foobar2000 v0.9.6.4 beta 1

foobar2000 is an advanced freeware audio player for the Windows platform. Some of the basic features include full unicode support, ReplayGain support and native support for several popular audio formats.

What's new:

  • Third party components can now register custom protocols with the File Types preferences page.
  • Removed the restriction of just one instance of specific DSP in a DSP chain.
  • Fixed incorrect handling of 3-channel and 5-channel FLAC and Vorbis files.
  • Converter now accepts alternate names for some of command-line encoder binaries (mpcenc.exe, oggenc2.exe).
  • Converter and File Operations components no longer strip trailing dots from names of created files.
  • Improved compatibility with dodgy Windows shell replacements.
  • Automated submission of crash reports.

News source: Official website
Download: foobar2000 v0.9.6.4 beta 1
Screenshot: >> Click here <<

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 7: Few more changes from Beta to RC

Next Story

Free Windows Live Hotmail POP3 access has gone worldwide

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

To those who don't understand all the "fuss" about foobar, especially the ones who tried it a few years ago (it's come a long way), what sort of speakers/amplifier do you have? The sound output of foobar2000 has a much richer sound coming out of my speakers, and makes even low quality mp3s sound MUCH better than Winamp and Windows Media Player.

If you're serious about storing lots of music and having multiple playlists to choose from at once, not to mention the low memory footprint and the beautiful sound, then foobar is definitely for you. If you're the sort of person who uses their computer to check your emails and talk to your friends via IM, then stick to your "pretty" media players. I'll be laughing while I play my .cue/.flac files!

http://www.foobar2000.org/?page=FAQ#other_questions

Does foobar2000 sound better than other players?

No. Most of “sound quality differences” people “hear” are placebo effect (at least with real music), as actual differences in produced sound data are below their noise floor (1 or 2 last bits in 16bit samples). foobar2000 has sound processing features such as software resampling or 24bit output on new high-end soundcards, but most of the other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.

[edit]lol@codepage fail

I too fail to see the appeal of this program. The extent people can customize the program is impressive. I toyed with it about 2 or 3 years ago, and I could never get it to look exactly how I wanted... or some poorly tagged music in my library would throw it way off visually. I spent a good amount of time trying to figure out how to manipulate the interface to my liking (probably 4 or 5 days spending a few hours each day). I remember the nerd in me enjoyed the experience but my practical side had a hard time seeing the point.

I think that the same kind of people who get a kick out of configuring and setting up Gentoo Linux, are the type of people who enjoy this program. They don't really want to use an OS or listen to music, just spend countless hours setting things up.

For me, I generally use Zune for my music library needs. I've definitely have plenty of processing power and memory to handle it. On rare occasions when I need a media player that is "lite" I go with Winamp in its classic skin.

foobar is better than Winamp, in almost every respect I can think of, except "skinning". (However the new Default UI added in 0.9.5 makes the interface more functional than any Winamp skin I've ever seen)

foobar is intended for people who want a library with correct filenames and tags, and it has the features which make doing so en mass relatively easy.
Sorting and Grouping a playlist is a cinch. Building playlists and autoplaylists is easy. Transcoding is simple. Secure Ripping is hassle free and at unlimited speed for no cost. ABX testing is made simple. And, best yet it NEVER CRASHES when you don't run spoony 3rd party UI components.

If you've been led to believe that foobar2000 is all about UI customization, you've been badly mislead.

toyed with it but not really that good from average users point of view specially those into customizing not personally just having a nice looking media player it doesn't have an equalizer and most customizing plugins/themes or whatever don't get updated and don't work on new versions it pretty much means no point updating regularly so devs waste their time with builds like this.

the average foobar2000 user is a medium to advanced PC user that favors functionality over shiny buttons and bling bling. (seriously, who keeps staring at the pimpy media player for hours instead of doing real stuff???)

foobar has it all, if not out of the box, then with a few easy to install plugins. transcoding without limits, cd burning, mass tagging and renaming, ogg, flac, ape, mka, iPod management... and most importantly: it's centered around building playlists, the real stuff you need in your fingertips to listen the music you want.

Winamp is still playing catch-up, it was kind of hilarious to see Winamp add ReplayGain support a few versions ago, when foobar had it like forever... and don't get me started on the iTunes "I have like 3 features" hell or the "hello, i'm Windows Media Player and I don't know what ogg or flac is and my library management sucks" madness.

gonchuki said,
the average foobar2000 user is a medium to advanced PC user that favors functionality over shiny buttons and bling bling. (seriously, who keeps staring at the pimpy media player for hours instead of doing real stuff???)

foobar has it all, if not out of the box, then with a few easy to install plugins. transcoding without limits, cd burning, mass tagging and renaming, ogg, flac, ape, mka, iPod management... and most importantly: it's centered around building playlists, the real stuff you need in your fingertips to listen the music you want.

Winamp is still playing catch-up, it was kind of hilarious to see Winamp add ReplayGain support a few versions ago, when foobar had it like forever... and don't get me started on the iTunes "I have like 3 features" hell or the "hello, i'm Windows Media Player and I don't know what ogg or flac is and my library management sucks" madness.

I mean generally say i wanna go to deviantart download one of lassekongo's awesome themes for it the way it's developed the theme will only work on version he's made it to. My point mainly is with each new release comes a waterfall of dependent development which doesn't support legacy customization which is a real pain in the ass specially if you follow suite with usual software ideals of always updating to newest version. Winamp you can install themes generally any 5.x theme will work with any build later then 5.x not this only will not work on 0.9.5.2 or newer stuff. Foobar updates > plugin developers have to update > customizers have to start updating or from scratch all over again isn't a good software development cycle. Also an equalizer i would assume is pretty basic thing for most media players to have these days...

Winamp can be minimized to a small bar on top of your screen to have very quick access. It's not like "always staring on it" but does foobar2000 also have this ability?
foobar2000 is ugly as hell. Period.

th3rEsa said,
Winamp can be minimized to a small bar on top of your screen to have very quick access. It's not like "always staring on it" but does foobar2000 also have this ability?
foobar2000 is ugly as hell. Period.

there's foo_AdvancedControls , while its not the same you "waste" even less space (since its located in tray)

as for foobar being "ugly" ... are you telling me you look at winamp and admire its beauty while listening to music ?

Digix, its up to the authors of the plugins to keep them up to date, so blame them(there are only 14 official plugins on foobar2000 homepage, the rest are 3rd party)

as for EQ http://img10.imagehosting.gr/out.php/i498921_Untitled1.jpg

Harlem39s Finest said,
there's foo_AdvancedControls , while its not the same you "waste" even less space (since its located in tray)

The same possibility exists for Winamp, so there's no advantage here...
What would you prefer? An ugly, functional player or an eyecatching, functional player?

th3rEsa said,
The same possibility exists for Winamp, so there's no advantage here...
What would you prefer? An ugly, functional player or an eyecatching, functional player? ;)

You're right, that's why I use foobar over winamp

th3rEsa said,
The same possibility exists for Winamp, so there's no advantage here...
What would you prefer? An ugly, functional player or an eyecatching, functional player? ;)

there's no software on my pc that i use over another because of its looks, its always about how good it is and if its a good value for money.


i don't know why its so important that my music player should look "pretty"(there are people who prefer minimalistic look, not saying every foobar user feels that way, just pointing out) when its minimised 99% of the time ?

you can just right click foobar's tray icon to reveal stop, play, pause, previous, next, random buttons.


and don't forget you can always use keyboard shortcuts (yeah, in winamp too) so you almost never need to move your hands from the keyboard or even see the app window... and coupled with foo_osd (from kode54) you can get a nice display when song changes and a proper on-screen volume bar.

just wondering... did I mention you can record streaming audio right out of the box?

Customization with the Default UI is very easy and doesn't "take hours".

Those that choose to enslave themselves to poorly made 3rd-party components only have themselves to blame.

I have only used this application once and i honestly did not see what all the buff with it is. Why is this program as popular as it is.

littleneutrino said,
I have only used this application once and i honestly did not see what all the buff with it is. Why is this program as popular as it is.

Its simple, for me its because its really customisable and more importantly it only uses 6mb ram when playing I just can't fault it.

littleneutrino said,
I have only used this application once and i honestly did not see what all the buff with it is. Why is this program as popular as it is.

I feel the same as you. I think the appeal is that you can customise almost every part of it.

It is well written, has a ton of functionality out-of-the-box and does all little things (cue sheet support, replayGain, native gapless playback of gapless formats, easy transcoding, simple secure ripping) right.