Best jukebox

[Gary Sheynkman]

Lets be honest here....itunes is NOT the greatest windows app ever. It is slow, buggy, and just a pain to use.

So what do you use?

(due to the # of answers anticipated...i cant provide a poll :oops: )

Obviously if one uses an ipod for XP, itunes is needed...but what if you dont?

winamp?....real?(haha)....?

[Godsongz]

Been using winamp for years, and never really bothered looking around for anything better. I'm always willing to try the latest and greatest, but has there been one?

[Jason Dunn]

Myself, I just use WMP9 - I used to use Winamp, but WMP9 is quite nice and does everything I need it to. Not that it doesn't have its glitches mind you - like why doesn't it load in state where you can drag and drop music onto it? Noooo.....you have to click on the NOW PLAYING button first, THEN you can drag music onto it. Stupid. :evil:

[Janak Parekh]

Lets be honest here....itunes is NOT the greatest windows app ever. It is slow, buggy, and just a pain to use.
It's pretty darn stable for me. ;) And not that slow either...

I also use Winamp5 at work for Oggs. 5.01 has finally made the Media Library stable.

And there's nothing wrong with WMP9, as Jason points out...

--janak

[marlof]

It's pretty darn stable for me. ;) And not that slow either...

Yeah, same here, I actually have not found any problem with iTunes for Windows. In fact, I moved my complete MP3 library from my Mac to my WinXP box since iTunes behaved so good there. Not a problem maintaining my 18 GB collection since.

[ux4484]

I toggle between WMP9 and MusicMatch. I (now ages back) did the lifetime update subscription to MusicMatch, and for the price I paid then it has been very worth it... though since WMP9, it is a bit of a burn as it does (for free) much of what MM plus does. I've been happy with MM download service, very quick and pretty stable for me, and in tandem with Sure Thing labeler; making Jewel cases and CD labels is almost automatic.

[Suhit Gupta]

Like Janak I use Winamp 5 as well (obviously, since we share an office :)). We used to use QCD and WMP9 a fair bit but the new Winamp is definitely nicer.

At home I still use QCD bit I may switch to Winamp shortly. On the other hand, since I just bought a hard drive based MP3 player, I have been hooked to that for the last week or so :).

I should point out that when I use iTunes on my WinXP box, it is awfully slow to start up. I use it to play my voicemail messages (my phone carrier is Vonage and they provide an online voicemail system). When I installed iTunes on this machine, it took control of playing .wav files, and I have just been too lazy to switch control back to Winamp :roll:

Suhit

[Jason Dunn]

iTunes lasted for all of 10 seconds on my computer. Why? NO @(#ING SUPPORT FOR BUYING MUSIC FOR CANADIANS! I really, really hate how these companies assume everyone in the world is American and don't bother to sniff the IP or give a friendly warning "Hey, this won't exactly work right for you in Canada".

[Janak Parekh]

iTunes lasted for all of 10 seconds on my computer. Why? NO @(#ING SUPPORT FOR BUYING MUSIC FOR CANADIANS!
Couple points on this:

1. iTunes works just fine even if you don't use the music store. In fact, it's the cheapest way of getting a Fraunhofer MP3 encoder, because Apple pays the license fees.

2. I'm sure Apple is not doing this deliberately -- they're probably trying to get the same terms in Canada -- but from what I've heard, the record industry up there is pretty tough. After all, you have that CD-R tax. :(

3. They could probably make the bit about no iTMS in Canada a bit bolder -- no argument there.

--janak

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

I use good ol' Winamp 2.8. I don't see anything wrong with it, and it's nice and compact. I can't even use iTunes! =P

[Suhit Gupta]

I use good ol' Winamp 2.8. I don't see anything wrong with it, and it's nice and compact. I can't even use iTunes! =P

Oh, you really should try Winamp 5. None of the silly problems that everyone sufferred with, with the versions between 3 and now :roll: .

Suhit

[Gary Sheynkman]

I read their explanation of "why no winamp 4" and still dont get it.

and now you have to pay!?!?!?!?!?!

so much for staying true to their ideals

[Janak Parekh]

I read their explanation of "why no winamp 4" and still dont get it.
5 = 2 + 3, i.e., best features of both.

and now you have to pay!?!?!?!?!?!
Nope. There's a free version right there. It's very obvious to me...

--janak

[Suhit Gupta]

Nope. There's a free version right there. It's very obvious to me...

Direct link here - http://www.winamp.com/player/free.php

Suhit

[Gary Sheynkman]

let me restate...you have to pay for faster burning/encoding?!?!??!

Why why why? This is just the beginning. Soon winamp will be as crippled as musicmatch is in its free version :(

[Jason Dunn]

If iTunes played WMA files, I might use it - I installed it again and don't mind it as much now that I've accepted I can't buy songs through it. ;-)

[Suhit Gupta]

let me restate...you have to pay for faster burning/encoding?!?!??!

Why why why? This is just the beginning. Soon winamp will be as crippled as musicmatch is in its free version :(

I disagree. You don't pay for anything 'faster'... the free version has no burning/encoding features built in.

And most software of this kind has a free version and a non-free full featured version. How else do you expect them to make their money? It is not like this is a sourceforge project ;-).

Suhit

[Suhit Gupta]

I disagree. You don't pay for anything 'faster'... the free version has no burning/encoding features built in.
I am soooooo wrong. Jason just pointed out that even though it says that they don't have a encoder/burner listed on their product description on http://www.winamp.com/player/ but they do list it on http://www.winamp.com/player/free.php. Removing foot from mouth now... :-P

Suhit

[Janak Parekh]

Why why why? This is just the beginning. Soon winamp will be as crippled as musicmatch is in its free version :(
Why are you being so paranoid? What they're doing is to charge for some of the added features. Ultimately, nothing can stay free. Even iTunes isn't free, per se -- it's a loss-leader for iPods. Anyway, I doubt you'll ever see Winamp's playback features crippled -- just the "add-ons".

--janak

[Jason Dunn]

I ditto Janak's opinion - it's not surprising that Winamp has come out with an enhanced paid version. The free version does everything the pay version does (which is surprising), it just does it slower (which is ok). All in all, I think it's quite fair. $15 is cheap, and free is cheaper - they've got both versions covered. Remember that ANYTHING that rips to MP3 has to pay a licensing fee!

[marlof]

1. iTunes works just fine even if you don't use the music store. In fact, it's the cheapest way of getting a Fraunhofer MP3 encoder, because Apple pays the license fees.

Yeah! :rock on dude!:

2. I'm sure Apple is not doing this deliberately -- they're probably trying to get the same terms in Canada -- but from what I've heard, the record industry up there is pretty tough. After all, you have that CD-R tax. :(

I'm in the same boat Jason is in. Apple is working very hard to tie up the contracts with the European record companies, but all they can state at this moment is that they're coming to Europe, and hopefully this year. See the report on eWeek (http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1473108,00.asp) on the problems that are on the road to this.

"One big problem: No pan-European agreement exists between record labels and the various agencies that collect royalties for songwriters and music publishers.

For now, companies that sell music online in Europe have to negotiate royalty rates in each individual country—a nightmare of red tape. Record labels and representatives of writers and publishers across Europe are trying to reach an agreement to make things simpler.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), which represents the global recording industry, says there's still haggling over prices and terms, though it expects resolution within months."

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Remember that ANYTHING that rips to MP3 has to pay a licensing fee!

I don't recall paying anything for CDex. =P Or is that some pariah software here? =P

[Jason Dunn]

Remember that ANYTHING that rips to MP3 has to pay a licensing fee!

I don't recall paying anything for CDex. =P Or is that some pariah software here? =P

Years ago, Thomson (the company who owns the licensing the rights to MP3), allowed applicates to not have to pay a fee if they were under "x" copies out there. About a year ago, they changed things around so that almost anything required a royalty fee:

http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/index.html

I'm not sure how something like LAME fits in here, but I have a feeling it might be a legal grey area...but according to that licensing page, even PLAYERS have to pay a licensing fee.

[Janak Parekh]

I'm not sure how something like LAME fits in here, but I have a feeling it might be a legal grey area...but according to that licensing page, even PLAYERS have to pay a licensing fee.
Even LAME's own site suggests (http://lame.sourceforge.net/about.html) there may be a patent license fee, and they have some links to more information on the subject. My guess is that CDex might get around it because it's developed internationally. Of course, this was the biggest motivation for the development of Ogg, and CDex includes it too. ;)

--janak

[Paul Martin]

Most of the time, I use the Quintessential Player (www.quinnware.com). It's fast and free. Their sight also provides a great free converter with lots of downloadable codecs. It provides right-click conversion, which is real handy.

[Janak Parekh]

Most of the time, I use the Quintessential Player (www.quinnware.com). It's fast and free.
Yes. It's indeed pretty good, although Winamp5 finally comes really close and it has a better Media Library. On the other hand, QCD has better support for music CDs.

--janak

[Gary Sheynkman]

let me restate...you have to pay for faster burning/encoding?!?!??!

Why why why? This is just the beginning. Soon winamp will be as crippled as musicmatch is in its free version :(

I disagree. You don't pay for anything 'faster'... the free version has no burning/encoding features built in.

And most software of this kind has a free version and a non-free full featured version. How else do you expect them to make their money? It is not like this is a sourceforge project ;-).

Suhit


no...but "back in the day" it was free.... :( just kinda upsetting.


Its alot like PPC software. It started out as freeware and now every POS costs something. Im an economist at heart.

[Janak Parekh]

no...but "back in the day" it was free.... :( just kinda upsetting.
"What" was free? Winamp was a playback program back in the day. Have you actually downloaded the free version of Winamp5? It's tons more than what Winamp2 was. So you're getting more for free.

Or are you the lamenting people's right to offer a non-free version along with the free one? In that case, I think you'd have a tough time maintaining that:

Im an economist at heart.

;)

Besides, "free" is a dangerous (and relative!) term. What does it mean to be free? Winamp5 most certainly doesn't give you the source code for free. So why aren't you using all GPLed or BSD-licensed or other OSS-compliant products?

--janak

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Well, as Janek has said, while Winamp 2 was free, it was just a player. And it's still free you know, I don't think Nullsoft is forcing you to buy the pay edition of Winamp 5. Between this and no Winamp at all, I'll take the option of buying the pay edition if I want to, thank you very much.

If you want to talk about economics, then in what way does this shift the demand/supply curves for Winamp?

[Mr. MacinTiger]

At my Wintel work machine, I use iTunes for Win (since I have it at home on the Mac it is a smooth transition for me). Since I am Mac-centric it is a good fit for me!

However, I also use WiMP 9 with a sweet, sweet OS X skin that totally aquafies it. WiMP for Windows is a heck of a lot better than WiMP for Mac...don't even get me started on how THAT thing is crippled. :roll:

In the past I have also used good 'ol WinAmp and Musicmatch...both of them were pretty decent from what I can remember...

Just curious...does anyone on here used Quicktime for Windows to play music files? I would guess not since there is nothing remotely like a playlist feature on it...

[Gary Sheynkman]

Well, as Janek has said, while Winamp 2 was free, it was just a player. And it's still free you know, I don't think Nullsoft is forcing you to buy the pay edition of Winamp 5. Between this and no Winamp at all, I'll take the option of buying the pay edition if I want to, thank you very much.

If you want to talk about economics, then in what way does this shift the demand/supply curves for Winamp?


oy vey...do get me started

Since the elasticity of demand for media players is rather elastic, consumers will not be willing to pay more $$$. Thus if P increases, Qd will decrease

There is no shift in the actual curves but rather a movement along the demand curve.

http://home.comcast.net/~sheynkman/ECON.JPG

[Janak Parekh]

But it's not that simple, seeing as how the "media player" is still free.

--janak

[Gary Sheynkman]

we are talking about the paid player only. a demand curve for a free player is a vertical line


so it does not apply in our case

[Jason Dunn]

This conversation just got way to intellectual for my tastes... 8O

[Ed Hansberry]

This conversation just got way to intellectual for my tastes... 8OHa! let me drag it back down.

I've stuckswith WMP9. Flawless operation among 3 PCs, includinG the MCE and 4 pocket PCs. I know there are more feature rich apps out there, but putting those on all of my PCs and then worrying about their compatiblty with PPCs... nah.

Plus, The WMA fromat works great for me, even at lowest quality bitrates.

[James Fee]

Ha! let me drag it back down.
WMP??? Must resisted urge to http://members.cox.net/jamesf1/emots/barf.gif.

;)

[Gary Sheynkman]

Ha! let me drag it back down.
WMP??? Must resisted urge to http://members.cox.net/jamesf1/emots/barf.gif.

;)

lets not go THAT far. WMP is ok when you have tiny PC speakers to listen out of :wink:

[Ed Hansberry]

Oh here we go... the purists that have hearing sooooo good that I am not allowed to enjoy my audio unless the technical specs meet your standards. :roll:

[Jason Dunn]

lets not go THAT far. WMP is ok when you have tiny PC speakers to listen out of :wink:

You're suggesting that the audio decoding quality of WMP is inferior to other media players? That's a bold assertion - please tell me more about this bub. :twisted:

[Jason Dunn]

WMP??? Must resisted urge to http://members.cox.net/jamesf1/emots/barf.gif.;)

Works for me, and I have 11,000 or so songs, and WMP pulls them across a LAN connection. It's a wee bit slow loading the library with 11,000 songs, but other than that it works amazingly well.

What do you use?

[Janak Parekh]

I've stuckswith WMP9. Flawless operation among 3 PCs, includinG the MCE
... and the MCE is a good motivation as to why to "stick" with WMP9. The integration in the tuner applet seems pretty slick, although I don't have the setup at home myself.

--janak

[Wiggin]

I've tried all of the options listed so far on this thread (plus many many other wanna bees that continue to show up on ZDNet... is there anyone else out there that used to be a zd junkie looking for the next killer MP3 app on the ZDNet download pages??? :crazyeyes: ... good thing I finally kicked that habit!). After all is said and done, I find myself using two apps...

1) iTunes serves as my "play" jukebox app... for some strange reason, I like the UI, and due to my use of an iPod as my mobile music device, it forces me to make sure that any changes to my digital music collection are correctly reflected in my iTunes library.

2) MusicMatch 8.2 serves as my music ripper, and my music library manager (tag editor, file name manager, file remover from the HD, etc.). iTunes is lacking in the tag mgmt area IMO, and physically deleting music files is a silly process with iTunes.

I know, no need to say it, my behavior is a tad schizo :silly:

I still have WM9 as a fall back, but my entire collection is made up of MP3 or M4P files, so the WMA factor doesn't affect my choice.

So, I have no option on iTunes given my choice of a mobile music platform (and I hate to admit it... I like the app... must be something in the soup??), and MM is a terrific ripper/tag manager. :way to go:

[Gary Sheynkman]

lets not go THAT far. WMP is ok when you have tiny PC speakers to listen out of :wink:

You're suggesting that the audio decoding quality of WMP is inferior to other media players? That's a bold assertion - please tell me more about this bub. :twisted:

Ok...if thats the way it is....

WMA has the most poorly integrated equalizer in the history of music players. You have to LOOK for it! Thus you dont have the convinience to get the full experience. Plus the presents are terrible. Winamp=good iTunes=good WMP=I have to do manual for every song!

There :wink:

Since my PC DOES have terrible speakers though, I tend to care less (although use winamp). When I use my headphones though (the big ones) I turn into a crazy audiophile..lol... I get it from my dad. In our place in Kiev there is a speaker just about everywhere in the house.

[Janak Parekh]

WMA has the most poorly integrated equalizer in the history of music players. You have to LOOK for it!
That doesn't back up your statement. You're saying that WMP's user interface could be better, but aren't making any statement about audio decoding quality.

--janak

[Janak Parekh]

2) MusicMatch 8.2 serves as my music ripper, and my music library manager (tag editor, file name manager, file remover from the HD, etc.). iTunes is lacking in the tag mgmt area IMO, and physically deleting music files is a silly process with iTunes.
Hmm. Out of curiosity, what does MusicMatch offer tag-editingwise that iTunes doesn't? And how is deleting files from iTunes so difficult? :|

(and I hate to admit it... I like the app... must be something in the soup??)
Why do you hate to admit it? I think the iTunes interface is very well done, and I'm glad to use it as my main jukebox.

--janak

[James Fee]

Oh here we go... the purists that have hearing sooooo good that I am not allowed to enjoy my audio unless the technical specs meet your standards. :roll:
Now, now... Lets not jump to conclusions. I hate the program, not the format.

[James Fee]

What do you use?
I can't stand the interface of WMP. I use iTunes currently (mainly because I have an iPod, but I'd probably use it anyway). I was using MusicMatch before, but its interface is just about as weird as WMP. The navigation of the library in iTunes allows for me a much easier experience than the "flatter" library of WMP. Personal preference I guess, but doesn't change my opinon about the player. :puppydogeyes:

[Gary Sheynkman]

WMA has the most poorly integrated equalizer in the history of music players. You have to LOOK for it!
That doesn't back up your statement. You're saying that WMP's user interface could be better, but aren't making any statement about audio decoding quality.

--janak
In my original statement I did NOT say that the WMP cant decode well....I just said that the quality coming out of it wont be best...because you have a hard time tweaking it to your liking. I guess I word things in an odd way...sorry :wink:

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Foobar (http://www.foobar2000.org/) anyone?

[sojourner753]

I've been using iTunes mostly because the ipod was my first and current digital music player.
I just recently moved my mp3 library to a network and may start playing music on my pocket pc as well.

Does ony one else have a similar set up?