[fewtch]

I'm fine with WinAMP v2.91 as well. I like organizing my own playlists in directory format using .m3u files, and regular folder structures -- I don't like a program doing this kind of thing for me. I use the WaveOut v2.0.2a SSRC plugin with upsampling on Win2k (tried ASIO and kernel streaming but had nothing but problems, and couldn't tell any difference in sound). WaveOut on Win2k (at least with my soundcard) sounds fine, maybe it's different on XP.

 

[bubbagump]

I use winamp, it sounds better than MM. I don't like the foobar logo.

 

[Cyclone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bubbagump I use winamp, it sounds better than MM. I don't like the foobar logo.

You can change that.

pretty easily too.

 

[JWFokker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickchen Dear Winamp-buddies, I don't think that I'll ever switch to higher versions of Winamp than 2.xx. I tried out some of the newer and found the loading time inacceptable, 3 seconds of HD-crackling after doubleclick on a well configured 512 RAM 2660 P4 is ridiculus, same with my old SCSI 1800 P4 System. Generally, I don't care how much time programs need to load, with the only exception of the player THAT NEEDS TO BE THERE INSTANTLY.

Then you use the MAD plugin, right? It works from Winamp 2 and up.

 

[Seijang]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GokieKS The main reason I switched was because of the Unicode support, but I understand it's not a major issue to most people. I also like the included masstagging and conversion tools. I actually like the asthetics of Winamp, but not enough to make me choose it over fb2k's features. I do use foo_looks, with the Foopilot_one look, but it's kinda quirky (main annoyance being the slow rate of scrolling while using the mousewheel), so I find myself using the normal interface more often than not. ~KS

Is there way to use winamp skins with foobar?

 

[nickchen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclone You can change (the ugly appearance). pretty easily too.

Yep, found some practical and lots of freaked out skins for foobar.

But things aren't not THAT easy, you need the foo-looks plugin, for which you need additional windows GDI+dlls. These aren't available anywhere because all links are dead. Surely solveable, but looks like several hours of intensive internet search.
Possibilities displayed until now are quite convincing. I plan to work myself into that toppic, but it will take some time. Things displayed in Hydrogen Audio Forum look really fantastic, but ...pooh, these script wizardries are quite ambitious. I am a computer freak (MCSE+CNA), but rather hardware, implementation and network type than the C++ programming type.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWFokker Then you use the MAD plugin, right? It works from Winamp 2 and up.

No, not yet, but you can bet that I'll check this out. Actually, it's the original out_wav.dll 2.02 (could not find any quality disadvantages until now, but maybe I'm too green) As long as I don't have a perfect personalized foobar player (maybe a long way...), I'll go on using good old winamp.

 

[uzziah]

must we really do this again????

 

[nickchen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by uzziah must we really do this again????

For me, there is no urgency with nothing. We just do talk job until now. This is NOT one of these tearful "Please help me"-threads, not for me.

BTW, did you mean this old thread ?

 

[uzziah]

oh i'm just kidding....a tad..

the "foobar vs winamp" thing comes up every month or so and we have long passionate discussions about "uncluttered gui" and "sounds the same" and "free tacos are good:" (wait, nevermind that last one....ummm.....tacos). but i'm glad it's helping. long live fooamp!

 

[Cyclone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickchen Yep, found some practical and lots of freaked out skins for foobar. But things aren't not THAT easy, you need the foo-looks plugin, for which you need additional windows GDI+dlls. These aren't available anywhere because all links are dead. Surely solveable, but looks like several hours of intensive internet search. Possibilities displayed until now are quite convincing. I plan to work myself into that toppic, but it will take some time. Things displayed in Hydrogen Audio Forum look really fantastic, but ...pooh, these script wizardries are quite ambitious. I am a computer freak (MCSE+CNA), but rather hardware, implementation and network type than the C++ programming type.

Oh you thought i meant changing the whole appearance of foobar was easy. No, that is a pain in the ass. Just changing the icon for foobar is easy (i bolded the guy i quoted about that). I've been working on it for a few months on and off. But what i really want is to be able to have Milkdrop integrated into foobar (not in its own free moving window) on one of the panels. If anybody can quick drop a link for me, or just tell me how to do that, i would be very grateful.

 

[Kram Sacul]

It's all about personal preference. My preference is to listen to FLAC encoded music using ASIO and Winamp can do that with plugins. I've been using Winamp since it was released and there's no reason for me to switch.

Has anyone tried Sonique ? It's beautifully animated and skinned, appears to play music, and is a pain in the ass to use.

 

[erickoh]

What? i'm shocked no one complained about the apparent lack of a volume control on foobar yet

 

[acedriver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by erickoh What? i'm shocked no one complained about the apparent lack of a volume control on foobar yet

the +/- keyboard buttons, make that global hotkey and can control it without making foobar an active window

 

[Patu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by erickoh What? i'm shocked no one complained about the apparent lack of a volume control on foobar yet

And it's possible to get one with Columns UI. Remember that Foobar is very modable.

 

[nickchen]

Installed the MAD plugin for Winamp yesterday and configured it to 24 bit. Afterwards, I compared some clipping Jimi Tenor 128 kbit MP3 + HQ 256 kbit Bach single violin MP3 using

- Winamp 2.90 with MAD plugin
- Winamp 2.09 default

Well, there was a slight difference. The MAD sounded a little bit more brilliant. But it was only recognizable when listening with 175% concentration.

That result supports my former assumption, that sound quality mostly depends from the hardware and playing software is only subordinated.