FooBar rocks!

I'm an admitted audio-quality biggot, so when a coworker introduced me to the audio player utility FooBar, I was skeptical of his claims of it being a better mousetrap. But, now after a little time switching back and forth, listening to the same music on Media Player 9, and FooBar, I have to admit its lack of a descent UI is definitely compensated by its incredible audio-processing.

Check it out...you may lose your handy blog-tool hooks, and may miss the nicer UI, but if your an audio-freak, you will quickly forget about those minor annoyances.

3 Comments

  • I'd also suggest Winamp 5 beta 1. It's extremely good and its media library is finally up to par. Great DSP plugins for postprocessing too :)

  • I have tried the latest WinAmp, Media Player, and many other audio players, and despite the FAQ, I DO get better sound when using FooBar.



    Having said that, I have found over time that it's really hard to compare apples-to-apples with Audio due to the many variables; Speaker/Headphone quality, SoundCard, Noise from PC, media type/quality, current moon-phase, etc.



    So, as a audio-purist, and amateur musician, I will always take people's disagreement as just the random chaos factor that introduces too many variables to adequately compare. :)



    However, I can still guarantee that on my Dell Latitude D600, using Grado SR60 headphones, with MP3's, M4A's, and Audio CD's, I see a big difference between the sound quality with FooBar compared to Media Player, or WinAmp (any version).



    NOTE: I rarely if ever use DSP's, since they often distort the original recording. Therefore, I am ignoring any compensation of other programs by using DSPs.

  • Whatever the faq says, foobar sounds excellent on my 20bit d/a converter in my notebook soundcard (cirrus 4229). The only other time the full 20bits are used is when im mastering tracks on it.

Comments have been disabled for this content.