|
Which player is best?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Purple |
I use what everyone I know uses: 'Winamp'.
Are their any other better players to listen to music than Winamp? |
|
|
| DJ Cinos |
I use Winamp, but it's not good... takes too much memory and is generally sluggish (even on my near-high end computer).
So I'm also open for suggestions.
(bad ideas: Quintessential Player, RealPlayer, Quicktime, iTunes...) |
|
|
| Bega |
| You could go to an older version of winamp. I never use the modern skins, to keep speed and cpu usage low. 2.9 was good, you can get it from www.oldversion.com |
|
|
| electrotux |
I won't use winamp anymore...AOL bought it and now it keeps on asking me if I want to upgrade to the full version, after telling it "No" repeatedly.
I use foobar2000 for all my music listening. Its incredibly lightweight, yet has about 100x the features winamp has. Its truly a wonderful program. The interface right after you install it doesn't look the best...but give it a chance, learn the myriad of features and configurations there are, and you'll learn how to customize it and come to love it as I do. Highly recommended! |
|
|
| DJ Cinos |
A good player would, IMHO...
Be skinnable
Have a light footprint
Do justice to the sound (some players sound really bad)
And that's it. |
|
|
| zoric |
| Winamp is good. I think WMP takes too much memory, and that's for sure. |
|
|
| Purple |
I used this XM Play once, its also nice, it automatically Amplifies higher or lower with the cheering in Livesets.
Their are definatly better players out their than Winamp, its just that I dont know them. :conf: |
|
|
| nfekted |
| i'm also using winamp but that's because i haven't found a better one out there. Winamp does tend to be slower, and for some reason the newer versions take longer to load on my computer which is annoying. I'm also open to suggestions lol. |
|
|
| Sami.H |
| Foobar2000 + Asio = teh win |
|
|
| oje_oje |
An extremely good player for mp3-files is Apollo. The developers tried to optimize the mp3-decoder close to its limits. The mp3-audio comes as close as possible to the specifications for mp3-sound, much closer than for any other program. It is often used by radio stations.
Disadvantage of Apollo: it does not care much about other audio formats, it is a lot about mp3. And they do not care about the "Look'nFeel" of their program so it looks very spartanic.
http://koti.welho.com/hylinen/apollo/ |
|
|
| DJ Cinos |
| quote: | Does Apollo support ID3 tag editing?
No. It will never do. The reason is that I don't use ID3 tags myself and the current development of Apollo is based on my own needs |
Yeah. Smart idea.
...it sucks. |
|
|
| oje_oje |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Cinos
Yeah. Smart idea.
...it sucks. |
As I told you: Apollo is all about mp3-sound quality and not about tons of graphical and non-essential features. |
|
|
|
|
