Hello,
I'm starting this thread with the clear mind that it probably won't be received seriously, but I'm really a "fan" of the foobar2000 features (embeded cue sheets, file operations and the converter) and want to continue using it as my audio player.
What really distant me from this player is that it sounds different to me. I've recently started using Ableton Live! (music production software, so it can serve as reference) on my desktop computer and since then I've noticed that Live! sound way different than foobar2000. It's strange, because I've turned off replaygaing in foobar, and no dsp take effect neither in foobar nor in Live!. For that reason Ive downloaded winamp and it also sounded different than foobar. My first thought was to check the decoders... For test file I used Tool - Intolerance.flac. And for test tool - windiff. In winamp the diskwriter was used to decode the file and in foobar - converter. No dsp or replygain. Windiff reported - identical. Then... may be it's from output, but winamp's ds and diskwriter plug-in is written by Peter, so they shouldn't be THAT different. So now, I'm really left with no clue... I've started testing since 0.9.5.1, but the situation is the same with the both new betas. It's a full installation with only foo_run 0.3.4, foo_audioscrobbler 1.3.16, foo_input_monkey and foo_input_alac as optional components.
I've also ABXed the foobar2000 with Live! with my brother's help:
Right / Wrong = Test Number
1 / 0 = 1
2 / 0 = 2
3 / 0 = 3
4 / 0 = 4
5 / 0 = 5
5 / 1 = 6
5 / 2 = 7
6 / 2 = 8
7 / 2 = 9
8 / 2 = 10
9 / 2 = 11
10 / 2 = 12

May be that's the reason for the rave in the net about "foobar sounding better"... :/

Are there Replaygain tags in your music?
And how "different" does it sounds?

Does foobar2000 sound better than other players?
No. Most of “sound quality differences” people “hear” are placebo effect (at least with real music), as actual differences in produced sound data are below their noise floor (1 or 2 last bits in 16bit samples). foobar2000 has sound processing features such as software resampling or 24bit output on new high-end soundcards, but most of other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.



my question is : different is different or worse?

also winamp and Ableton Live! sound differents?

There are replaygain tags, but rg is set to "none" in the preferences of foobar.





I haven't tested WinAmp and Live! side by side, but the output of both is more pleasant than foobar's. It's somehow dull and fatiguing to listen to foobar for long hours.

Any equalizer settings in other the software?

What are the output modes on the respective players?

No equalizers in WinAMP and Live!




All players use DirectSound.

What's your Windows version? I heard that Vista has separate volume control for each application. Maybe foobar's volume is set too low in Windows' mixer?

Can you record the output of these three apps using Audacity or Goldwave?

i've got different experience than yours.
with foobar2k, i can listen music for hours without getting any fatigue nor feeling bluffy.
but with winamp, i got those.

i'm never use 'software equalizer' & any DSP.
so it played with flat EQ (off) and without any DSP on.
and yes, i'm talkin about playing MP3's file.
almost of my MP3's are 320 CBR kbps quality.


for years, my primary music player was winamp.
but when i'm (tried) using foobar2k (0.9.5), for me, it sounds better than winamp.

i am sorry winamp, from now on i'll stick with foobar2k.