Software - Music Player [Archive] - The Art of Sound Forum

aBe

03-07-2010, 09:05

The other day I decided to put my trusted iBook G4 to a permanent 'sleep' mode due to its health condition and got meself a cheapo Win Laptop as a replacement instead. On the Mac, as far as audio player is concerned it has always been iTunes all the way. But when it comes to Windoze, I'm lost in options.

Tried the Winamp, VLC, WM Player and finally settled on Foobar 2000. I think it sounds a tad better than iTunes on Mac. Been using it for quite some time, until....

I stumbled upon Apollo 37zz

It's a no frills player. No skin, no album artwork support. FLAC, ALAC etc is enabled via plugins. I reckon this is the better music player of the lot.

Free download from here..

http://apollo.capacala.com/

aBe

04-07-2010, 06:02

In my exuberance I've made such a hasty conclusion..

I'm foreseeing that there'll be plethora of neat software to be discovered and evaluated in time to come. Speaking of which, I've unearthed a few more niceties from the net.

My Top of The Pops at this mo <sound wise according to my pair of woolly ears> :

1) Lilith Player (All format, but in Japanese)
2) Ultra Player (MP3 only :( )
3) JetAudio (All format)
4) Apollo 37zz (All format)
5) Foobar 2000 (All format)

Themis

04-07-2010, 07:26

It seems that Apollo has ceased development since 2006.

Vincent Kars

04-07-2010, 09:27

I don’t like minimalist media players.
Having a feature rich interface is half of the fun for me.
That's why I use J River MC15
However, if you want a minimalist one, here is one without any interface at all: http://andy-audioplayer.blogspot.com/

ZebuTheOxen

04-07-2010, 10:13

Try Foobar2000 - http://www.foobar2000.org/
with
ASIO4ALL - http://www.asio4all.com/

Depending on your soundcard software, the sound may still be influenced by preamp / EQ effects but will otherwise output a bit perfect audio stream.

aBe

04-07-2010, 15:56

Yeah..I'm already running the players with Asio, everything else being turned Off to be on the pure side.

GUI-less player? Wow, that's too hardcore for me to handle.
JetAudio is not that bad actually, it's a nice player with quite an elaborate interface.

Right now I'm still searching for FLAC plugins/support for Ultra Player, to no avail. Please do let me know if anyone had stumbled upon one.

http://www.ultraplayer.com/download/download.asp

technobear

04-07-2010, 21:45

xbmc is quite a polished player.

I found foobar required far too steep a learning curve in order to get it looking good and doing anything useful.

I found winamp to be only marginally better.

Media Monkey has a reasonable interface straight off but some of the interface is a bit obscure - particularly the handling of media players is a bit arcane but works fine once you figure it out.

I currently use EAC to rip CDs to WAV. Then I use Media Monkey to convert to FLAC and do the tagging (automatically from folder and file names) and add the album art.

I use a Transporter to play FLAC through the hifi.

In the future, I anticipate that DACs with asynchronous USB will overtake the Transporter and Caiman combination. I will then most likely choose xbmc as the player of choice.

Batty

05-07-2010, 23:43

+1 for media monkey, Liked it so much I bought the gold version.

aBe

06-07-2010, 06:21

I am not that too particular with interfaces or those extra bling features.
And don't really mind using a crappy looking software, with buttons that look as though they're designed by kids from kindies.

So long as it sounds great. It's fine then.
Sound quality is still my utmost consideration..

aBe

21-08-2010, 09:22

Got nothing to do, I decided to spent some time getting acquainted with those GUI-less or 'Memory Players'. Thanks to Vincent Kars, I guess I have finally found the light, the enlightened path..

Memory Players are obviously in their own league. Good FWIW, the Lilith Player trails in the sound department.

I could live without artworks, playlist etc for the sake of better music.
You guys might want to give them a try too - and be another convert just like yours truly.

1) StealthAudio Player with WASAPI
2) cPlay (WAV & FLAC only)
3) Lilith Player (All format, but in Japanese)
4) Ultra Player (MP3 only )
5) JetAudio (All format)

Welder

21-08-2010, 10:45

If sound quality is the deciding factor then you might want to check this out
http://www.xxhighend.nl/

The guy who develops it has some interesting ideas.
Memory players are also an interesting concept but loading files into RAM prior to playing does have its drawbacks; difficult to manage long tracks requiring more than available RAM for example.
I still haven’t found anything better than foobar with AISO4all or kernel streaming for sound quality and functionality. Granted it isn’t the easiest player to get looking good if that’s an issue for you and despite much research there are still one or two minor irritations I cant seem to solve with regard to file organization.

You might also like Reclock.
http://reclock.free.fr/

StanleyB

21-08-2010, 11:19

In the future, I anticipate that DACs with asynchronous USB will overtake the Transporter and Caiman combination. I will then most likely choose xbmc as the player of choice.
I wouldn't bet on that. Once the fad of async USB has turned from marketing push into actual listening tests, its days will be numbered :).

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 12:03

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 12:16

I disagree. Async USB is still affected by PC interference. Even Gordon Rankin himself admitted that.

Leave music playback to the streamer, and processing to the PC. Your audio system is much happier that way.

In the future, I anticipate that DACs with asynchronous USB will overtake the Transporter and Caiman combination. I will then most likely choose xbmc as the player of choice.

Welder

21-08-2010, 12:22

Sqeezethatbuffalo.

I’ve just downloaded it ;)
It’s one of the few I haven’t tried out.
I’ve never been totally convinced that I could hear the difference between one player and another.
It was only after learning a bit about how different players retrieve data that I acknowledged there were at least rational explanations as to why one player might sound different to another.
As to whether one thing is better or worse than another; frankly I think such comparisons are a bit pointless, “better” and “worse” mean different things to different people.
I’ve never been a great fan of the dogma and ignorance that tends to underpin the, this is better than that, debates.

Edit.
But, but, isnt a streamer just another computer ;)

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 12:26

But it IS the best. In the Flat Earth subjectivist sense ;)

Whether it works for others, well, that's what they need to find out!

Edit: Yes, but a computer that's (arguably) designed for audio playback. The power consumption, noise, and overhead are (supposedly) much less compared to an all purpose PC. I went a long way trying to "optimize" an x86 to play music. Let's just say it didn't work out as I have hoped. Oh, and during that bumpy ride, I discovered that the less the system load/processing power being used, the better the sound. So in principle, I think it's a good idea to let one "computer" do the processing and the other to handle the playback anyway.

Then again, that's just IMO, feel free to compare different solutions and see which you like best.

Welder

21-08-2010, 12:51

So far I’ve only found one player that I didn’t like purely on sonic performance and that was Winamp.
Not quite sure why that should be. I have read that some players use a small offset when retrieving data and Winamp is in this group.
Frankly, I would be very surprised if I could actually tell the difference in a controlled test between any of them. However, setting up cPlay on the laptop as I type.

EDIT.
Oh, btw, had a fiddle with my daughters Sonos and while it is a very neat gadget I didn’t think the sound quality matched my current setup.

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 13:02

IME, cPlay truly shines when used with cMP (in terms of sound quality and ease of use). Navigating through the library is PAINFUL without cMP.

No experience with the Sonos, but thanks for sharing. Borrow a Touch if you can, I think it won't disappoint (as a transport)!

Welder

21-08-2010, 13:14

Hmm, don’t think this is going to work.
I only have 512MB of RAM and cPlay seems to want more.
I’ve gone the low power route with my Vaio, stripped everything out that isn’t needed to keep the thing ticking over.
With foobar+ASIO4all the RAM usage is hardly measurable and CPU runs below 5%.

Edit, may try putting the RAM modules i stripped out back in.

Vincent Kars

21-08-2010, 13:43

I have read that some players use a small offset when retrieving data and Winamp is in this group.

Almost all do and I think they should.
We talk about multitasking OS so a buffer is almost mandatory.
Likewise you probably won’t find a soundcard without a buffer.
Some suggest that buffer management has a strong impact on sound quality.
But it is highly unclear to me why this should be the case (except the obvious, buffer over/under run)
Much of the difference between players can probably explained by the driver used.
You might try one e.g. Foobar and try drivers like DS, WASAPI and Kernel Streaming.

In general a minimalist configuration is recommended.
Streamers are minimalist by design, no HD, no fan, small CPU.
The paradox is that de Squeeze Touch is often reported to sound better than the Duet or the Classic. However it uses quit powerful hard ware (500 Mhz ARM) compared with the other 2.

Stratmangler

21-08-2010, 14:20

Oh, btw, had a fiddle with my daughters Sonos and while it is a very neat gadget I didn’t think the sound quality matched my current setup.

And did you hook it up to your DAC ? - it has SPDIF output in both coax and optical.

I wouldn't expect the Sonos analog outputs to be the best.

I use a SB3 myself, and it's linked up to an external DAC, as I don't particularly rate the analog output from the SB3 - the external DAC sounds much better.

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 14:24

I believe Welder's current DAC only supports USB input.

And I agree with you, Squeezebox products are best used as transports.

Welder

21-08-2010, 14:25

Hello Vincent Kars.
I had a look at your site after a comment you made in another thread.
I liked your site, and the way you have approached computer audio.

I already use foobar + AISO4all. Couldn’t get KS to work with the HRT/foobar/xp combo for some reason; something to do with Realtek HD sound drivers.
Would love to strip all the Realtek drivers out and find out what can be done with the core drivers but I’m chicken ;)

Stratmangler.
No, as sqeeze mentions, my Dac is USB only. I have a V-Dac coming over later and i might try with that. Just need to make some cables up.

Stratmangler

21-08-2010, 14:29

I believe Welder's current DAC only supports USB input.

And I agree with you, Squeezebox products are best used as transports.

You are correct - my mistake.
I thought he'd also got a Monarchy DAC, but I'm probably mixing him up with someone else.

Stratmangler

21-08-2010, 14:33

Stratmangler.
No, as sqeeze mentions, my Dac is USB only. I have a V-Dac coming over later and i might try with that. Just need to make some cables up.

Gotcha;)
I thought you'd got another DAC too - my mistake.

Vincent Kars

21-08-2010, 14:35

Hello Vincent Kars.
I already use foobar + AISO4all. Couldn’t get KS to work with the HRT/foobar/xp combo for some reason; something to do with Realtek HD sound drivers.
Would love to strip all the Realtek drivers out and find out what can be done with the core drivers but I’m chicken ;)

KS won't work with devices having WaveRT drivers such as High Definition Audio Devices integrated with newer motherboards.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=78885

A simple way to try MS HDaudio.sys:

•System: Make a restore point so you can rollback
•Device manager: deinstall the driver (write down type, etc just in case you need to download them from the manufacturers website)
•Programs - remove the driver otherwise it will be installed again at the next step
•Reboot and Win installs the MS High Def Audio Device.

In the past I removed all Realtek and used MS High Dev only.
Today in Win7 my speakers don't work but the SPDIF and USB does.
Something has changed in the MS audio driverrs

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/SW/VistaTweak.htm

Thanks for the kind words about my website

Welder

21-08-2010, 14:43

I’m quite fortunate in have 3 friends from my engineering days who are also a bit deranged when it comes to audio living close by.
Two are very much state of the art, spent thousands on audio and are very knowledgably, friendly, realistic, if a bit barking.
One is a vinyl junkie (we don’t talk to him much ;))

Welder

21-08-2010, 14:47

Vincent Kars.
K, thx, just need a few valium and I may give it a try.
Thanks for links.
Will this work with 32bit XP?

Vincent Kars

21-08-2010, 15:13

I never tried it in XP.
The XP audio is completely different from Vista and higher so probably not.

Welder

21-08-2010, 16:16

“The XP audio is completely different from Vista and higher so probably not.”
Ah, this is what I’ve been led to believe.

I had a choice when setting up the laptop, use XP 32 which is apparently less system intensive than either Vista or Win7 and will run quite happily with 512 RAM and 1.5Gig processor, or have the maximum amount of RAM I can squeeze into the laptop (1 Gig) and use Win7 which is also more CPU intensive than XP and try to minimize that.

I have read that Win7 audio architecture is natively better for audio, but the majority of the benefits of Win7 over XP concerning audio didn’t seem enough to warrant getting to grips with a new OS and then stripping all but the necessities out.
Any thoughts on this or is audio nervosa creeping in?

What I have atm, powered, but galavanically (based around an ADuM 4160 chip) isolated Hitachi hard drives, feeding the stripped out Viao, via usb > mono powerd USB hub > HRT Dac > system would seem to be very close to a purpose built music server so I’m not sure one option still to explore (Music sever) would offer any great benefits.

The thing is I am actually quite happy with the sound I get with my current setup. I am thinking about upgrading the Dac but the more Dacs I hear the less convinced I am that I’m going to actually notice (without sitting down and constantly comparing A against B, which isn’t really what enjoyable music listening is all about for me) any sonic benefits.
The transition from CD to file > Dac > current system, was such an obvious improvement with my system that it was a no brainer. The benefits of changing OS and music players etc isn’t quite that clear cut.

Maybe I should just stop tinkering and buy lots more music :scratch:

squeezethatbuffalo

21-08-2010, 16:35

Good idea. If you're satisfied with the sound, spend more time listening to it!

aBe

22-08-2010, 04:42

Alex_UK

22-08-2010, 09:11

I can't help but noticing a slight irony in than many people move to file based audio because turntables are too much "hassle"... ;) I guess though, once an audiophile always an audiophile, and wringing the last nth out of any format is all part of the fun!

I am curious to explore this further (i.e. more than just letting itunes do it's worst... :o) but not sure I can face the faffing around.

squeezethatbuffalo

22-08-2010, 13:37

I'm going to put all these soul-searching to rest for a while.
For now I'll just stick to Andy's Stealthaudio Player and Lilith.

Did I mention that I also prefer WASAPI to be used with the Players on Win 7?
Just discovered that WASAPI driver is actually native to Win 7. That might explain why it sounds a wee bit more 'right' compared to ASIO4All.

Haha. I already spent most of my time vegetating in the hifi room listening to music (and being on the net at the same time). Now with my newfound enlightenment, my wife must have been thinking that I'm slowly turning into a hifi hermit :)

I agree. I'd avoid using ASIO4ALL if other "native drivers" are available.

You sound just like me! I don't even have a desktop system because of this. I use a big flatscreen as my monitor, and sit in front of my hifi while surfing. Or is it better to say that I'm sitting at my computer while listening to music?

It's a good thing that my girlfriend lives in a different place. :lol:

Welder

22-08-2010, 16:14

Alex UK.

I was also under the slightly deluded notion that file audio was going to be relatively simple compared to say keeping a suspended sub chassis record deck.
The problem is of course the computer. All the theory concerning the benefits of no mechanical link in data transfer that have dogged even the best CDP is fine, no doubt about that.

Until recently, generally speaking, audiophiles were not noted for their familiarity with computers; mention computer and audio in the same breath in most audiophile circles and you would be discretely hustled out of the company as if you had arrived at a gentleman’s club wearing trainers.

The simple fact is, you won’t know if file based audio is suitable for you until you give it a try.
I was extremely skeptical about computer based audio, mainly because I’ve always been convinced that any computer I’ve owned sole purpose was to over complicate my life and make me feel stupid.
My opinion about computers hasn’t changed, but my opinion about file based audio has.

I’ve got a fairly tame laptop now, doing what it’s told. I’ve stopped verbally abusing it and threatening to hoist it out of the nearest window and in return it produces extremely satisfactory audio.

The most surprising fact is that I listen to a lot more of my music collection using file based audio than I did with either vinyl or CD. How many times have you wanted to hear a particular track but not bothered because getting the record out of the sleeve, placing it on the turntable mat, cleaning it with the anti static brush and then trying to delicately drop the needle in the appropriate groove was just to much of a ritual knowing for the next track you want to listen to you’ll have to repeat the whole process.
It takes me a few seconds to organize a playlist now and when I don’t want to sit down and concentrate solely on the music, no problem, I can let it play on or switch to internet radio.

I have music playing 70% of time I’m at home. I get to hear music I wouldn’t otherwise hear through internet radio and I can let my friends, relations, dogs and kids into my home without having a heart attack about sticky little outstretched fingers; best of all, no bloody TV!

dave2010

23-08-2010, 10:32

aBe
The other day I decided to put my trusted iBook G4 to a permanent 'sleep' mode due to its health condition and got meself a cheapo Win Laptop as a replacement instead. On the Mac, as far as audio player is concerned it has always been iTunes all the way. But when it comes to Windoze, I'm lost in options.

Tried the Winamp, VLC, WM Player and finally settled on Foobar 2000. I think it sounds a tad better than iTunes on Mac. Been using it for quite some time, until....

I stumbled upon Apollo 37zz

It's a no frills player. No skin, no album artwork support. FLAC, ALAC etc is enabled via plugins. I reckon this is the better music player of the lot.

Free download from here..

http://apollo.capacala.com/I'm going the other way - from Windows to Mac. Seems easier - not completely trouble free - but hey - around 95% of the rubbish management you have to do just to keep the computers going seems to have disappeared. Trouble is now I have to really think what I'm going to do each day, rather than responding to YAWP (Yet Another Windows Problem) - which usually takes hours.

If you do stick with Windows, I used most of the players, foobar, winamp, VLC etc. You've probably figured out which is best for you by now if the OS hasn't driven you insane.

BWS

aBe

24-08-2010, 08:43

Dave,

I couldn't agree more with you.
With the Mac, I spent more time listening to my favourite songs (and surfing the net) without so much worries about tweaks, tricks etc just to get better music as I don't feel I am missing much on that.

Will definitely consider to grab myself a Macbook again soon...

dave2010

24-08-2010, 10:23

aBe
Dave,

I couldn't agree more with you.
With the Mac, I spent more time listening to my favourite songs (and surfing the net) without so much worries about tweaks, tricks etc just to get better music as I don't feel I am missing much on that.

Will definitely consider to grab myself a Macbook again soon...I've not had a Mac laptop for quite a few years - though I still have an old Powerbook one. One early wireless Mac laptop died rather young.

If space/cost is no object and portability isn't an issue then go for an iMac. Even the low end ones beat the heck out of most PCs, and the screens are great. I just couldn't believe that mine figured out the NAS and the networked printers with hardly any fuss at all. The speakers are adequate for listening while working, though of course not really high quality. Despite that the overall effect for background listening is rather pleasant.

ZebuTheOxen

24-08-2010, 11:23

Even the low end ones beat the heck out of most PCs, and the screens are great.
This is not true.
You pay a lot for what you get with a Mac. It does look nice but it's nothing special under the hood.
Their screens are extremely pretty I agree, but again, you're paying £300+ over Dell's offerings for a snazzier case.

If you're happy with that, then go for it :)

Welder

24-08-2010, 11:29

cPlay

I gave it a try on my PC which has 4 gigs of RAM.
I found it to be the most user unfriendly music player I’ve come across so far.
If you’re not familiar with cue sheets and/or play list editors then I think most people new to computer audio would find this player extremely frustrating.
Once I had finally got it working, I couldn’t hear any difference between the sound quality of cPlay and foobar2000, both using ASIO4all.

Dave2010
Hmm, I would love to hear your justification for this
“Even the low end ones beat the heck out of most PCs”
regarding Mac v PC.

Both are equally capable of producing bit perfect audio.

dave2010

24-08-2010, 11:55

John

Dave2010
Hmm, I would love to hear your justification for this
“Even the low end ones beat the heck out of most PCs”
regarding Mac v PC.

Both are equally capable of producing bit perfect audio.I have experience of Macs, PCs and other workstations (Sun etc.), and Unix and Linux machines . During the last 12 years I have largely used PCs and found them to be so full of problems that I have several times thought of jumping off a cliff, or otherwise going to remonstrate with the perpetrators of the dreadful software which runs them/on them.

Until very recently I was also wary of Macs - and I have been using iMacs since the first "lampshade" iMac came out. Last year I bought a new iMac which I have only recently got working. It's a real treat compared with the PCs. Arguably new PCs should do as well, but at work we have both. The PCs I've used don't compare. On a network iMacs do not do as well as the one I have at home. My experience with PCs is generally pretty negative, though there is more software, and some of it is good. I should also mention that at work there is support for PCs, but Mac users are often left to fend for themselves. Despite the lack of support most of us still find fewer problems.

Re music on the iMac, actually there may be some problems due to buffering as I discovered when running from my network drive, and indeed from files stored on the machine itself using iTunes. Even my Asus eee (PC/Windows) running Squeezebox server generally manages to avoid problems with the transport stream. However I didn't get the iMac primarily to do music, and I think I can fix the issues anyway. My current fix for the iMac is to use VLC rather than iTunes and set the buffer latency to high, though I'd be glad to know of other methods.

Some guys at work also benchmarked iMacs a few years ago versus PCs, and the opinion was that they were significantly faster - though benchmarking obviously can be biased by the program mix.

I'm not saying that Macs are perfect, but that they generate significantly fewer problems for most people than PCs running Windows. For me, as I said previously, I now have to think more about what to do than how the heck to solve the next, and the next, and the next ... software problem. This of course presents a problem - which I call the blank sheet of paper syndrome, but in some ways I feel that I've got my life back.

To get a PC with similar performance, style and display etc. to my iMac would probably cost about as much - though I did manage a discount.