which one is the best?

[rendongx]

which one is the best?
windows media player 9
real play
Quintessential Player
foobar 2000

[fatal error]

gotta love how winamp wasnt even listed.....lol

qcd is best in my opinion

[rendongx]

what advantage does qcd have?
does it cost less memory,compared with wmp9 or realplay?

[fatal error]

what advantage does qcd have?
does it cost less memory,compared with wmp9 or realplay?
it certainly has a smaller footprint than wmp9 and realplay I havent used in years so....I dunno about that.

if you're like me, you've tried every media player under the sun and found things you like and don't like about each one. qcd has performed the best for me in all I've tried to do with it, and barely scratch the surface of its capabilities.
with the proper plugins installed you play just about any file type out. if it doesnt, there is a PDK for the ambitious minded to develop a plugin that WILL.
If you have problems with qcd, a post in the forum will most likely result in a resolution.

but in the end, it comes down to what you want out your choice in player.

[Tokelil]

Well since you are in a QCD forum probably all will say QCD is the best. I wouldn't use QCD if didn't think it was the best.
So what make it the best in my oppinion:
- Stable
- Great look through a good skinning engine
- Little CPU and memory use
- Many features
- Paul

What makes QCD so good is the mix of things. All players can play my music so you have to look at what they offer besides that.

(And btw. Winamp5 is better than the players you listed, maybe except Foobar2000)

[Heigar]

Well since you are in a QCD forum probably all will say QCD is the best. I wouldn't use QCD if didn't think it was the best.
So what make it the best in my oppinion:
- Stable
- Great look through a good skinning engine
- Little CPU and memory use
- Many features
- Paul

What makes QCD so good is the mix of things. All players can play my music so you have to look at what they offer besides that.

(And btw. Winamp5 is better than the players you listed, maybe except Foobar2000)
I have to agree with Fatal and tokelil 100%,I've tried them all and QCD has always been the one that hasn't been uninstalled.
One feature you guy's forgot - is all the friendly and helpful people in the forum when you need alittle help or what not!:D

[Young Twig]

I've never used Foobar, but I've used Winamp, Sonique, WMP... I just prefer QCD. That's why I'm on these forums. (I agree with Tokelil... everyone here will say QCD.)

[Hanzo]

I've never used Foobar, but I've used Winamp, Sonique, WMP... I just prefer QCD. That's why I'm on these forums. (I agree with Tokelil... everyone here will say QCD.)

I've used Winamp... crashed a lot. I've used Sonique... too slow (but awesome looks). WMP... I use it only for DVD playback. I would never use a program called "foobar" here in Panama, that's not a nice name for a program.

QCD is the best... all it does, does flawlessly, small, fast, sexy looks (still lacks visuals IMHO, but the Sonique plugin quite solves it)

And there comes the forum... is there anything better than this forum? :)

[bonzo]

I think Im the only person in this forum in the iTunes camp. Its a complete beast when it comes to resources but the playlist is matched by no other program that Ive used. What it comes down to is I use Itunes when I want to listen to a certain genre in which itunes sorts it all out for me. Or if I dont give a damn, Ill put qcd on shuffle and set it using timer to turn of and on as an alarm clock. Definately better on the ol RAM.

[Roj]

which one is the best?
windows media player 9
real play
Quintessential Player
foobar 2000QCD for sound quality and code quality.

Real is a vile virus that infects your machine and indisiously insinuates itself into every facet of its being. WMP - bloat. What more is there to say. FUBAR? Learn the meaning of the acronym and there you have it. :)

[deeswift]

A combo of 1by1 Player (uses 1 mb resources only) and QCD v1.27 for CD playback does the job for me. Until ANY player can compete with 1by1 (software genius) for lack of CPU used I won't bother using it. If QCD was able to have such a low CPU usage I'd go back to using it again.

Winamp 5 is BLOATED beyond belief. Foobar2000 is a tech fest.

I don't want my audio player to encode files (I use MusePack / MPC Batch Encoder) or burn CD's (I use Nero 6.3)

Audio players are trying to do too much, in my opinion, they're getting fatter and fatter all the time when I think they should be getting smaller and faster.

WMP -- forget it, it's hideous.

RealPlayer -- Only a fool uses it.

[Spidercrab]

I think Im the only person in this forum in the iTunes camp. Its a complete beast when it comes to resources but the playlist is matched by no other program that Ive used.
Agree with you all the way.

[Roj]

A combo of 1by1 Player (uses 1 mb resources only) and QCD v1.27 for CD playback does the job for me. Until ANY player can compete with 1by1 (software genius) for lack of CPU used I won't bother using it. If QCD was able to have such a low CPU usage I'd go back to using it again.

Winamp 5 is BLOATED beyond belief. Foobar2000 is a tech fest.

I don't want my audio player to encode files (I use MusePack / MPC Batch Encoder) or burn CD's (I use Nero 6.3)

Audio players are trying to do too much, in my opinion, they're getting fatter and fatter all the time when I think they should be getting smaller and faster.

WMP -- forget it, it's hideous.

RealPlayer -- Only a fool uses it.I agree on most counts except I don't particularly give a damn about CPU utilization or RAM use within reason. The smallest active machine in my house (there are six machines here) has a PIII 650 and 512Mb PC100; I have a 2600+ Barton and 512Mb PC2700. Sound quality for me counts above all - if it takes an additional 1% CPU, who cares... (vanilla mpglib doesn't cut it for me).

[buvypapy]

which one is the best?
windows media player 9
real play
Quintessential Player
foobar 2000

WMP: I prefer to call it the "Windows ResourceWaster" since version 7. I'm stuck to ver 6.4 yet (only for AVI's and other propietary formats).
RealPlayer: I tried both the old player and the One. The One is also a resourcewaster like WMP, and now I haven't the player installed. On earlier re-installs of Windows I only installed it just if it's needed (no tray icon), the same reason for why I install QuickTime.
QCD: This is the one I use now for CD's (only when CDDB-recognisable / what happens when you place a CD that doesn't exists on CDDB?) and MP3's. Skinning easiness, low resouce compsumtion, good sound... since I got a 3.x version on a cover CD i haven't stopped usnig it :cool:

[KR_Dragon]

Ultimately, only sonique and QCD has what I want in an audio player. They both have their pluses and minuses.

[JEdwardP]

I don't want my audio player to encode files...Audio players are trying to do too much, in my opinion, they're getting fatter and fatter all the time when I think they should be getting smaller and faster.

I don't think audio players should try to be encoders/burners/rippers either. But since QCD's encoding functions are via plug-ins, I simply never install them. (I never load the visualizations, either). Therefore my only complaint about QCD trying to be an encoder is to wish the encoder button could somehow be made to automatically not appear in the default skin if no encoder plug-ins are installed.

[deeswift]

I agree. Why the hell would we wanna use QCD for ripping / encoding when we have EAC & LAME? Why not just build toaster and a microwave features in too?

Back to the original point: WMP and RealPlayer shouldn't even be in the list! Anyone who uses RealPlayer is a fool.

[Jencatd]

which one is the best?
windows media player 9
real play
Quintessential Player
foobar 2000

QCD is the best when the CDDB works. The CDDB controller won't load at the moment, therefore QCD won't load. I'm using Winamp 5 until I get QCD up and running again (Winamp 5 is so bloated compared to Winamp 2).

I only use WMP7 and Real Player when I absolutely have to. WMP7 takes ages to load, and has "features" I'll never need or use (like the Media Library, Media Centre, and CD Ripping). What I don't like about Real Player is the unnecessary "sister" programs Real adds to it, like RealJukebox and RealDownload.

[sld]

Winamp 5 is so bloated compared to Winamp 2

It isn't. Winamp 5 is as light as Winamp 2, though I know for some people, Winamp 2 is never light enough :D
Trust me.

[Roj]

It isn't. Winamp 5 is as light as Winamp 2, though I know for some people, Winamp 2 is never light enough :D
Trust me.My God, the prodigal has returned after dissing QCD mightily elsewhere - not to mention spreading the "gospel" of so-called "objectivity" (snicker).

Wassamatter, get bored with hyping FUBAR and Tinamp?

Here's where I duck out and let the furious hamster backpedalling begin... (GDAR)

[matty28carter]

I must admit winamp 5 is very bloated, i've been using it all day to see how it compares to QCD so far not so good

Quality with the MAD plug-in isn't as good as QCD with the MAD plug-in
Its slow (no alpha blending switched on here and my computer isn't exactly slow, but its not the fastest either 800mhz Duron)
ALSO the damn things crashed 5 times today most of the time whilst it was doing absolutly nothing!