I think you must be the only one oblivious to the fact that I posted that for .Sup.Zimmer wrote:
lol.Gooners wrote:
.Sup wrote:
"So you left out the best sounding audio player eh? Apollo, made by a Finn, which doesn't look pretty (looks at gay iTunes users) but sounds great. Flat, no bass boost and excellent highs/mids. http://koti.welho.com/hylinen/apollo/
Download, listen (don't look at it) and be amazed on the sound it produces. Though probably most of you won't notice any difference compared to other players as you don't have hi-end quality cards ot DAC and no golden ears "
No, I missed it out for a reason. It's discontinued and now there are better alternatives.
Gooners, you actually listen to that?LOL. That's called the speakers doing their work. Media Monkey, for example, can be customised to your listening needs.Sup wrote:
Flat, no bass boost and excellent highs/mids.
You know why Apollo wont even be considered? Because it doesn't support FLAC. Therefore automatically nailing it to the wall as a "fail player" as FLAC is the best sound quality a compressed file can offer.
Gooners, you actually listened to that spewl. Do you have several thousand gigabytes of WAV files? lulz.
iTunes doesn't support FLAC lulz
And I was mortified to realize the other day that WMP11 doesn't support AAC.
And I was mortified to realize the other day that WMP11 doesn't support AAC.
VLC Media player, anyone?
EE (hats
It was added to the list because it is massively popular, unlike ApolloHurricane2k9 wrote:
iTunes doesn't support FLAC lulz
And I was mortified to realize the other day that WMP11 doesn't support AAC.
I think VLC both should and shouldn't be there; It's an ok player, but the interface isn't designed for music. I used it for music a while ago, and it was quite horrid. Works better for videos tbh.Morpheus wrote:
VLC Media player, anyone?
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Foobar is sexy. Back in the day when I played Runescape on a P3 with 256MB of ram that is what I used.
+Really simple
+ Will play anything.
Drawbacks are
+I could design something that looks better.
EDIT: Was trying Song Bird. Is it just me or does it look like he's farting?
Also, lol'd at the description of 'Mashtape'.
Oh, a plus for WMP for Windows 7 users. (Might be Vista too, not sure, never used it) when you hover over the icon in the taskbar, it pops up and you can pause, next track or previous track. Sounds useless but it's very handy.
Godfuck I love the snipping tool.
+Really simple
+ Will play anything.
Drawbacks are
+I could design something that looks better.
EDIT: Was trying Song Bird. Is it just me or does it look like he's farting?
Also, lol'd at the description of 'Mashtape'.
Oh, a plus for WMP for Windows 7 users. (Might be Vista too, not sure, never used it) when you hover over the icon in the taskbar, it pops up and you can pause, next track or previous track. Sounds useless but it's very handy.
Godfuck I love the snipping tool.
Last edited by Finray (2009-01-31 04:00:03)
foobar2000:
+ plays 99% of all audio formats, m4b seems to be the only thing it doesn't know
+ very customizable, you can make it look like you want it to
+ needs very few ressources, working with huge music libraries (60GB +) doesn't lower the performance
+ a lot of plugins available
+ tagging your music is very easy, also has freedb support
+ Ripping cds and encoding to various formats possible with the correct plugins
- rather complicated to set up, knowledge in coding is needed to make it look nice
- "stock"-version doesn't look too good
- does not play video files
foobar2000 can do everything you want it to do, but only if you have the time and the knowledge to set it up properly. For low-end computers it's probably the best choice because you will not notice any influence on the computer's speed while running this program.
+ plays 99% of all audio formats, m4b seems to be the only thing it doesn't know
+ very customizable, you can make it look like you want it to
+ needs very few ressources, working with huge music libraries (60GB +) doesn't lower the performance
+ a lot of plugins available
+ tagging your music is very easy, also has freedb support
+ Ripping cds and encoding to various formats possible with the correct plugins
- rather complicated to set up, knowledge in coding is needed to make it look nice
- "stock"-version doesn't look too good
- does not play video files
foobar2000 can do everything you want it to do, but only if you have the time and the knowledge to set it up properly. For low-end computers it's probably the best choice because you will not notice any influence on the computer's speed while running this program.
Awesome, I've been looking for a music player that... works...
Been using Songbird lately, but it tends to fail sometimes. The Album art tool is pretty shit.
I'll be looking forward to your conclusion, sir.
Been using Songbird lately, but it tends to fail sometimes. The Album art tool is pretty shit.
I'll be looking forward to your conclusion, sir.
Rhythmbox:
+ Comes bundled with Ubuntu
+ Simplistic interface that works
+ Can play almost all music formats
+ Very easy to use.
+ Very easy management
+ Very light weight
+ Podcast and radio support
- Sometimes "too" simple
- Could be more customizable
- Integration into the Gnome taskbar could be better.
- Limited id3 editing
+ Comes bundled with Ubuntu
+ Simplistic interface that works
+ Can play almost all music formats
+ Very easy to use.
+ Very easy management
+ Very light weight
+ Podcast and radio support
- Sometimes "too" simple
- Could be more customizable
- Integration into the Gnome taskbar could be better.
- Limited id3 editing
Last edited by Sydney (2009-01-31 04:34:52)
Windows Media Player
I prefer the interface of WMP to Songbird for a few reasons. One is that it splits up the albums so you can navigate to which one you wish to listen to easily. The playlist editor is also very good. Drag and drop, hit save. Navigating to songs/videos/artists etc is also made easy with the taskbar on the left. As a music player, WMP is very good. Only flaws are that it doesn't play every file type out there, but when you're like me and you download most of your music, it's always in MP3 or similar. For the average user this is a perfect media player, and the fact that it intergrates into the taskbar is pretty cool. Here's a screen so you can see what I'm talking about.
Songbird is .. different. I like it. The default layout is very iTunes-esk, which I don't like. At all. After five minutes (seriously that's all it took) I got it to the way I liked it. The in-player browser is very useful for surfing for new skins, which are called 'Feathers'. Some very professionaly made ones on the site. You can swap most of the layout, for example stick the trackbar at the top etc. The Genre/Artist/Album trackers at the top makes it very easy to navigate to whichever song you wish to listen to. Better than WMP I would say. Having only used it for a half hour, I haven't hit all the features yet, but it's very impressive.
Stock Songbird.
Five mins of changing.
Only one word about songbird.. it's pretty heavy on memory usage.
But that won't be a problem for users with 2+GB of ram.
Hope this helps, Zim.
I prefer the interface of WMP to Songbird for a few reasons. One is that it splits up the albums so you can navigate to which one you wish to listen to easily. The playlist editor is also very good. Drag and drop, hit save. Navigating to songs/videos/artists etc is also made easy with the taskbar on the left. As a music player, WMP is very good. Only flaws are that it doesn't play every file type out there, but when you're like me and you download most of your music, it's always in MP3 or similar. For the average user this is a perfect media player, and the fact that it intergrates into the taskbar is pretty cool. Here's a screen so you can see what I'm talking about.
Songbird is .. different. I like it. The default layout is very iTunes-esk, which I don't like. At all. After five minutes (seriously that's all it took) I got it to the way I liked it. The in-player browser is very useful for surfing for new skins, which are called 'Feathers'. Some very professionaly made ones on the site. You can swap most of the layout, for example stick the trackbar at the top etc. The Genre/Artist/Album trackers at the top makes it very easy to navigate to whichever song you wish to listen to. Better than WMP I would say. Having only used it for a half hour, I haven't hit all the features yet, but it's very impressive.
Stock Songbird.
Five mins of changing.
Only one word about songbird.. it's pretty heavy on memory usage.
But that won't be a problem for users with 2+GB of ram.
Hope this helps, Zim.
Last edited by Finray (2009-01-31 04:40:06)
I will not add that in primarily because it isn't a music player but a media player. It's interface is terrible, even for a media player, it's still damn buggy in comparison with stuff like SMPlayer.Morpheus wrote:
VLC Media player, anyone?
@ Finray: There is no better graphical alternative to WMP. It beats anything on the market atm. It's lovely to use and works seamlessly with Windows. Too bad customisation options and codec files are utter failure on it.
Songbird, on the other hand, has serious memory problems. As you have shown there.
Will be updating shizzle now.
Massively updated.
You guys are too fucking anal. If it plays music, it works for me.
BF2s: Only the best.phishman420 wrote:
You guys are too fucking anal. If it plays music, it works for me.
As long as something plays .mp3's and can organise shit easily by monitoring folders etc.. then that's good enough for me. WMP 11 does everything I want it too. Also sets up my PC as a media server which means I can stream my shit to my PS3 in my room
I love the 21st century.
I'm not too concerned about it not being able to play certain files, most of them are niche and I rarely come across them. Good guide though, I used to use Realplayer alot for memory reasons but then I threw in an extra 1Gb and now WMP11 is no problem
I love the 21st century.
I'm not too concerned about it not being able to play certain files, most of them are niche and I rarely come across them. Good guide though, I used to use Realplayer alot for memory reasons but then I threw in an extra 1Gb and now WMP11 is no problem
Haha. Yeah, but many don't play the music I have. So therefore it's not fine.phishman420 wrote:
You guys are too fucking anal. If it plays music, it works for me.
If I wanted to be really anal, I would go into small detail about all the players, but I am just giving an overview. Just like you would give an overview of the best pot available.
@ Mek, yeah, true. But now more and more people are switching to FLAC. Primarily because they have better systems and now can tell the huge difference between a shitty mp3 and a FLAC file. WMP cannot do that, if it could, there would be no need for this guide.
WMP still rapes anything at music organisation and management. If it had the features of Media Monkey and AIMP and the layout of WMP then you would have a killer.
Windows 7 Media Player supports M4a.
Not sure about FLAC, though.
Not sure about FLAC, though.
Can't do FLAC and most video formats.FFLink13 wrote:
Windows 7 Media Player supports M4a.
Not sure about FLAC, though.
I will most likely be testing WMP on Windows 7 more, to see how it fares up.
What's FLAC?Zimmer wrote:
Can't do FLAC and most video formats.FFLink13 wrote:
Windows 7 Media Player supports M4a.
Not sure about FLAC, though.
I will most likely be testing WMP on Windows 7 more, to see how it fares up.
Also, someone want to send me different formats via XFire so I can test them on WMP 12? (That's what W7 has right?)
WMP12 was released late 2008 afaik, so probably.Finray wrote:
What's FLAC?Zimmer wrote:
Can't do FLAC and most video formats.FFLink13 wrote:
Windows 7 Media Player supports M4a.
Not sure about FLAC, though.
I will most likely be testing WMP on Windows 7 more, to see how it fares up.
Also, someone want to send me different formats via XFire so I can test them on WMP 12? (That's what W7 has right?)
Isn't the version of WMP available on Vista different to that of XP's? Or do they just look different.
Mine's like this:
Never had a problem with it, but that's probably because all of my music is MP3 and a large majority of it isn't even at 320. I guess there are probably better players out there but I'm happy with what I've got and thus have no reason to change.
Mine's like this:
Never had a problem with it, but that's probably because all of my music is MP3 and a large majority of it isn't even at 320. I guess there are probably better players out there but I'm happy with what I've got and thus have no reason to change.
They look the same, as long as it's WMP 11. The only problem is I can't set my laptop as a Media Server, because that runs on Vista and it doesn't allow you to do it on "public" networks or some shit like that. There's something gay with Vista and media sharing, I haven't really looked into it properly but I will
Why does Google think the Songbird site will harm my computer?
see various other threads, google's not working properly.ghettoperson wrote:
Why does Google think the Songbird site will harm my computer?
Fucking Googleghettoperson wrote:
Why does Google think the Songbird site will harm my computer?