Why are so many of you so intimidated by Foobar2000?

[Anarcho-Capitalist]

I always read about how you guys think it's too difficult to use, which is weird considering we all know more than the average computer user.

So, what exactly is so hard about using Foobar?

[Mordkanin]

I use foobar, as my only music player, and I'm intimidated by it.

I use the columns UI, but it's freaking scary and complicated. I wish I had the time to learn how to customize it properly.

[Draconian Guppy]

I use foobar, as my only music player, and I'm intimidated by it.

I use the columns UI, but it's freaking scary and complicated. I wish I had the time to learn how to customize it properly.

+1 Although I just download pre-made configs :)

[Calum Veteran]

They may call it a 'placebo effect', but for someone who has never used foobar2000 before, and I count myself in that statement, I've got amazing hearing, and there was a difference between WMP/MPC/WA and foobar2000. I played the same song "Elvenpath" with all settings back on default for the aforementioned players and the difference in sound was noticeable.

I take it you understand what the 'placebo effect' is? So that means with the above quote, you are admitting that the only reason foobar2000 sounds better to you is because you want it to or you expect it to. Am I right?

The developer of the application stated that it does not sound better than the others. That should be enough to make anyone realise that it does not sound better than the others :ermm:

[NEVER85]

I'm not intimidated by Foobar. I just prefer Winamp.

[Eric Veteran]

Foobar ate my puppy once, so I refuse to use it.

Seriously, I didn't like the way it looked/ran OOTB, so I uninstalled it.

[SMELTN]

ok question for you foobar peeps.

I have a couple of albums.. That are compilation albums, but of course it is separating the songs by artist. I don't want it to separate them by artist, I want the songs to show up in the compilation album.. Now I do not want to change the rest of my album list, because it is perfect, just those 6-8 albums that are compilation albums being sorted wrong..

How do I fix it?

Here is an example

[Reacon]

This is now the second time I've personally seen this 'MPCstar' mentioned on neowin, so spill the beans how does it differ from MPC/MPC-HC and where do you get it?

It's a partner software of my (formerly) favourite bittorrent program, Bitcomet. It comes with basically all codecs needed, but I use CCCP for other reasons as well.

I honestly have no clue as to how it compares with MPC as I have never used it. Upon further investigation of the program the functionality seems similar save for a more or less archaic UI (Windows 2000 style). My current setup is very delicate (conflicts left and right with both programs' codecs) and I'd rather not mess with it by installing MPC as it may take me an hour or so to fix. Such an inconvienience I would like to avoid.

Anyway, if you want to know more about MPCStar, there's always the main site itself: <a href="http://www.<< warez >>/" target="_blank">http://www.<< warez >>/</a>

Rather obvious domain wouldn't you agree? :shiftyninja:

EDIT: And apparently it is classified as warez. Whaa?!

Since when is a media player classified as warez? Possibly its connection with Bitcomet but that's still no reason to blacklist the site.

And before anyone asks, the answer is NO, it does NOT contain a trojan/virus/malware. My computer is perfectly clean as of yesterday (my last scan with Avira/MBAM/Spybot).

Edited May 18, 2009 by Recon415

[ceminess]

It's a partner software of my (formerly) favourite bittorrent program, Bitcomet. It comes with basically all codecs needed, but I use CCCP for other reasons as well.

I honestly have no clue as to how it compares with MPC as I have never used it. Upon further investigation of the program the functionality seems similar save for a more or less archaic UI (Windows 2000 style). My current setup is very delicate (conflicts left and right with both programs' codecs) and I'd rather not mess with it by installing MPC as it may take me an hour or so to fix. Such an inconvienience I would like to avoid.

Anyway, if you want to know more about MPCStar, there's always the main site itself: <a href="http://www.<< warez >>/" target="_blank">http://www.<< warez >>/</a>

Rather obvious domain wouldn't you agree? :shiftyninja:

EDIT: And apparently it is classified as warez. Whaa?!

Since when is a media player classified as warez? Possibly its connection with Bitcomet but that's still no reason to blacklist the site.

And before anyone asks, the answer is NO, it does NOT contain a trojan/virus/malware. My computer is perfectly clean as of yesterday (my last scan with Avira/MBAM/Spybot).

Because it contains proprietary codecs like quicktime for example.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?act=...;f=12&id=11

Edited May 18, 2009 by ceminess

[Reacon]

Because it contains proprietary codecs like quicktime for example.

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?act=...;f=12&id=11

I see now...

Rather stupid if you ask me, but I guess it is for the better of Neowin.

[acedriver]

ok question for you foobar peeps.

I have a couple of albums.. That are compilation albums, but of course it is separating the songs by artist. I don't want it to separate them by artist, I want the songs to show up in the compilation album.. Now I do not want to change the rest of my album list, because it is perfect, just those 6-8 albums that are compilation albums being sorted wrong..

How do I fix it?

Here is an example

usually the tag is wrong.. in your example, the album and year tag is different and that's why it's separated

[BoDEAN]

It would be a nice feature to be able to easily import custom skins that people make into foobar.

[08993]

Well, from reading the thread seems the question should be "Why is Foobar2000 so intimidating?"

Answers so Far:

The Developer is an ass.

The community is elitist.

You have to retag all of your files in order for them to display properly.

Only user-friendly after configuration.

Any more?

[Windows 7 x64]

I take it you understand what the 'placebo effect' is? So that means with the above quote, you are admitting that the only reason foobar2000 sounds better to you is because you want it to or you expect it to. Am I right?

The developer of the application stated that it does not sound better than the others. That should be enough to make anyone realise that it does not sound better than the others :ermm:

Yes, I know what that is, I am not some stupid dump redneck hick! That is possible, however, after getting foobar2000 many hours ago it was the first time I've ever used it, and there was a very noticeable difference between it and WinAmp.

[shakey_snake]

^no one believes you.

[dwhall]

Yes, I know what that is, I am not some stupid dump redneck hick! That is possible, however, after getting foobar2000 many hours ago it was the first time I've ever used it, and there was a very noticeable difference between it and WinAmp.

I am a stupid dumb redneck hick and I take offense to that statement.

[Reacon]

I am a stupid dumb redneck hick and I take offense to that statement.

Lol!

[Deadlydread]

I am a stupid dumb redneck hick and I take offense to that statement.

As am I... MA GET THE SHOTGUN! WE HAVE US ANOTHER MOCKING BETSY!

[Rob2687]

I use it and love it but I switch between Itunes and Foobar. Itunes is the only thing that syncs my iPod Touch so I use it for playback when it's open but I still prefer foobar for some reason.

[Ksquare]

haha reading through the thread with quotes such as "The bottom lime is that I don't want to have to do more work just to get the results I want" is just sooo amusing :laugh:

I'm actually really glad that not so many people here actaully like Foobar -> the fact is that Foobar is for someone who knows what they want, i can fully mod my Foobar in 1min flat. Foobar takes practice like everything in life, so if you're too simple minded, weak or ignorant to even try a few times, hey.... your loss :)

here's why i love Foobar since the first day it came out:

1. supports f load of codecs

2. lets me have it my way :D

3. experimentation is the key :D

4. want results? go fetch the silver platter son...

5. it just works and the audio quality is like no other player

good luck (Y)

Why practice for sth that shud be easy to use and shud be ready to use in seconds and not minutes.

It's not supposed to be rocket science ,if i want to play music why all that messing up every now and then just to play music.

Foobar is for losers, who dont know of a better way to kill thier time.

Better than that,

i use FFDSHOW in my winamp ,sound quality that no player can match but still easy to use.

[dead.cell]

Whatever guys. It went from being a simple question to a name calling contest right from the start. If you don't like customizing the hell out of Foobar, you're automatically: stupid, weak, ignorant, and maybe even a prick! Seriously though, why the need to bitch at people who don't feel like f---ing with trivial nonsense? It's like telling off some guy who doesn't feel the need to put flame stickers on the side of his car, and "pimp" it out...

Foobar is nice, but WMP out of the box picks up all my music, makes it easy to sort through, sits as a toolbar on my taskbar so I never have to bring it up, runs automatically with most keyboard controllers, allows me to rip and burn my music on the spot, pull up album art, and everything very easily. No f---king playlists are needed. No pulling your hair out because you accidentally screwed with the list, and all that junk. Foobar has nice qualities too, but FOR ME, AND MAYBE THIS IS A HARD CONCEPT TO GRASP, ya know, that I may have DIFFERENT NEEDS AND WANTS FROM MY PLAYER THAN YOU, but WMP has my bases covered.

If I needed something more, I'd use something that would meet those needs. Simple as that.

[kcmc20]

It's not... I just use it for simplicity...

Ha Ha Ha Ha I agree. It is just too easy. Is there a more complicated, better way to waste one's time? This FooBar is just too easy. I want to spend even more time configuring my software. I don't care how it sounds. I don't even like music! I like to install windows every other day and install all programs from scratch. That's the life! Who wants things to just work out of the box? Just crazy talk!

Edited May 18, 2009 by kcmc20

[The Dark Knight]

I'm sure someone has better hearing than me, but I just don't understand how people can say one audio player sounds better than another. Not all players are created equal, but the majority of sound differences people hear are strictly due to their differing hardware and whether they've properly configured the hardware.

I've also never understood why people entertain the thought of buying expensive computer speakers when they're inferior in every way, and spend only 35 dollars on a sound card or using some cheap on-board card...

Bottom line, you can't say one or the other (audio player) sounds better unless you have a true audio setup, and you've turned off all audio signal processing for a true comparison. Even then, what you hear is still only going to be as good as your hardware...

Hopefully you're not in this category...

Well, for one, I have hooked up a Logitech Z5500 Digital THX 5.1 Speaker system, which has a very good hardware decoder built in, so I did not see the need for a very expensive soundcard because the soundcard is just a passsthrough, the speakers are handling all the decoding.

Also, I compared all these software players with default settings, no equaliser or DSP effects, etc. and all players are using the same codec. Yet, WMP sounds much better than the others...

Whatever guys. It went from being a simple question to a name calling contest right from the start. If you don't like customizing the hell out of Foobar, you're automatically: stupid, weak, ignorant, and maybe even a prick! Seriously though, why the need to bitch at people who don't feel like f---ing with trivial nonsense? It's like telling off some guy who doesn't feel the need to put flame stickers on the side of his car, and "pimp" it out...

Foobar is nice, but WMP out of the box picks up all my music, makes it easy to sort through, sits as a toolbar on my taskbar so I never have to bring it up, runs automatically with most keyboard controllers, allows me to rip and burn my music on the spot, pull up album art, and everything very easily. No f---king playlists are needed. No pulling your hair out because you accidentally screwed with the list, and all that junk. Foobar has nice qualities too, but FOR ME, AND MAYBE THIS IS A HARD CONCEPT TO GRASP, ya know, that I may have DIFFERENT NEEDS AND WANTS FROM MY PLAYER THAN YOU, but WMP has my bases covered.

If I needed something more, I'd use something that would meet those needs. Simple as that.

Best Answer!! :)

[dwhall]

Seriously... I use it for it's simplicity. Default minimal install, I load all my music to it and run it in my tray.

All I do is let it run random. Don't need anything to be any simpler cept maybe a smaller program to do

the same thing from the systray :p

[s1k3sT]

I used winamp until I figured out foobar2000. Now I can't switch back. I always wanted a program I could browse my library through the program itself, and the default ui of foobar does this great. The only thing I change from the default is the view setting of my library I set it to "folder structure". That way it uses the folders, and not tags. Tags would be awesome but not every mp3 is tagged right.

[shakey_snake]

He means, "I always wanted a program I could browse my library by the folder structure through the program itself".

AFAIK, there's a good number of programs that don't do this, including out-of-the-box Winamp.

Winamp/iTunes/foo_facet style Pane-view browsers don't lend themselves to this task particularly well since a folder structure can be any number of folders deep.