Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Confused Mediamonkey user (Read 2218 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Confused Mediamonkey user

Hello all,

I am a recent convert to the flac world.  Previously I had roughly 60,000 mp3's varying from 192kb to 320kb bitrate.  A friend of mine finally got me to do some ABX testing with some of my favorite songs (192mp3 vs flac).  The result...I deleted my entire mp3 collection in disgust (over 7 years worth of ripping/collecting). 

So there is the backstory...I am now re-ripping everything to flac.  I have used Mediamonkey for about 2 years now(gold lifetime license) and have been quite pleased with it, however I keep feeling like I am missing out by not switching to foobar.  I have foobar installed, and "to me" it sounds better than MM, but I assume this to be because I "want" it to sound better.  I am not familiar with customizing it yet, and really just want to hear if it is worth it or not before I invest the time into learning it.

I have searched the forums, but it seems that most comparison threads tend to go off-topic or perhaps I suck at searching.  I would like information from individuals who have used both.  What does Foobar offer that the other can't (things not immediately available from the specs) Also, is there a way to do tagging/album art in foobar from sources like amazon, etc?

TIA, Statcat

Confused Mediamonkey user

Reply #1 –
Quote from: Stratcat on
Hello all,

I am a recent convert to the flac world.  Previously I had roughly 60,000 mp3's varying from 192kb to 320kb bitrate.  A friend of mine finally got me to do some ABX testing with some of my favorite songs (192mp3 vs flac).  The result...I deleted my entire mp3 collection in disgust (over 7 years worth of ripping/collecting). 

So there is the backstory...I am now re-ripping everything to flac.  I have used Mediamonkey for about 2 years now(gold lifetime license) and have been quite pleased with it, however I keep feeling like I am missing out by not switching to foobar.  I have foobar installed, and "to me" it sounds better than MM, but I assume this to be because I "want" it to sound better.  I am not familiar with customizing it yet, and really just want to hear if it is worth it or not before I invest the time into learning it.

I have searched the forums, but it seems that most comparison threads tend to go off-topic or perhaps I suck at searching.  I would like information from individuals who have used both.  What does Foobar offer that the other can't (things not immediately available from the specs) Also, is there a way to do tagging/album art in foobar from sources like amazon, etc?

TIA, Statcat


From all that I've read here, it's unlikely that foobar actually sounds better. I use MM gold, and have for 3 or so years. I've toyed with foobar from time to time, but never end up sticking with it because in my experience it has quite a learning curve and quite a bit of tweaking to get it to look cool like some of the screenshots I've seen. (I do believe that later versions of Foobar are easier to setup, though.) Also, MM works with my remote control (Remote Wonder) and has a few years of metadata about my listening and a number of autoplaylists set up.  Long story short: though Foobar is tempting, for me it would be too much work to switch -- and I don't really find MM lacking in anything. A more experienced Foobar user can probably do a much better job of explaining its benefits...

Confused Mediamonkey user

Reply #2 –
From the Foobar2000 FAQ:
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 other mainstream players are capable of doing the same by now.

This thread (if you haven't seen it already) is full of user comments related to why users have chosen Foobar over others.  The foo_discogs component is great for adding metadata and album art to your media files.