Foobar? kX drivers?
Mar 27, 2006 at 5:27 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 6

003

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Posts
4,688
Likes
14
I've got some questions. First, I see most of you guys are using foobar to play your music. Why is that? Is there any advantage to using it? I have been using winamp, is that OK? Or should I also use foobar? Second, I have seen some referance to the kX drivers. Do they provide better sound quality than the creative drivers by using a different DAC or something? I checked the website, and they don't list the X-fi as a compatible card. Would it work with the X-fi cards, and if so, would it provide better sound quality? Sorry if these are stupid questions.
 
Mar 28, 2006 at 6:22 AM Post #2 of 6

HiFiRE

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 1, 2005
Posts
443
Likes
10
People use foobar because it's hard to use and it makes them feel 1337. JK. People use it because it gives them a lot of control over how their music is processed. Maybe there's a better word than that. People also use it because it plays just about everything gaplessly out of the box and it has many practical tools built in such as replaygain and file renaming/moving.

Your X-fi isn't an emu10k1 or emu10k2 card which the kx drivers are for, so you can't use them.
 
Mar 28, 2006 at 6:29 AM Post #3 of 6

uzziah

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Posts
4,049
Likes
13
thing about foobar is this:

it's free, and right out of the box it's perfectly usable and LIGHT on pc resources. it's simple, straightforward, and functional. if all you want is a list of your songs, you can have kernal streaming with one short click (guess you must download KS for version9), and you'll be fine.

BUT, should you ever wish to TWEEK things: whether visually with different plugins for looks/albumart/etc. or functionality by adding different types of stuff for crossfeed, resampling, blah blah blah, you can

personally, i just use foobar very simply. just with columns UI and kernal streaming, that's it. could i use winamp? sure. but why would you want to?

the truth is that if you ever want to tweek, foobar is the most used player by audiophiles that i've seen. that means, lots of good third party suppport, and that's a good thign
 
Mar 28, 2006 at 6:36 AM Post #4 of 6

003

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Posts
4,688
Likes
14
Ok, well I think I'll stick with winamp and the kernel streaming output plugin (or ASIO), with my X-fi in audio creation mode and bit-matched playback enabled.
 
Mar 28, 2006 at 7:04 AM Post #5 of 6

jiiteepee

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Posts
1,582
Likes
53
Quote:

Originally Posted by uzziah
thing about foobar is this:

it's free, and right out of the box it's perfectly usable and LIGHT on pc resources. it's simple, straightforward, and functional. if all you want is a list of your songs, you can have kernal streaming with one short click (guess you must download KS for version9), and you'll be fine.

BUT, should you ever wish to TWEEK things: whether visually with different plugins for looks/albumart/etc. or functionality by adding different types of stuff for crossfeed, resampling, blah blah blah, you can

personally, i just use foobar very simply. just with columns UI and kernal streaming, that's it. could i use winamp? sure. but why would you want to?

the truth is that if you ever want to tweek, foobar is the most used player by audiophiles that i've seen. that means, lots of good third party suppport, and that's a good thign



Yeah, with using foobar, audiophiles have now something to 'play with' without extra cost (--> it's much much cheaper hobby than it used to bee before 'PC Audiophility'), and the 'support' they need, is just for bringing up ... as you can read on these forums.

Also, the need of support is one of the weak points on Foobar.


jiitee
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top