and foolproof then use something else besides Foobar and don't complain about missing feature X. It's free and the most powerful player I've used. Winamp is ok, it can be extended to do whatever you like but I personally prefer downloading one file (special installer) which includes everything+ I need withing one setup file. I hate when I have to search for Winamp's X plugin. Not to mention it's not being updated anymore (besides securty fixes, I guess).

I don't see what big problem with Foobar’s configuration is. I don't see how spending several minutes to configure it you want (default setup) is so hard. If you don't like it, don't use it. There are other players out there - Foobar too hard? Use iTunes.

Edit: To me personally if you use right string it looks better than anything else out there. Simple, straightforward and useful.

The problem is two-tiered:
1. While the architecture is right, it could use some visual work to make categories and sections more easy to understand
2. Most 3rd-party plugin devs make everything and your cat configurable. Columns UI is a good example: It is the best UI available right now, and the author did some awesome work. But while he is talented code-wise, he is not talented when it comes to visual preferences design and keeping a tight grip on the *amount* of options. The result is that almost every plugin makes at least a some things configurable which are not needed by almost everyone - this piles up to a mountain of unnecessary options.


Default setup is irrelevant, because thats not what most people install fb2k for.

FB2K has some problems and design-pitfalls - but it is not the core but instead the way most plugin-preferences are designed. So, its the plugins which are at fault, not the core-player itself. However, if you want your own personal audioplayer with special features, then it is the *only option* - and it is materially free - you pay with a steep learning curve and doing your homework - you pay with time for it. Think you could do something better? Fine, learn to code and improve it - almost all plugins - the majority of what you "see" - is opensourced. Whining won't help anything - because there is no "staff" which works for you. No one cares about delivering YOUR optimal audioplayer in the fb2k-community.... you get the platform, and from there on, its your turn.

- Lyx

Thank you all for the feedback! I guess foobar is my only choice, and I'll have to bite the bullet and spend more time tweaking it (believe me, I've been using foobar for years and I HAVE done tweakings with it).

Just to reply to Lyx’s post,

I agree with you that number of options can be overwhelming, even for the people know foobar inside out. I use Columns UI myself and has “almost as options to configure as foobar itself”. Which can be viewed both as good and as bad. I think it is nice to be able to configure it to slightest detail (the player), however I understand having too many options is just as bad as having a few. There was talk about wizards and stuff to make it easier to configure which would be great, but I guess there would be people who would argue about implementing something like that.

Pardon me for not being clear regarding “default setup”. I mean that I don’t see why should be a problem for a person to spend several minutes configuring it to his/her needs. Once you’re done, you hardly will have to do it again. Maybe configure something minor here and there, but it’s not like you’d be setting it daily. I just keep backup of my configuration and when I install it freshly, copy configuration file and it’s all there.

Foobar could use slight interface retouch and I know that a lot of people complain how it badly needs preference part redesigned completely. I’m sure it can be done better and for it to be more logical. I am sure it wouldn’t be as “complex to use” if it had more logical interface.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not complaining about Foobar at all. I’m glad that I can have a player that can do anything I want and that it’s free. I cannot find any commercial application that can do most of the things foobar can. I like playing around with things once in awhile. I’d be bored if it were just another MusicMatch clone. There are plenty of players out there to choose from. I’d simply move on to something that fits my needs better than complaining about its complexity. It’s wasn’t meant to be mainstream player, although a lot of people are using it now.

Regards,

r.

From a single user's point of view, every unneeded option is a flaw, not a feature - because it distracts from those options which one does use(therefore increasing access-times) and making the thing more complicated.

Now, everyone knows that needs differ - users will ask for exotic features en masse, only considering their personal needs but not those of others. Mozilla Seamonkey is the most famous example for falling into this trap by implementing truckloads of features which only a minority use. They learned from it, and thats why they are now way more successful - and loved by almost everyone as well as hated a little bit by almost everyone(for axing/not implementing exotic feature #5438938). The interesting point to learn here is that as a dev, to make your app good for the majority, you need to reject lots of feature-requests. Because single users do not know what is good for the userbase as a whole - they only consider their individual needs, not those of the majority.

There are some interesting lessons to learn from this: every feature.... every option...... automatically is a flaw to some extend, because it makes something more complex/difficult. The benefit of implementing it then has to outweight the added complexity - if thats not the case, then don't implement it.

Now for a real-world example: Columns UI has an option (among many others) to enable playlist renaming by doubleclicking the tabs. Is there a significant benefit of making this an option? Or wouldn't it be better to just enable it by default and remove the option from the prefs? There are countless other examples in columns ui as well as almost every other plugin.

As for examples how to make something flexible and powerful without the need for a truckload of options, see my ui-columns design "Navigator Suite".... it has gotten quite a userbase in just 2 months (i even got a notice from the ui-columns site admins to decrease the package-size, because it was consuming too much traffic) - and the one thing i hear over and over from users is that they like its ease-of-use while still being powerful and flexible. A good and powerful piece of software does not necessarily need to have truckloads of options.

- Lyx