• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Winamp5? Convince me.

H

Hal|9k

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 2, 2001
Messages
5,624
A thread last night got me thinking about this one...

I'm still using Winamp 2.81 with the MAD plug-in. It's been good to me, it's stable, and sounds pretty damn good to boot.

Can anyone give me any reason (not including support) that I should upgrade to 5 (or 3/4 for that matter)? Bear in mind that I don't need too many advanced features or anything like that. Just clean sound, passable management, and lack of bloat.

Any thoughts?
 
Winamp 5 is Winamp 2.9x, with modern skin/winamp3 skin support added via a plugin. Winamp 2.x skins work just as they always have.

(Winamp 3 development is dead. Winamp 4 does not exist. Winamp 5 is called Winamp 5 because 2+3=5 :))

It also sports a much updated plugin API that addresses many of the limitations 2.x had. Still works with 98% of Winamp 2.x plugins. Configuation dialogs have been completely cleaned up and look MUCH better. Built in Crossfading is nice too. (the crossfading enable/disable button is only available in "Modern" skins)

The Media Library is a great feature. If you have a LOT of music files then it makes finding them much easier. Shoutcast listings are built into the Media Library. Nullsoft InternetTV is also built into the media library. InternetTV works like Shoutcast, but for video instead. People broadcast whatever content they want.

It also contains the new EQ code by 4front. (you have to use Winamp's own decoder and disable the "Fast Layer 3 EQ" option to get the new EQ) Winamp 2.9x includes the new EQ code as well.

However, when using the MAD plugin a few of these features get disabled. The MAD plugin does not pass infomation to or from the media library and it does not support streaming or ID3 v2 tags at all. None of this will probably change since development on it seems dead. No update to the plugin in almost 2 years now.
 
Thanks, stevewm. Brilliant post and exactly the kind of info I'm looking for.

Sounds like 5 is worthy of consideration after all. I wear the cans a lot so the crossfading could definitely come in handy.

You think the SQ is high enough that I could ditch MAD for the newer features? I'd like v2 tags, definitely, but not by trading off any quality...
 
Originally posted by X86Dude
Are you confusing crossfading with crossfeed?
Click to expand...

lol. Yep. Apparently my blood:alcohol level is dangerously low. :p
 
Get foobar and totally forget about Winamp.

The only thing I wish Foobar had was a port of the MilkDrop :)


Cheers,

Mr. Pain
 
Actually the MAD decoder is not as good as people think.

In some tests at http://www.hydrogenaudio.org they measured and compared 3 different decoders for distortion at certain output settings. They tested Foobar, Winamp 2.91 and Winamp 2.91 with MAD. (5 uses the same decoder as 2.91)

Foobar and Winamp where equal for the 16-bit/44khz tests. MAD came out with much higher (worse) numbers. For the 24-bit tests Foobar's numbers barely changed at all when compared to 16-bit. MAD actually got worse on some samples in 24-bit.

Keep in mind this was about a month ago. I'll try and dig up the link on Hydrogenaudio and post it back here when/if I can find it......

Few things I forgot to mention. Crossfading is only supported with the DirectSound output plugin, which by the way is the default output plugin. If you want gapless playback turn the "Buffer ahead on track change" slider up to 500ms. If still not completely gapless enable the Silence Remover. All of these settings are in the Config screen for the DirectSound output plugin.

If you have a 4/5.1 speaker system and Winamp does not play to the rear speakers. In the DirectSound plugin's config enable "Hardware Accleration". This in most cases makes the rear channel work again :)

And if you use the EQ at all. Definately make sure to disable that "Fast Layer 3 EQ" option so Winamp uses the new EQ :) CPU usage will not increase in the least bit.

When you install Winamp 5 it WILL install over your 2.81 install. I recommend you completely uninstall Winamp 2.81 and delete the Winamp directory before you install 5. Or alternatively install 5 to a different directory.

Most of the new features are only included in the Full version download. The Lite version looks and acts exactlly like Winamp 2.x.

It will by default attempt to associate will all media files and VIDEO files during install. Just uncheck the ones you don't want.

And I did forget to mention Winamp 5 has video support. It plays any format that Windows Media Player can (uses DirectShow, just like most other media player apps do)

There are a few other cosmetic things added, like the Windows XP style notification popup on song changes. Transparency support (2k/XP ONLY!), etc.... Just search through Preferences to find it all. Most of the visual settings are also in the Config drop down drawer....

Wow, long post..................
 
Thanks much, fellas. I'm putting foobar and WA5 on the "To Do" list for after the playoffs.

I think I'll just export the proper key(s) and rename \Winamp so I can put everything back if the auditions fall flat.

I have a feeling they won't, though. Thanks again!
 
Originally posted by Stanley Pain
Get foobar and totally forget about Winamp.

The only thing I wish Foobar had was a port of the MilkDrop :)


Cheers,

Mr. Pain
Click to expand...

I went back from Foobar to winamp 5. I was an avid foobar user, but winamp5 actually uses less memory and resource, and looks better. Not to mention the database/media library on winamp is much better.
 
Originally posted by Urraca
I went back from Foobar to winamp 5. I was an avid foobar user, but winamp5 actually uses less memory and resource, and looks better. Not to mention the database/media library on winamp is much better.
Click to expand...


cpuusagefoobar.jpg


I think it's a moot point though, since anything from a >150mhz machine wouldn't use that many resources or memory when playing mp3's.

As for look, I don't really care, as long as it plays my music just fine. I don't watch my mp3's.

As for database and media library, I don't really care for that, but then again we all have our choices on mp3 players :cool:
 
Does winamp 5 load slow for you guys? ver. 2.9 loaded pretty instant for me while 5 takes a good couple of seconds. I'm using the full version (i wanted video titles to show inside of the litestep theme!)

I like the look, was just wondering if the load was only my computer. specs below.
 
Originally posted by Blue Knight
Does winamp 5 load slow for you guys? ver. 2.9 loaded pretty instant for me while 5 takes a good couple of seconds. I'm using the full version (i wanted video titles to show inside of the litestep theme!)

Click to expand...

Foobar loads instantaneously, winamp5 took about 3 seconds to load.


I have a slightly better system proc-wise, instead I'm running a Barton 2800+.


oh yes, winamp5 load on my cpu (fluctuates between 4 and 7%)

winampusage.jpg


edit: oh yeah, less resources.
 
Blue Knight: The longer load time is due to the modern skin engine. It takes a bit of time to parse the XML files and assemble the skin before it displays it.

If you use Classic skins the load time returns to less than a second.


Duck-BOT: The CPU usage is caused by the modern skin animation. If you minimize Winamp it should return to 0-1% (should stay on 0% most of the time if Hardware Accleration is enabled for the DirectSound output plugin) With Winamp 2.x skins the CPU usage should stay at 1% or below, even with Winamp showing on the screen.
 
Originally posted by Duck-BOT
Foobar loads instantaneously, winamp5 took about 3 seconds to load.


I have a slightly better system proc-wise, instead I'm running a Barton 2800+.


oh yes, winamp5 load on my cpu (fluctuates between 4 and 7%)

winampusage.jpg


edit: oh yeah, less resources.
Click to expand...

my CPU usage for winamp5 stays at 1-4% (4% rarely). I was talking about the memory footprint as well. My Foobar2000 stays at around 11,700 while Winamp5 is consitantly in the 8,000kb range. What type of CPU do you have? Still the differences are miniscule, atleast on my system. That is why I went back to Winamp, it's much more visually pleasing, and like I said the new media library kicks ass.

It sorts everything perfectly, searchs easy and in multiple ways, groups artists and albums, and automatically incorporates new downloads and scans in the background your download directories. Also, if gives you other playlist features such has your most played albums, recently downloaded, neverplayed etc. I like it alot.
 
Yeah like I said, the differences are miniscule and it really shouldn't matter, it's just preference. I just like foobar because it's simple, I don't need skins or a nice visual interface. To each his own.

I don't download a lot of mp3's, so winamp's way of sorting isn't really necessary for me, but for some people it's a god send.

steve: Yep, I know. but I don't like minimizing then having to wait a few seconds for it to reappear when I click on it on the system bar. Foobar pops up instantaneously, and unfortunately, I'm one of those very impatient Americans who want things now now now.

It really doesn't matter to me, I can go either way, I just think foobar has grown on me. Winamp doesn't do it for me after the entire Winamp3 fiasco.

As for what CPU I have, it's a Barton 2800+ (mentioned earlier btw) with 1 gb of ram. It's a moot point :p
 
Originally posted by Duck-BOT
Yep, I know. but I don't like minimizing then having to wait a few seconds for it to reappear when I click on it on the system bar. Foobar pops up instantaneously, and unfortunately, I'm one of those very impatient Americans who want things now now now.

Click to expand...



If it takes several seconds for Winamp to come back up from a minimize, something it terribly wrong :) It should pop up instantly....
 
Foobar2k > *

Nuff said.

For large MP3 collections, Foobar is the way to go. Specially when you get some nice playlist reformatting scripts in.
 
Originally posted by ItsSoLARGE
i wish foobar had a media library :(
Click to expand...

It's got a hefty Database system in there. There are also a few plugins available that let your search the DB.

That and the playlist is like one giant DB, with the ability of tabbed playlists from the main screen.

Cheers,

Mr. Pain
 
Well I use WinAmp5 but I had to disable the default skin... on a PIII 650 (My work machine) it used a ton of CPU.

Jason
 
The biggest problem I have with Fubar is...



When you are playing a game or using another application that takes up the entire screen, you can't control your Fubar playlist with the Special functions on Microsoft keyboards. I can skip tracks, pause, stop, and play using the buttons on the top of my keyboard when using winamp. The "Media" key even launches winamp by default (not windows media player, unless winamp is not installed) which I think is very cool. Winamp I find is just much more integrated with windows.

I do however want a BASIC player that just plays music and nothing else, so Fubar attracts me. But the inability to work with my keyboard hotkeys is what prevents me from using it.
 
There are also plugins for foobar, as well as program that allow you to remap the media keys to do what you want them to do :)


Can't remember the programs name, but look on the foobar forums. Lots of info there :)


Cheers,

Mr. Pain
 
Now I'm not one to post on crowded threads (why repeat what someone has already said) and this might come a bit late, but being an a loyal foobar fan, I'd like to express my personal experiences.

Foobar can be massive overkill for most people. Yes, it is hard to use it's cooler features but I'm the kinda of person who has to change EVEYTHING to something OTHER then the default. :D Because of this, foobar has been endless in its 'tweaking' and customization. Yes, it lacks in the eye candy department with visualizations (probally not for too long though) but thats what Winamp is for. Personally I like the raw performance of foobar and its very strait forward play list system. I've recommended foobar to lots of people and I have yet to receive a complaint.

However, foobar wasn't really made with mp3s in mind. It was built more for FLAC and other lossless compressions and for 5000+ song playlists. To the more casual mp3 listener (I define casual in that they cannot hear the flaws in mp3s) I've found they enjoy CoolPlayer over Winamp. I have no idea about CoolPlayer's sound quality, but with mp3s, lets not go there. It IS a blazingly fast minamlist mp3 player with useful features.

I was a big fan of Winamp 2 myself. (Tried my hand at making a few skins too) That was before I found foobar and lossless audio formats. If sound quality is important (as in you do NOT listen to mp3s) yes, foobar hands down. Dont get me wrong, I still have and download mp3s (they will never go away) and foobar does an extra fine job with them. If visualizations and look are important, I'm going to say Winamp 2 or 5 kills in this department. Its been a while but i remember Winamp 2's sound quality being just fine (w/o MAD). If you are a more of a casual listener (mp3s only) check out CoolPlayer. Hell, check out CoolPlayer anyway, the thing is VERY small.

When it comes down to system resource management, ALL the above mentioned players are pretty damn close on the grand scale of things. 4% CPU usage is piss in the bucket with CPUs these days. I'm sure even Winamp can be tuned up for lower CPU usage.

I mostly have foobar running in the background while I'm at my computer. Its kinda nice being at LAN parties playing Quake3 or UT2k3 with Rage playing in the background. Never once has the game or music hic-uped on me. It does takes a bit of fiddling, but you can set up global hot keys and an OSD so you can have total control of your music while in game. (I wouldn't be suprised if a plugin will let you use multimedia keyboards)

Foobar is not for eveyone, but it is a damn good audio player if it fits your tastes.
 
Been using Winamp 5 for a few days now. One thing I really don't like is that it doesnt load instantly like Winamp 2.9x.

It takes about 3 seconds to load Winamp 5, although comparing to Winamp2.x that 3 seconds feels like 3 minutes. Call me impatient but I like my software clean and quick. No gimmicks or bloat.
 
Easlier versions of Winamp 5 wouldn't run on my computer, however now it does.

Unfortunately the multimedia keys on my keyboard seem to not control 5. :(
 
Originally posted by agentzero9
But the inability to work with my keyboard hotkeys is what prevents me from using it.
Click to expand...
Do you have multimedia keyboard support enabled?

(click the image for the full size version)
 
Whats wrong with your guys' computer setup?

When running Winamp5 my CPU usage is almost always at 0% and jumps to 2% about every 5-10 seconds.
If running visualizations (milkdrop) windowed its constantly 20% (GF4 4200 8X 128MB if that matters for that part).

This is a Pally 1700+ on Nforce2 (Epox 8RDA), 512mb DC DDR PC2100 (lax timings), no soundstorm- using onboard 2channel Nforce audio with no hardware acceleration.
The checkbox for that in DirectSound output options is greyed out.
Lack of hardware acceleration is something else to take into consideration considering my results..
Your CPU usage must be due to those Creative drivers :D

I doubt it would even go to 2% once I get my Audiotrak Prodigy.

edit- Should add that my results are with the modern skin and the results were the same whether it was minimized or maximized.

Still 0-2%
 
the only thing that prevents me from using winamp5 is that i cant have stereo 2x...i have tried everything but still cant get it to work...so im stuck on foobar..but i love it
 
Again, thanks for all of the valuable input, folks.

I've been running WA5 for quite a while now and I'm probably going to roll back to 2.81 (or maybe 2.91). 5 just doesn't give me anything that I actually USE. I'm a bit of a minimalist, so that's probably the only issue here. 5 seems a little "quirky" but I expect that of any code ending in .00 or .01 (or even .02 or .03 :D ).

I won't go back to 2.x before trying foobar, though, but only IF you guys think it offers me anything I'll use. Is SQ better or anything functional like that? So long as CPU usage stays within a few percentage points I'm not really concerned with eating cycles. Whatchall think, give foobar a whirl?
 
Yea I just got Foobar 2000 like a week ago. Its great, low cpu ultlization, good sq, and ALOT of options. Your gunna want a different skin though, the default one is kind of "bland". But besides that, its great...

-MoOfAsA~
 
Originally posted by Hal|9k
Again, thanks for all of the valuable input, folks.

I've been running WA5 for quite a while now and I'm probably going to roll back to 2.81 (or maybe 2.91). 5 just doesn't give me anything that I actually USE. I'm a bit of a minimalist, so that's probably the only issue here. 5 seems a little "quirky" but I expect that of any code ending in .00 or .01 (or even .02 or .03 :D ).

I won't go back to 2.x before trying foobar, though, but only IF you guys think it offers me anything I'll use. Is SQ better or anything functional like that? So long as CPU usage stays within a few percentage points I'm not really concerned with eating cycles. Whatchall think, give foobar a whirl?
Click to expand...

Yup give it a whirl. Get the special edition (foobar_special.exe when you download).

Options out the wazoo. And it has the best sound quality. (Supports ASIO/Kernel Streaming, and noise shaping/dithering).

Foobar's main screen is like a giant playlist. check out the foobar formatting page. Really good stuff for those with large playlists, etc.

Once you foobar, you never go back (unless you're a looks > functionality type goober).

Cheers,

Mr. Pain
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top