Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Foobar vs Media Player
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Foobar vs Media Player

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
I joined head-fi for only a couple of weeks and I've learned quite a bit regarding using computer as a source from all of you. Nonetheless, I am still a noob. I just today succesfully ripped a CD using foobar and played it back through my DAC to amp to main speakers. Pretty amazing sound. Since I have an old laptop(still decent) sitting around collecting dust. I am going to utilize it and use it as my music library.

I would like to hear your opinion on using Media Player vs Foobar for playback and ripping(lossless of course). Reason being, I found Media Player is much simpler and easier to use. A lot of folks think that foobar is better in terms of playback quality. But if I am ripping my CDs losslessly, and using the interface simply to feed my DAC, wouldn't it be the same whether it's foobar or Media Player or even iTune? How is Media Player's lossless comparing to FLAC?

If there are threads on this subject already, please point me to them. Your inputs are much appreciated.
post #2 of 6
For ripping you should be using EAC actually. I dislike Media Player because it hogs resources. Foobar works very well you just needs some time to learn it.
post #3 of 6
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firam
For ripping you should be using EAC actually. I dislike Media Player because it hog resources. Foobar works very well you just needs some time to learn the format.
Please forgive my ignorance, but what's EAC? Is it a decoding/encoding algorithm available in Foobar? Other than a resource hog, is there any other drawbacks? Since I won't be using the dusty laptop for anything else, resource is not a problem.

Thanks.
post #4 of 6
Exact Audio Copy; arguably the best ripping program out there. You should only have to rip your collection once. Do it right the first time.
Latest version of EAC.
A good setup guide.

Windows Media Player is easier to learn. Foobar is easier to use.

N'joy
post #5 of 6
If you want something easy to use with very nice eye candy, checkout J. River Media Center, it has bit-perfect output just like foobar. It costs a little $ though, but you would save many hours trying to config foobar instead. That is, if you don't like foobar's plain initial interface.
post #6 of 6
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the inputs.

I don't have a problem with Foobar's simple interface for playback. In fact, I like simplicity. The problem I am having is Foobar's not so user friendly CD ripping process. Please forgive my stupidity, but I still couldn't figure out how to update/change file/song names during ripping. With Windows Media Player, title/artist/track info can be downloaded with a click of a button.

Michael, thanks for the link, I will try using EAC and playback with Foobar.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Foobar vs Media Player