- #Foobar2000 skins itunes pro#
- #Foobar2000 skins itunes software#
- #Foobar2000 skins itunes professional#
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. If you don’t like it, just delete it! Easy as a-b-c!
#Foobar2000 skins itunes professional#
He says that Foobar could deliver sound similiar with professional WaveLab that cost a lot of money (Foobar is free).ĭon’t believe? Just download and give yourself a 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. Though a little bit pessimistic at first, he still tries my suggestion to try. Never able to hear the sound produce from standard player like WinAmp or Windows Media Player. One of my friend, he is a professional sound engineer.
#Foobar2000 skins itunes software#
I sticked with ESI and EMU1820M until now.įrom 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).
#Foobar2000 skins itunes pro#
Finally, I moved to pro class sound card like ESI, EMU1820M, ECHO, and Lynx. 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). Foobar offered clean interface, simple, but sounded fantastic.Īlso I have traveled from many sound card to sound card. It was a fantastic moment (I was a WinAmp user to). I think it was version 0.3 or 0.4x something. Well, if I remember correctly, that time was when 3dsoundsurge was a popular audio forum on the Net. I have been using Foobar since quite long time ago. If you hear the different, then it’s a placebo 😉 So no use of debating what your hear “good” or “better” here).īut the fact is, Foobar2000 is absolutely better than any others standard player (WinAmp, WMP, iTunes, etc are no match for Foobar2000). “Foobar2000 is no better than any other players”, claimed Peter (despite the fact that in Western community like hydrogenaudio, any black is black – period. 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. It doesn’t offer many colorful or skins option (though it’s possible to do so).įoobar2000 was developed by Peter Pawlowski, former Nullsoft (WinAmp) freelance programmer. And it’s also very simple and lightweight player.
Simply because Foobar2000 offers better sound quality. Why not WinAmp? Windows Media Player? MusicMatch Jukebox? Apple iTunes? or what-so-ever more popular other players? This is a very popular question from PC-Audio users.
0 kommentar(er)
