How do you eat yours?

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

What do you use to play music on your comp/ laptop?

Winamp
24
32%
iTunes
25
33%
realplayer
1
1%
windows media player
13
17%
other (post details?)
13
17%
 
Total votes: 76

User avatar
AdamZ
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:26 pm UTC
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact:

Postby AdamZ » Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:12 pm UTC

I use rhythmbox for all my musical needs. It does pretty much everything I want except being able to transfer songs directly to my mp3 player (but it will soon), and I love the play queue. The developers are really cool and helpful too.

And why is mp3 a better format than m4a? Is it just it's ubiquity? Cause they're both patented.

User avatar
TheTankengine
Our Fora-father
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby TheTankengine » Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:23 pm UTC

AdamZ wrote:I use rhythmbox for all my musical needs. It does pretty much everything I want except being able to transfer songs directly to my mp3 player (but it will soon), and I love the play queue. The developers are really cool and helpful too.

And why is mp3 a better format than m4a? Is it just it's ubiquity? Cause they're both patented.


What mp3 player can it not transfer to? I used it with my iPod Nano for months and it worked fine. It can even interpret the "encrypted" file names that iTunes puts on the nano (not DRM'd).

And pure opinion.
be centered
be compassionate
be interesting

User avatar
programmerbrad
Posts: 77
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:21 am UTC
Contact:

Postby programmerbrad » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:03 pm UTC

So, I decided to try out audacious today. :O

I have it compiled and installed, and I must admit it's pretty nice. A bit more useable than xmms, but still not overburdened with dumb stuff. The only problem I've having so far is how to get last.fm/audioscrobbler working with it. Anybody know how?

EDIT: Nevermind, got it working! It's part of the audacious-plugins package, but apparently my libmusicbrainz and libcurl were too out of date, so I just had to

Code: Select all

emerge musicbrainz curl audacious-plugins
and now it works. :D

User avatar
william
Not a Raptor. Honest.
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Contact:

Postby william » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:49 pm UTC

TheTankengine wrote:Jesster:iTunes automatically organizing your music can be switched off in preferences. I don't have it on the computer I'm on right now, but I believe you need to unselect the option that is similar to "Keep my music organized".

And VLC will play .m4a.

Though, I don't recognize it .m4a as a legitimate music file, either. mp3 or .ogg (vorbis) are much superior in my opinion.

.m4a is AAC which is the successor to the mp3 format. Basically a twerked mp3. There are programs that run un-DRMed AAC on Linux. And iTunes' DRM is not a feature of AAC(unlike WMA) but a wrapper around the file. iTunes could have DRMed Vorbis just as easily.

User avatar
AdamZ
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 7:26 pm UTC
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact:

Postby AdamZ » Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:26 pm UTC

TheTankengine wrote:What mp3 player can it not transfer to? I used it with my iPod Nano for months and it worked fine. It can even interpret the "encrypted" file names that iTunes puts on the nano (not DRM'd).

It's a regular USB storage based player from Samsung (I don't want an iPod because they don't play vorbis files). Support for transferring files to generic players should be coming soon though, so it's not too bad, and it's not exactly difficult to transfer files now. I'd just prefer it if I could drag songs from my library to the player source instead of dragging them into the file manager.

User avatar
Ephphatha
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:03 am UTC
Location: Bathurst, NSW, Australia

Postby Ephphatha » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:09 am UTC

william wrote:
TheTankengine wrote:Jesster:iTunes automatically organizing your music can be switched off in preferences. I don't have it on the computer I'm on right now, but I believe you need to unselect the option that is similar to "Keep my music organized".

And VLC will play .m4a.

Though, I don't recognize it .m4a as a legitimate music file, either. mp3 or .ogg (vorbis) are much superior in my opinion.

.m4a is AAC which is the successor to the mp3 format. Basically a twerked mp3. There are programs that run un-DRMed AAC on Linux. And iTunes' DRM is not a feature of AAC(unlike WMA) but a wrapper around the file. iTunes could have DRMed Vorbis just as easily.
.ogg vorbis is THE successor to the mp3 format.
I'm not lazy, I'm just getting in early for Christmas is all...

User avatar
Narsil
Ask me about my junk!
Posts: 2995
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:59 pm UTC
Location: Columbus.

Postby Narsil » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:21 am UTC

What's so great about .ogg vorbis? Does it offer higher quality, greater compression, or both?

User avatar
aldimond
Otter-duck
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 am UTC
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Contact:

Postby aldimond » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:28 am UTC

Well, quality in compressed music is measured in terms of quality at a given bitrate. Vorbis has better quality than MP3 at most bitrates, according to lots of people, which means you can get the same quality at a lower bitrate if you want to. Though they say the difference between Vorbis and variable-bit rate MP3 is pretty small. I don't have any specific links, this is just what people tell me; I don't have good enough speakers for it to make a difference, but some people that do say that it does.

One problem with with MP3 and M4A is that the algorithms to generate the files (though not those to play them back) are patented, so those patents technically need to be licensed in order to create an encoder for those formats. This is not true of Vorbis, which is why Free Software geeks like me regard it as the compression format of choice.
One of these days my desk is going to collapse in the middle and all its weight will come down on my knee and tear my new fake ACL. It could be tomorrow. This is my concern.

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Postby Jesse » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:52 am UTC

WMP will play .m4a files. But it stores them in the library under 'Other Media'. This means that when I open the library to just play random songs from my playlist, any songs encoded under .m4a are left out. And it won't allow me to playlist them.

I know about the iTunes not having to organize my files, but it still freezes during the middle of every fifth/sixth song.

User avatar
TheTankengine
Our Fora-father
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby TheTankengine » Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:46 pm UTC

Jesster wrote:I know about the iTunes not having to organize my files, but it still freezes during the middle of every fifth/sixth song.


The obvious answer to your conundrum is to build a new computer. :wink:
be centered
be compassionate
be interesting

User avatar
Ephphatha
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:03 am UTC
Location: Bathurst, NSW, Australia

Postby Ephphatha » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:51 pm UTC

At the time of me writing this post, there are too many people on these fora using iTunes. Exactly 23 people too many to be exact.
I'm not lazy, I'm just getting in early for Christmas is all...

User avatar
Jesse
Vocal Terrorist
Posts: 8635
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:33 pm UTC
Location: Basingstoke, England.
Contact:

Postby Jesse » Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:08 pm UTC

Building this computer took far too much time and there is quite practically nothing wrong with it and nothing that should be causing iTunes to freeze. Thus we move from the realms of science into the realms of goblin-infestation.

I will try WinAmp.

Kalten
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:39 am UTC
Location: England

Postby Kalten » Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:02 pm UTC

What is the problem with WMP 11? Or is this a case of "Microsoft makes it, so I must hate it" syndrome?

Personally, being quite obsessed about my collection being organised, and filed properly (correctly filled in track names, certain file name structures, organised into folders by album and artist, and with genre and original release date), then the WMP library is simply fantastic. I dont have to make playlists...as with in a couple of clicks I can have all sorts of different combinations of tracks playing. It's also incredibly intuitive to me....despite what people say here. Plus it looks awesome!

The only downside I can see, is that its slightly heavier on the resources than, say, winamp...but as long as you've got a reasonably good pc, and its not vital to get every CPU cycle for whatever else you are doing, why worry about that?

I will agree that VLC player kicks ass for movies though!
--------
Kalten

"If you are in a minority of one, the truth is still the truth" Gandhi

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Postby fjafjan » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:16 pm UTC

Kalten wrote:What is the problem with WMP 11? Or is this a case of "Microsoft makes it, so I must hate it" syndrome?

Personally, being quite obsessed about my collection being organised, and filed properly (correctly filled in track names, certain file name structures, organised into folders by album and artist, and with genre and original release date), then the WMP library is simply fantastic. I dont have to make playlists...as with in a couple of clicks I can have all sorts of different combinations of tracks playing. It's also incredibly intuitive to me....despite what people say here. Plus it looks awesome!

The only downside I can see, is that its slightly heavier on the resources than, say, winamp...but as long as you've got a reasonably good pc, and its not vital to get every CPU cycle for whatever else you are doing, why worry about that?

I will agree that VLC player kicks ass for movies though!


Hey, you said what I said n alot more lines :D WMP for music, VCL for movies. Tis all you need.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
aldimond
Otter-duck
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 am UTC
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Contact:

Postby aldimond » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:41 pm UTC

Kalten wrote:What is the problem with WMP 11? Or is this a case of "Microsoft makes it, so I must hate it" syndrome?


I generally try not to get too animated about this kind of thing, but I'm very pissed off at the world today and you happened to step in my path. Sorry :evil: . I read plenty of Slashdot and hear lots of that kind of silly MS-bashing. But in this thread just about everyone that criticized WMP gave reasons. Why is there more criticism of WMP than other players? It's the one that almost everyone has tried. It's nice that WMP works well for you, and that certainly doesn't make you an "M$ $hill" or anything like that. The fact that some people prefer other players doesn't give them some kind of "syndrome".
One of these days my desk is going to collapse in the middle and all its weight will come down on my knee and tear my new fake ACL. It could be tomorrow. This is my concern.

Jack Saladin
X is kiss
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Postby Jack Saladin » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:44 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:Hey, you said what I said n alot more lines :D WMP for music, VCL for movies. Tis all you need.


Can't be bothered reading through the thread, but yeah; this is what I do. VLC is great for movies, takes most formats, easy to use subtitles etc...

Kalten
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:39 am UTC
Location: England

Postby Kalten » Thu Dec 07, 2006 11:43 pm UTC

aldimond wrote:
Kalten wrote:What is the problem with WMP 11? Or is this a case of "Microsoft makes it, so I must hate it" syndrome?


I generally try not to get too animated about this kind of thing, but I'm very pissed off at the world today and you happened to step in my path. Sorry :evil: . I read plenty of Slashdot and hear lots of that kind of silly MS-bashing. But in this thread just about everyone that criticized WMP gave reasons. Why is there more criticism of WMP than other players? It's the one that almost everyone has tried. It's nice that WMP works well for you, and that certainly doesn't make you an "M$ $hill" or anything like that. The fact that some people prefer other players doesn't give them some kind of "syndrome".


Hmm, pretty narky reaction there. I'm guessing your day was pretty awful!

The reason why I said it, wasn't for any moral high ground. In fact, quite hypocritically, most the reasons why I dislike iTunes, is because Apple makes it. I can't justify it, except through a prolonged, tedious and pointless arguement about how I don't like Apple due to their copyright stance and their attempt to live off being "cool". So, i can barely feel superior about people having the same attitude towards MS products.

Its just, well, I actually really like WMP, and after trying other media players (like winamp), to me, nothing has the same level of control, ease of organisation and ease of use for someone with a large music collection, all rolled into one. So, to see so many people dismiss it, and dislike it, it makes me wonder if people are just predisposed to see the bad in it, like I am with iTunes.

Or perhaps I am just amongst a minority here...Ah well. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
--------

Kalten



"If you are in a minority of one, the truth is still the truth" Gandhi

User avatar
Wikey
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:53 am UTC
Location: 612 Wharf Ave.
Contact:

Postby Wikey » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:45 am UTC

I use WMP, it works good for me, and I like the little minimize feature.

My brother uses iTunes to put songs on his iPod, and wow. It seriously takes like 10 minutes+ to open, and it makes my computer lag if I have anything else running at the same time. I know my computer sucks, but WMP opens up within a minute tops, and can be run with whatever other programs I want.

Also, uTorrent is also awesome for this same reason.

User avatar
aldimond
Otter-duck
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 am UTC
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Contact:

Postby aldimond » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:47 am UTC

Wikey wrote:I use WMP, it works good for me, and I like the little minimize feature.

My brother uses iTunes to put songs on his iPod, and wow. It seriously takes like 10 minutes+ to open, and it makes my computer lag if I have anything else running at the same time. I know my computer sucks, but WMP opens up within a minute tops, and can be run with whatever other programs I want.

Also, uTorrent is also awesome for this same reason.


s/minute/second/g ?

Or do you just have an incredible level of patience?
One of these days my desk is going to collapse in the middle and all its weight will come down on my knee and tear my new fake ACL. It could be tomorrow. This is my concern.

Teaspoon
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:37 pm UTC
Location: Where you least expect me

Postby Teaspoon » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:51 am UTC

WMP probably opens comparatively quickly for the same reason IE does; shell integration. Which means it's using resources even if it's not running.

I'd prefer something that loads quickly because it's small and only does what I want it to. At the moment that means I'm using Media Player Classic, but one of these days I'm going to get back on track with the player that I was writing and then I'll have exactly the player I want. :)

Jack Saladin
X is kiss
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Postby Jack Saladin » Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:50 am UTC

What sort of amount of music do you non-WMP/iTunes users have/listen to? I've always found the alternative players to not really be suitable for easily moving throughout however many thousands of songs one has.

Teaspoon
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:37 pm UTC
Location: Where you least expect me

Postby Teaspoon » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:26 am UTC

MPC has no media library that I'm aware of.

But that's okay, I sort any movies, songs, etc into the appropriate directories on my storage box before playing them. Why get a library to arrange the files if they're already arranged in the filesystem? I don't have millions of songs, but I don't think it would make a difference. Also, I don't do the whole play-everything-in-random-order thing.

User avatar
Peshmerga
Mad Hatter
Posts: 2061
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:56 am UTC
Contact:

Postby Peshmerga » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:54 am UTC

I usually loop a great song until I grow weary of it, then find another song to loop.
i hurd u liek mudkips???

User avatar
TheTankengine
Our Fora-father
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby TheTankengine » Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:46 pm UTC

I have looped "Goodbye Horses" for the last several months.

It is the only song in my iTunes library.

Has anybody else listened to this song? You probably have and didn't even know it? :wink:

The first person to correctly identify this song wins the "I kick ass!" award of the day.
be centered
be compassionate
be interesting

User avatar
Ephphatha
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:03 am UTC
Location: Bathurst, NSW, Australia

Postby Ephphatha » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:16 pm UTC

Saladin wrote:What sort of amount of music do you non-WMP/iTunes users have/listen to? I've always found the alternative players to not really be suitable for easily moving throughout however many thousands of songs one has.
I find winamp has no problems with the... 5000 or so songs I have. Probably more now actually, I need to recount it.
I'm not lazy, I'm just getting in early for Christmas is all...

User avatar
Pau!
Dutiful Sycophant
Posts: 213
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:20 am UTC
Location: Ottawa
Contact:

Postby Pau! » Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:32 pm UTC

Umm... taking someone else's work without paying for it is stealing, period.
Downloading windows (or music, or whatever) is exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing the box or CD, except that walking into the store requires balls. The actual cost of the CD is almost nothing; it's the work they put into it that justifies the price tag.

Now, here's where I say it: Yes, I download music. And I'm pretty sure this copy of windows isn't legal. But I'm not going to try to justify it; it's stealing. There's just less of a chance I'll get caught this way. Maybe one day I'll mature enough morally to be able to deny myself the pleasures of free music and operating systems, but for now I'm a thief, and nothing more.
"Materialism and vanity are tools of youth and fear. We'll grow up. " Sarah Lyons

User avatar
TheTankengine
Our Fora-father
Posts: 3328
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, KY
Contact:

Postby TheTankengine » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:12 pm UTC

Pau! wrote:Umm... taking someone else's work without paying for it is stealing, period.
Downloading windows (or music, or whatever) is exactly the same as walking into a store and stealing the box or CD, except that walking into the store requires balls. The actual cost of the CD is almost nothing; it's the work they put into it that justifies the price tag.

Now, here's where I say it: Yes, I download music. And I'm pretty sure this copy of windows isn't legal. But I'm not going to try to justify it; it's stealing. There's just less of a chance I'll get caught this way. Maybe one day I'll mature enough morally to be able to deny myself the pleasures of free music and operating systems, but for now I'm a thief, and nothing more.


It is NOT the same thing as taking something from a store, precisely because of the media.

If I download a song, absolutely no one has lost any tangible object whatsoever. They are 1's and 0's; completely separate from the realm of physical properties.

You bring up a good point about the price of the printed media, though. Originally, the reason a CD cost you $20 was because the media it was on/packaging/distribution actually cost more than a few bucks. As the costs associated with CDs went down, the price of the finished product should have gone down with it. I'd be surprised if a CD/jewel case (irregardless of content) from a store is actually worth more than 10 cents.

Where piracy comes into this, is the fact that the price didn't drop barely much at all. A brand new CD still costs $15. This means the production companies are making astronomical profits, when they could easily get by with only charging 5, 6, 7 dollars.

This is precisely what the media corporations do not understand. They think they will make more profit by keeping the same price and encumbering the media with DRM. On the flip side, if they reduced prices and actually catered to their customers (as opposed to treating everyone like a criminal and just assuming 'pirates' are going to end the world) they would turn a profit, because it would be more convenient just to by the thing and get good quality.
be centered
be compassionate
be interesting


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests