View Poll Results: Foobar or Winamp?
- Voters
- 142. You may not vote on this poll
-
-
-
01-27-2008, 06:29 PM
Software & Hardware -
#82
winamp...because foobar doesnt look nice
-
-
01-27-2008, 11:58 PM
Software & Hardware -
#83
-
-
01-28-2008, 01:17 AM
Software & Hardware -
#84
Come on foobar YOU CAN DO IT!!
-
-
01-29-2008, 07:34 PM
Software & Hardware -
#85
Poster
BT Rep: +3
-
-
01-30-2008, 10:04 AM
Software & Hardware -
#86
-
-
01-30-2008, 10:51 AM
Software & Hardware -
#87
Yoga Novice
BT Rep: +2
It is very irritating to see people saying Winamp or Foobar is good. I have tried both,but their sound is NOT AS GOOD as XMPlay.
Dont be ignorant or lazy,try XMPlay,it is free,small in size,good looking customable skin and it allows Bit-Perfect in Win Vista through the Wasapi output plugin which is better than Kernel Streaming and ASIO and but up till now only XMPlay has it.
Both ASIO and Kernel Straming still goes through the Wasapi interface. In computing language,the lesser the layer of abstractions or layers,the faster the code and this means lesser latency = more accurate sound
Last words ranking in sound quality reproduction
XMPlayer with WASAPI > Winamp with native ASIO driver not ASIO4ALL > Foobar2000 with either ASIO or Kernel Streaming
If you dont believe,test with your ears
-
-
02-01-2008, 03:02 PM
Software & Hardware -
#88
come on foobar users we all know its the no1
audio player in the known world
-
-
02-01-2008, 03:53 PM
Software & Hardware -
#89
Member
-
-
02-01-2008, 05:26 PM
Software & Hardware -
#90
I didnt hear any difference in sound quality with foobar and xmplay. Am I deaf?
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks