Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Foobar2000

foobar2000.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 193 posts

Re: Foobar2000

#81

Post by fallinditch »

One of the things I loved about Winamp was programming my own visualizations - can't remember if this was a plugin or was built into the main app. But it was most satisfying to generate trippy visuals with extreme granular control. I also liked having control over my skin and panel setup.

Also, this is cool for all those über random playlisters: a tool you can use to create a random playlist of X amount of songs from your entire library [edit: and make copies of the random files to a new folder. Useful for making playlists on portable media]. Sorry it was a long time ago and I don't recall what it was called.

Re: Foobar2000

#82

Post by vunderba »

haunter wrote: post #64
vunderba wrote: post #59

Bit of a tangent but it's kind of infuriating to me that I still haven't found anything better than Winamp (or Foobar for that matter) on a modestly powerful Windows machine. Even 20 years ago, I could literally just right-click on an entire folder sitting on my external hard-drive, and it would immediately enqueue all of those files into Winamp. I even had a bunch of Winamp plugins that could automatically handle my…

>Even 20 years ago, I could literally just right-click on an entire folder sitting on my external hard-drive, and it would immediately enqueue all of those files into Winamp. VLC? Right click on folder > Play with VLC media player Works with any media file. Takes like 2 seconds to open my Youtube local backup folder with +10k videos

Thanks I'll give it a shot, I've never even tried VLC with audio files before - but I just did some reading up and apparently it has built-in support for SPC and other game music formats out of the box.

Re: Foobar2000

#83

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

fluoridation wrote: post #68
thesuitonym wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if this will be the new Winamp-in-nothing-but-name or the old-new Winamp 5x builds, or even older builds?

To be honest, while I used and loved Winamp for a long time and it would be nice to have the sources even for a 2.x version, the reason it was popular back in the day was because it was the only one (or close enough). Nowadays there's a million ways to play audio files. Audacious even has a mode that imitates the Winamp aesthetics, and I think it can even load Winamp skins. There's not much value in the Winamp source…

Winamp also had visualizations. It seems that none of the modern players have that.

Re: Foobar2000

#85

Post by tvshtr »

a0123 wrote: post #76
imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

A remnant of simpler times. Foobar and VLC, any other software that has always worked and remained pretty much the same?

VLC is getting a a major UI overhaul, it's pretty much finished actually and should be released soon.

Re: Foobar2000

#86

Post by happytoexplain »

SeriousM wrote: post #30
happytoexplain wrote: post #23

Still my daily driver when I'm at my PC.

Where do you get your music from? Back in the old days we used cd rips and sharing platforms to get the mp3s from but nowadays streaming got so convenient.

I mostly listen to my existing collection. Rarely when there is something new I like - music filesharing is still quite healthy. I still use Spotify on mobile, and for the recommendation engine, but the interface is bad and they don't have everything I listen to.

Re: Foobar2000

#87

Post by signaru »

imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

I use Audacious on Ubuntu as I can almost get the same UI configuration as foobar2000, tabs of playlists which can be made on the fly or from saved files. A music player app is something I always use on the background, so all the fancy visualizations or album art are not so useful for me. It's also sad that the default music player on Ubuntu (Mate) doesn't have a volume control out of the box.

Re: Foobar2000

#88

Post by Teslazar »

I'm surprised that AIMP hasn't been mentioned yet. It's also a great old school audio player that was released back in 2006. I transitioned to it when Winamp development was fizzling out. Not sure when that was but I've been using it for a long time. With the 'Pandemic' skin it looks like classic Winamp and has support for visualizations and many other features people tended to like from Winamp.

https://www.aimp.ru/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIMP

Re: Foobar2000

#89

Post by serf »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #45
imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

Despite somehow liking WinAmp 2 more than WinAmp 3, I could never understand why do people consider WinAMP 3 awful. Nevertheless I just switched to foobar2000 on Windows and DeaDBeeF on Linux because their UIs just are perfectly bullshit-free practical pragmatic tools and I came to feel I want a tool rather than a show.

>Despite somehow liking WinAmp 2 more than WinAmp 3, I could never understand why do people consider WinAMP 3 awful

variety of reasons.

mine: it broke a huge amount of visualizers/dsps/skins.

Re: Foobar2000

#90

Post by fsckboy »

foo and bar, and foobar, have meanings and utility that is undermined by people giving them new definitions and polluting our public namespace. Instead, call the project "farting in an elevator" because that's what you're doing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasyntactic_variable

* FOO 3. Used very generally as a sample name for absolutely anything.*

https://www.dourish.com/goodies/jargon.html

A similar injustice, theft of the commonweal, was Microsoft was granted a trademark for "windows", as if that was the generic term for... well, "windows"

Post reply on HN