Foobar vs VLC

2019-11-10 06:10:20

My old system was setup just the way I like using Foobar, then the motherboard flaked out and in rebuilding a new system its seems like its easier to just use VLC as my it plays everything solution, but I haven't started to dig deep to try and make all the connections with my ancient, but all digital AVR system (firewire or HDMI 1.1 or s/pdif of some sort).

The new PC will be main media source, video as well as music, so even if I end up with Foobar for music, I will still need to setup VLC for all the video content. Question is, do I need Foobar at that point?

Re: Foobar vs VLC

Reply #1 – 2019-11-10 10:46:39

Of course. How do you manage your library with VLC ?

Re: Foobar vs VLC

Reply #2 – 2019-11-10 14:40:57

I dont know smart thing would be to use klite for video seeing as it still actively supports and uses mpc hc combined with music on foobar it really is the best set up VLC gets to much credit
https://codecguide.com/download_k-lite_codec_pack_full.htm is recommended
theres also a quick install version via
https://ninite.com/klitecodecs/

Re: Foobar vs VLC

Reply #3 – 2019-11-13 13:21:01

Assume you're starting with a new HD? If so, are you aware you can save off your foobar setup (.fth file I believe?) and then use that with a fresh install so you're not starting from square one?
I use foobar to manage my library, but use VLC as the associated program for mp3s within Windows for playing one-offs.
I'm not aware VLC can 'manage' a library, meaning it wouldn't automatically add new files like foobar does?