Winamp VS MediaMonkey - Sound Quality?

A few days ago i installed Media Monkey to try it out
While I like it because of its set of features and its ease of use it hasn't been able to steer me away from Winamp.

The problem is that the same Mp3(or whatever) file played through MM doesn't sound as full and rich as through Winamp.

Both players are set to 80% output volume and both players have no active EQ.

Does anyone know why the difference in sound might be there?

Well I was in the same situation as you. Before Err0r's competition of gold-version upgrade of MM, I used winamp and loved it.
I'm not all that fussy about sound quality, since speakers aren't that great anways. I can also adjust the equalizer to achieve the best sound.
One advantage with MM is the display of chinese ID3 tags, which winamp can't.
Since I am chinese, most of my songs are chinese, so I am using MM for now till forever - or until winamp allows chinese ID3 tags :P

Mediamonkey has a much better music library, but it's using an midified version of winamp as music player. The library part is better, but the player...

i agree with pascallo. the library part of MM is very good and theres alot of features, but winamp is way better at actually playing the music.

Im using both right now.

None - Foobar has better sound than both of them.

Though I must admit that my favourite player is Amarok - But that's reserved for Linux for now, for Windows support we have to wait for kde4.

Originally Posted by iversonjack

One advantage with MM is the display of chinese ID3 tags, which winamp can't.
Since I am chinese, most of my songs are chinese, so I am using MM for now till forever - or until winamp allows chinese ID3 tags :P

Latest version of winamp supports Unicode ID3 tags. (Asian & European characters).

I also tried Foobar but i didnt liek it for some reason...
Its been a while since i tried it though
maybe ill give it another shot

can anyone explain why diffrent software sounds difffrent playing the same file on the same hardware?

different reasons:
- some of them use their own codecs
- while some good players search for installed codecs on your computer before reproducing to ensure a suitable codec (and even they come packaged with those, who are installed all together with player) some others dont and just use the first available codec.
- some players are coded with very basic algorithms with poor options instead of looking for a high end API to work with.
- high end codecs could be difficult to use and configure (Not sure about it, I've never coded something related to audio or sound)

Originally Posted by FirePower

Latest version of winamp supports Unicode ID3 tags. (Asian & European characters).

No, it still doesn't. When I mean "support ID3 tags", i mean it as in, the player itself does not display chinese characters. I know the playlist does, but the player itself doesn't. I personally like to use winamp like the taskbar of windows, except it is kept and hidden at the top of the screen. That bar does not display chinese characters. I also know that the icon in the windows taskbar does display, but I would rather have the other player display it, if you know what I mean.

I already have the latest version v5.32, and it does not display.

MediaMonkey is actually pretty good

By the way, with MediaMonkey and the Gold Upgrade, can we use the same registration number and registered name to install on different computers?

heheh i dont think the ppl at Mediamonkey would be very happy with that


however, if possible, count me in

Originally Posted by iversonjack

By the way, with MediaMonkey and the Gold Upgrade, can we use the same registration number and registered name to install on different computers?

mmm let's see. If you buy a Windows Vista license and you go to a friend's house and you install it in his PC... what is that?
Basically you're giving to your friend an ilegal copy of software, doesnt matter if you bought a license before, that license its only for one person/one pc porpouses, unless you bought a small bussines license.

Im not saying you cant do it but, at least look around for other free/open source tool if you wanna install in several computers.

I fully understand...
But who doesn't buy and share? Or upload/download/share?
I shall think twice...

ok i just tried foobar again
The sound is very clear, a bit less full than winamp in the bass department but clearer in the middle and high tones...

While i must say the sound is good i wonder whats up with the interface?
The Romans has fancier computer GUI's!

its well.. white... with letters...and no options at all..

How do I skin it?

on the other hand... it just takes 7mb mem compared to 44 for Winamp!

does anyone know how to install a skin on foobar?
Foodbar(thats a freudian typo... i am hungry ) looks terrible and i found a cool skin id like to use but it doesnt come with instruction and i have no idea what to do

Foobar does indeed sound better compared to windows media player, it has to do with bypassing certain processing elements of your operating system, read about it somewhere. AmaroK and XMMS for linux sound clearer than their windows counterparts, for this very reason.

Of course, if you get a better sound card..... =D