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: is this the only foobar2000 forum? (Read 1887 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

is this the only foobar2000 forum?

Is this the only foobar2000 forum? The problem is TOS #8. Foobar2000 is used by many audiophiles for the possibility of good sound quality, which could make some good discussions. But most of us evaluate changes via non-blind listening, as it's simply impossible to conduct blind tests on every option that we need to explore. That requires a friend to help, and requires new tests for every small change which could take days when I might want to evaluate ten different settings for new gear. Just not practical.

Re: is this the only foobar2000 forum?

Reply #3 –
There is also the Head-fi forums, where placebophilia is encouraged/applauded.
| QAAC ~ 192 kbps |

Re: is this the only foobar2000 forum?

Reply #4 –
Hi, I don't know what Peter would want, foobar2000 being his baby, and I'd say he does enjoy all the purchases that help him out.

I wish I could say I'd like to toss out the audiophools and all their junk, but that's not really the official final word, it's just my opinion.

I care that this is a well engineered piece of software, and that it fulfills the use cases of a lot of people. I don't really care for the discussion of configuring this software to achieve placebo results, though. Bit perfect matters if you want to get compressed bitstreams out to your external decoders, but doesn't really matter much outside of that use case, and even then, if you do that, you can't do much of anything else with your sound hardware. But I bet you'd love spending hours discussing, at length, the exact benefits to using your direct to hardware SACD rip playback. Too bad you can't color that discussion with scientifically unprovable opinions, per this forum's rules. Maybe take it to Head-fi, they love that kind of rabble there.

Speaking of coloring discussion with scientifically unprovable opinions, that reminds me: Someone, fairly recently, was getting all insulted around these parts because someone didn't take kindly to their colorful use of religious references and metaphors in their discussion of audio quality. Boy, that was really fun.

Re: is this the only foobar2000 forum?

Reply #5 –
Quote from: mike1127 on
Is this the only foobar2000 forum? The problem is TOS #8. Foobar2000 is used by many audiophiles for the possibility of good sound quality, which could make some good discussions. But most of us evaluate changes via non-blind listening, as it's simply impossible to conduct blind tests on every option that we need to explore. That requires a friend to help, and requires new tests for every small change which could take days when I might want to evaluate ten different settings for new gear. Just not practical.
Which changes/options do you feel should be discussed with disregard to TOS #8?

Re: is this the only foobar2000 forum?

Reply #6 –
Quote from: kode54 on
I wish I could say I'd like to toss out the audiophool
sound quality commentary regarding drivers, ram caching and the like?

Yes, bounced right out on their ears!

Quote from: mike1127 on
snowflakes
To me the use of this term speaks volumes.