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: Linux Foobar200 Clone? (Read 18124 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #25
I wish Peter would do something with that playlist redraw thing. It's quite funny thing because almost every other menu works fine.
For now that would do fine until something is done for Linux.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #26
Ehh did anything happen of this? (massive bump yes, thanks google)

foobar is pretty much the main thing keeping me using windows.
hi

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #27
There is Boofar which aims to be a "Semi-clone of foobar2000 for linux" (screenshot). A very early "working" version has been released, didn't test it though...

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #28
hmmm... I like rhythmbox... now it supports plugins with the latest versions, I'll have to look into it and see how extensible they allow it to become...

that boofar page looks interesting (if anything ever happens with it)...

I'd be glad to contribute as music management is the only serious thing holding me on windows....

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #29
I've heard from multiple sources that amaroK is better than foobar2000 (it is only available on Linux), but I'm not exactly sure how extensively these persons used foobar, and I haven't used it myself. 

The main thing that keeps me from using Linux regularly is the lack of foobar, and its inability to safely write to NTFS partitions (on which all my music is stored).  Plus these days if you're smart enough to run Linux well, then Windows XP really is just a better OS.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #30
I've heard from multiple sources that amaroK is better than foobar2000 (it is only available on Linux), but I'm not exactly sure how extensively these persons used foobar, and I haven't used it myself. 

The main thing that keeps me from using Linux regularly is the lack of foobar, and its inability to safely write to NTFS partitions (on which all my music is stored).  Plus these days if you're smart enough to run Linux well, then Windows XP really is just a better OS.

AmaroK is indeed a very nice music player.  Has some very interesting features that even foobar doesn't.  I still prefer foobar and windows though.  I wouldn't say WinXP is a better OS though, especially for storing data.  Linux is solid as a rock for data storage, just setting up things like RAID and using LVM can be a bit challenging.  I still use windows though, thats what backups are for.  So for linux folks, I highly recommend amaroK.  Whether linux is better than WinXP or not can be decided elsewhere. 

EDIT: For those who won't switch to linux due to poor NTFS support, there is a proper ext2 filesystem driver for windows now with full read/write ability.  Not tested it yet, but it should work. http://www.fs-driver.org/
Apparently M$ has released an IFS SDK for writing real filesystem drivers.  Shame no one has written one for Reiser or XFS yet.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #31
I've heard very good things about Listen too.

Features include:

Code: [Select]
    * Play your favorite songs
    * Manage your library
    * Manage your ipod
    * Manage your podcast
    * Make playlists
    * Automatically or manually download album covers
    * Automatically synchronize album covers with iPod
    * Easily burn an audio CD
    * Directly get informations from wikipedia when you play a song
    * See the lyrics of a song
    * Have statistics about your favorite songs, albums or artists
    * Listen to web radio
    * Submit your songs to Audioscrobbler
    * Quick access to last.fm related file

With listen you will be able to

    * Listen And Rip Audio CDs
    * Browse and listen songs on a DAAP share
    * Share you library via a DAAP share
    * Fill metadata with musicbrainz
    * Make inteligent playlists

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #32
...

EDIT: For those who won't switch to linux due to poor NTFS support, there is a proper ext2 filesystem driver for windows now with full read/write ability.  Not tested it yet, but it should work. http://www.fs-driver.org/
Apparently M$ has released an IFS SDK for writing real filesystem drivers.  Shame no one has written one for Reiser or XFS yet.

I have been using the Ext2 filesystem driver for over a year now.  I run Windows from a 20GB slave hard-drive (NTFS) and Linux from a 250G master hard-drive (4 partitions: 20GB ext3, 2GB swap, 208GB ext3, 20GB FAT32).  The FAT32 partition was originally made to store my music so I could access it from both Windows and Linux, but after I began using this driver, I simply moved my music back to my 208GB ext3 partition.  It has worked beautifully and better than I ever expected.  Now if only Linux had better writing support for NTFS, but that's a different argument.

amaroK is an amazing audio player.  If you have never tried it, go download yourself a copy of the kubuntu livecd and fire it up.  Too much work?  Then at least check out the screenshots, although they really don't do it much justice.  I would love to have amaroK ported to Windows or for foobar2000 to adopt many of amaroK's scripting features.  Since amaroK uses DCOP (sort of the KDE equivalent to Microsoft's COM), plugins and extensions can be written in a variety of scripting languages such as Ruby, Python, and even with bash shell scripting.  foosion has been working on a COM Automation server and I have been working on bridging the gap between foobar2000 and Ruby, but it still has a way to go.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #33
Amarok, listen, MPD(GMPC), XMMS2, Rhythmbox whatever are all fairly good when I've played with them, but they don't match the extensibility and general amazingness of foobar.
hi

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #34
What I really need (on both platforms) is something with a '10 foot interface', i.e. something with an interface like a normal dvd player, where it can be controlled by someone sat on a sofa away from the screen and without mousing around everywhere. We need big fonts, crisp response, no pc style windows and intuitive but simple controls.

Foobar is the nearest to this with the columnsui. Amarok is hopeless - apart from the never ending crashes and sluggish performance it is designed for someone sat right in front of it with a mouse.

What would really be nice would be something with a core like foobar that runs in mythtv as a replacement for the woeful mythmusic.

My media box in the lounge runs fc5 which is lovely, but really it's only used for surfing, music and tv/films (mythtv). If I could combine all these things into myth i'd be a happy camper.

Maybe if MPD matures a bit then it could be used as an engine in the same way foobar is an engine wrapped in whatever gui you choose. It's got quite a way to go before it's that good though.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #35
I spose wth MPD you could use MPC in a console and just have a damned huge console font
hi

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #36
AmaroK sure is a good piece of software but it lack's the features why I use foobar2000, such as good resampler and good Wavpack support. Although the Wavpack support isn't AmaroK's fault entirely, it's still something that isn't working well in it.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #37
Do you know one having archives supported ? Usefull feature.

Linux Foobar200 Clone?

Reply #38
Not exactly a foobar clone, but a nice player nonetheless (compile the latest cvs version). For those who read this very soon, don't get the cvs tarball 0.184.0. Get 0.184.2 from the cvs server, it fixed a bug with the resampler (which was introduced after some realtime/jack fixes).

Only thing it lacks for me is apev2 tag support, but the rest is nice.