Why Foobar2000?

This is a very popular question from PC-Audio users. Why Foobar2000? It’s a strange name. Why not WinAmp? Windows Media Player? MusicMatch Jukebox? Apple iTunes? or what-so-ever more popular other players?

Simply because Foobar2000 offers better sound quality. And it’s also very simple and lightweight player. It doesn’t offer many colorful or skins option (though it’s possible to do so).

Foobar2000 was developed by Peter Pawlowski, former Nullsoft (WinAmp) freelance programmer. On some thread I’ve ever read (forgot where), Peter himself admits that this Foobar2000 should produces sound in the same quality with others player. “Foobar2000 is no better than any other players”, claimed Peter (despite the fact that in Western community like hydrogenaudio, any black is black - period. If you hear the different, then it’s a placebo ;) So no use of debating what your hear “good” or “better” here).

But the fact is, Foobar2000 is absolutely better than any others standard player (WinAmp, WMP, iTunes, etc are no match for Foobar2000).

foobar.jpg

I have been using Foobar since quite long time ago. Well, if I remember correctly, that time was when 3dsoundsurge was a popular audio forum on the Net. I think it was version 0.3 or 0.4x something. It was a fantastic moment (I was a WinAmp user to). Foobar offered clean interface, simple, but sounded fantastic.

Also I have traveled from many sound card to sound card. From SB Live 16, to AWE32, AWE64, Live!, Audigy, Audigy2, X-Fi, Terratec Aureon, Audiotrak Prodigy, M-Audio Revolution (what a nice battle between VIA Envy and Creative). Finally, I moved to pro class sound card like ESI Juli@, EMU1820M, ECHO, and Lynx. I sticked with ESI Juli@ and EMU1820M until now.

From my own opinion (and some of my fellows - most of them are audiophile or sound engineers), Foobar offers the same playback quality offered by professional class audio software (we are talking about WaveLab, Nuendo, or Cubase here).

One of my friend, he is a professional sound engineer. Never able to hear the sound produce from standard player like WinAmp or Windows Media Player. Once a time, I ask him to try Foobar. Though a little bit pessimistic at first, he still tries my suggestion to try. It doesn’t take a long time for him to admit that this player is better than the standard player that he ever tried before. He says that Foobar could deliver sound similiar with professional WaveLab that cost a lot of money (Foobar is free).

Don’t believe? Just download and give yourself a try. If you don’t like it, just delete it! Easy as a-b-c!

I’m not pulling an argument here… If you like it, just use it… If you still prefer your old WinAmp or Windows Media Player, so stick with it… I’ve been in audio for over 12 years and over 8 years in PC-based, I will completely sure to recommend this Foobar as a serious (but free) listening software. This is my recommendation. Feel free to have your own recommendation ;)

Add ASIO support from your sound card to bypass Windows KMixer then this Foobar really will rock! :) Make sure your sound card will support ASIO to. Most likely are professional based. Most consumer grade sound card doesn’t support ASIO. Check the technical specification if you are not sure.

Also, for a serious listening session, I still prefer WaveLab below (click below to enlarge).

wavelab.jpg

Return to Main Page of www.jimmyauw.com

10 Responses to “Why Foobar2000?”

  1. r3dx Says:

    he3x.. another foobar fanboy huh? :p

    me too (after trying with the ASIO support.. :D, without it. IMO is the same as Winamp or etc..)

  2. Jimmy Auw Says:

    With a good sound card (I use Lynx L22), Foobar with WaveOut is still better than WinAmp or Windows Media Player.

  3. David Winarso Says:

    Mr. Auw,

    have you ever try Audacity? Another excellent free s/w… this one is intended for editing actually…

    I think it is even better then Foobar… The cons is… it has it’s own file format… though can import from WAV or MP3. Another cons.. can only one file at a time.

  4. Mike Madison Says:

    Hi there,
    I completely agree with you. This Foobar is absolutely outperforms most player.
    Greetings from old fellas at 3dss…

  5. coolkwc Says:

    i had download the foobar and tried but hardly to find any different from my Winamp 5.53….I am using X-FI XtremeMusic and MX5021…maybe you can explain whats the foobar difference from other media player, I really wish to know….thanks

  6. Jimmy Auw Says:

    The way it decodes the file…

  7. vicong Says:

    Yes in Windows I love Foobar too even without ASIO support, simplicity is the best :)

  8. wilco_sg Says:

    have you tried winamp with MAD decoder, SSRC directsound output with izotope dsp? juz want to know your opinion about MAD and SSRC. thanks!

  9. olo Says:

    I have tried many and to my ears Foobar2000 IS THE BEST free player.

  10. Tasos Says:

    I used winamp 2.95 for a long time, after trying newer versions of winamp with FLAC files and found that the OLD winamp with the older FLAC decoder sounds BETTER… dunno why and how!

    Now I use foobar2000 and I will try to get ASIO working ;)

    My system:
    X-Fi Music->NAD C325BEE->B&W 685 speakers

Leave a Reply

Related Posts from the Past:

No results.