iTunes V.S. Foobar2000: Smackdown.
Dec 14, 2010 at 4:27 AM Post #46 of 91
[size=x-small]For me, I just don't get how people can stand living with ID3 tags as a principle means of organisation. They are a handy tool both for labelling and bespoke searching, but for everyday organisation they are awful.[/size]
 
[size=x-small]I use a naming structure on my folders which allows real alphabetic sorting. I don't want there to be half my music collection lumped under T (for "the"). But I don't want that naming structure on my artist tag - I want their name to be as it is spoken. [/size]
 
[size=x-small]So to use well known examples, for display purposes, on my tags, I want The Beatles and Jimi Hendrix, but on my folders I want Beatles, The and Hendrix, Jimi so I can easily locate them like I would in a record store.[/size]
 
[size=x-small]And then for albums. For display purposes I want the album tags to read Abbey Road and Revolver because that is the name of the albums. But then, if I asked ID3 tags to show me my Beatles albums - Abbey Road is BEFORE Revolver and With The Beatles is after both of them - completely out of chronological order! So for my folder structure I would have them named 1963 - With The Beatles, 1966 - Revolver and 1969 - Abbey Road and then inside each artist folder I am greeted with a chronological list of all their albums I own.[/size]
 
[size=x-small]What about compilations? With ID3 Tag organisation that's an utter mess - you want to search by albums then its there but if (as it is easier in most cases) you have your main list as "artist" it is littered with dozens if not hundreds of artist names each with one or two songs taking up a line on the list each. Folder Structure - The album is just there alphabetically on your list, or you can have a various artists folder if you like with the albums inside.[/size]
 
[size=x-small]The point is, with folde structure browsing it is entirely up to the user how they organise their music. I still have full access to tag searching if I wanted to call up all tracks by an artist over 50 different compliations, or all the tracks of a certain Genre (and Foobar2k's recognition of unlimited Genres per track is very handy here), but for everyday browsing my music collection is organised like a record shop would organise it and everything is where I expect it to be. [/size]
 
[size=x-small]Different strokes for different folks but personally I just don't understand how anyone can bear to be tied and bound by ID3 tags.[/size]
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 5:49 AM Post #47 of 91
If you right click on an album/file in iTunes and click "Get Info," then go to "Sorting," you can change the sorting options.  For example, David Bowie is by default listed in the "D" section, however I changed it so it would come up Bowie, David.  It still shows up as David Bowie in the library, but placed in the "B" section.  And if I wanted to place albums in chronological order, I put the year before the album in "Sort Album" and it doesn't alter the Album name in the iTunes library either.  You can even put "1, 2, 3,..." rather than years if you have multiple albums within the same year.
 
Anyway, I would love to use Foobar2k, but iTunes on Mac certainly is much better than iTunes on Windows.  WinTunes was pretty bad when I used it on my Sony Vaio (this was a few years ago, however).
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 6:12 AM Post #48 of 91
Tendol Horse,
I did imagine there would be some way around it - but why would I bother spending the time to tell itunes to do what foobar just does? When Foobar has a tonne more functionality in every area and is faster, there is no reason at all.
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 6:17 AM Post #49 of 91
Agreed. I'm yet to find a better player than foobar.

Tendol Horse,
I did imagine there would be some way around it - but why would I bother spending the time to tell itunes to do what foobar just does? When Foobar has a tonne more functionality in every area and is faster, there is no reason at all.


 
Dec 14, 2010 at 6:32 AM Post #50 of 91
Foobar2k shows the folders how you want it to show, just like iTunes.  As you stated, you need to change the folder's name in order for it to show in Foobar2k the way you want it to.  You have to do the same with iTunes, only you do it in iTunes.  It's the same number of steps.
 
Don't get me wrong.  When I used Foobar2k on my macbook, I was thoroughly impressed.  Unfortunately, it was just a hassle to use since it's not made for Mac OS X.  If they released a port, I'd be all over it.
 
Anyway, I go over the top to get my library the way I want it to look as well.  I'm just relaying what I know about iTunes in case someone else might want to know.
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 6:38 AM Post #51 of 91
Foobar2k hands down. There is no contest. Only Foobar. Everything about it is just easier to use and tweak. Being able to customize plugins is reason enough already.
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 7:31 AM Post #52 of 91
Tendol Horse,
But I already have all my music arrnaged and named in folders like that - I do it that way as I rip it and always have.
 
Yes if I started with a big folder of loose files - a lot of organisation needed whatever programme I use - in fact with iTunes it would be easier.
 
But I made my decisions about how I want to order my collection a long time ago and I want my DAP and software to allow me to access my music in that way.
 
That's why I will never buy a DAP and never use a software programme that does not allow me to browse by files/folders.
 
That's just for me. Each to their own.
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 9:40 AM Post #54 of 91
Quote:
can you guys post some of the skins you like on foobar2k ?
screenshots would be nice too.


There's already a huge fb2k screenshot thread that is devoted to exactly this.
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 12:36 PM Post #55 of 91


Quote:
Tendol Horse,
I did imagine there would be some way around it - but why would I bother spending the time to tell itunes to do what foobar just does? When Foobar has a tonne more functionality in every area and is faster, there is no reason at all.



Quite right, especially when you don't have an iPod.
wink.gif

 
Dec 14, 2010 at 2:33 PM Post #57 of 91

And this has to do with iTunes/Foobar how?
Quote:
There's an extension called BarTab that adds Chrome-like memory and tab management to Firefox.  I installed it a few weeks ago and it's made a huge difference.

 
Dec 14, 2010 at 2:44 PM Post #58 of 91
 
Quote:
And this has to do with iTunes/Foobar how?
Quote:
There's an extension called BarTab that adds Chrome-like memory and tab management to Firefox.  I installed it a few weeks ago and it's made a huge difference.


It doesn't but it's a great tip, just what I was looking for hopefully. Thanks batphink!
 
Dec 14, 2010 at 6:45 PM Post #60 of 91


Quote:
 
Quote:
And this has to do with iTunes/Foobar how?
Quote:
There's an extension called BarTab that adds Chrome-like memory and tab management to Firefox.  I installed it a few weeks ago and it's made a huge difference.


It doesn't but it's a great tip, just what I was looking for hopefully. Thanks batphink!


Sorry about that.  I was addressing the thread hijack on page 3.
 
Back to the original topic, I definitely prefer Foobar.  It's so lightweight, it can run off a USB thumb drive.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top