3 ms·
Foobar didn't really scratch the same itch for me as Winamp. Foobar felt more like it wanted to ingest/organize my entire library, which never appealed to me be
by AdmiralAsshat 4y ago
Foobar didn't really scratch the same itch for me as Winamp. Foobar felt more like it wanted to ingest/organize my entire library, which never appealed to me because my library was 1TB+ and it would take a lifetime to fix every album with some bad tags.
Winamp much better fit my workflow, which is: I wanna right-click a folder on my desktop that houses the specific album I want to play, click "Play in Winamp", and have the music player launch quietly in the system tray and throw up the occasional notification when the track changes.
- myfonj 4y agoAnd have you tried right-clicking _whole_ "1TB+" music folder and load it into Winamp at once? I remember there were even faster ways to "playlistify" directory structure (as I wrote around here [1]). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32778932#32780387 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32778932#32780387
- benjaminpv 4y agoNo disrespect but your experience with foobar seems like the inverse of how it works? It definitely has a Library function, but my workflow for using foobar for years now is: - Install - Turn off visualization - Drag and drop folder full of audio on the main window That's one of the things I like about it the most: I do a ton of reorganization of my audio, so the fact that foobar can run in 'dumb' mode is a godsend.