Winamp is returning, beta testing now.

[looniam]

Digital music stored locally is a dying breed . . .

stop. you're making me feel old(er). got stuff i *have to have*. (merzbow!)

all i care about are visualizations on my 4K TV that i haven't seen in the last 15 years.

 

[Deleted member 202104]

Cool to hear it's coming back. For the longest time I've used Audacious on both Linux and Windows. Even uses Winamp skins:

 

[Ferather]

I am using a different media player, but it does accept Winamp DSP's, interesting.

 

[outpt]

Haven’t used Winamp or foobar2000 in ages. I would like to see what will become of this.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Digital music stored locally is a dying breed

No it isn't. Some people do not stream. Simple reason, we don't want to listen to ads. I happily buy my music and store it locally.

 

[Sithaer]

Huh I'm also not sure whats this return, I always used winamp as my mp3 music player on my PC and still do.
Its like in my basic reinstall package after I do a clean Windows reinstall, never really used any other player for music.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Is it just me, or is there no download like?

 

[AusWolf]

Huh I'm also not sure whats this return, I always used winamp as my mp3 music player on my PC and still do.
Its like in my basic reinstall package after I do a clean Windows reinstall, never really used any other player for music.

Same here. It's not the best music player. It's THE music player for me.

 

[OneMoar]

Late to the party AIMP is what i have used for years
my needs for a stand alone media player have waned in recent years

 

[lexluthermiester]

Same here. It's not the best music player. It's THE music player for me.

What I'm hoping for is refinements to the plugin interface, improved options for the UI, improved media support(both audio and video) and all while keeping the classic options intact.

 

[bug]

No it is isn't. Some people do not stream. Simple reason, we don't want to listen to ads. I happily buy my music and store it locally.

For $5/mo, you don't have to listen to ads. But there are gems that you can't find on any streaming platform, so I'm not giving up my collection.
Streaming also gives me much of the music I collected over the years, but at better quality, so there's that.

 

[AusWolf]

For $5/mo, you don't have to listen to ads. But there are gems that you can't find on any streaming platform, so I'm not giving up my collection.
Streaming also gives me much of the music I collected over the years, but at better quality, so there's that.

Why should I pay $5 a month for something I can have for free as something stored on my PC or with a one-off payment at a music store? Especially since I already pay for my Internet connection.

 

[bug]

Why should I pay $5 a month for something I can have for free?

Ah, an entitled one. My apologies, sir.

 

[AusWolf]

Ah, an entitled one. My apologies, sir.

$5 for youtube premium, $5 for amazon prime, $5 for Netflix, 5$ for ad-free radio... am I made of money or what? No thanks.

All of this (well, the equivalents) was included in a simple TV subscription in the '90s, so again: no thanks.

 

[lexluthermiester]

For $5/mo, you don't have to listen to ads. But there are gems that you can't find on any streaming platform, so I'm not giving up my collection.
Streaming also gives me much of the music I collected over the years

To be fair, it's been a while since I've looked at music streaming. But also to be fair, even if there have been massive improvements, one simple fact still remains; You don't own your music. With CD's and digital purchases, you own that copy of that music and you can never be denied access to it. With streaming, you own nothing and can be denied access at the whim of some nitwit in a high priced suit. No effing thank you.

but at better quality

This I doubt.

 

[bug]

$5 for youtube premium, $5 for amazon prime, $5 for Netflix, 5$ for ad-free radio... am I made of money or what? No thanks.

All of this (well, the equivalents) was included in a simple TV subscription in the '90s, so again: no thanks.

You don't have to subscribe to everything, but, even if you hate RIAA and MPAA, you have to realize servers don't run themselves.

To be fair, it's been a while since I've looked at music streaming. But to be fair, even if there have been massive improvements, one simple fact still remains; You don't own your music. With CD's and digital purchases, you own that copy of that music and you can never be denied access to it. With streaming, you own nothing and can be denied access at the whim of some nitwit in a high priced suit. No effing thank you.

A fair point, but Spotify can play your local files. More importantly, it lets you upload your local collection: https://www.businessinsider.com/spotify-how-to-upload-music-and-save-offline-2018-8

This I doubt.

There are some tunes I only got in MP3 128kbps form... Some even lower than that.

 

[AusWolf]

To be fair, it's been a while since I've looked at music streaming. But also to be fair, even if there have been massive improvements, one simple fact still remains; You don't own your music. With CD's and digital purchases, you own that copy of that music and you can never be denied access to it. With streaming, you own nothing and can be denied access at the whim of some nitwit in a high priced suit. No effing thank you.

Exactly that!

This I doubt.

Nothing sounds better than a well-maintained vinyl record, or one ripped as lossless audio.

You don't have to subscribe to everything, but, even if you hate RIAA and MPAA, you have to realize servers don't run themselves.

I watch lots of cooking and science shows on YouTube and put up with the ads. I think it's a brilliant service for that purpose. It's also great for learning about new music. It's just shite for prolonged listening. Nothing can replace your own music collection.

A fair point, but Spotify can play your local files. More importantly, it lets you upload your local collection: https://www.businessinsider.com/spotify-how-to-upload-music-and-save-offline-2018-8

Imo, the need for Spotify is an artificially created one, just like the "need for" big-screened smartphones. No one has ever asked for it, yet it dominates the world for some reason. I still see no reason why I should upload my collection anywhere.

There are some tunes I only got in MP3 128kbps form... Some even lower than that.

Get better copies. You could buy them on CD for example. Ebay and Amazon are great sources.

 

[lexluthermiester]

There are some tunes I only got in MP3 128kbps form... Some even lower than that.

Most of my music in 256kbps or 320kbps. I have some that are 192kbps and 128kbps but not much.

A fair point, but Spotify can play your local files. More importantly, it lets you upload your local collection: https://www.businessinsider.com/spotify-how-to-upload-music-and-save-offline-2018-8

That's a cop-out at best. You still don't own your copy and they can deny you access on a whim. That's just unacceptable to a lot of people.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Digital music stored locally is a dying breed and Winamp needs to reinvent the wheel to become successful.

that depends where you get your digital collection.

 

[bug]

Most of my music in 256kbps or 320kbps. I have some that are 192kbps and 128kbps but not much.

You must have had better sources than I did. I even have stuff in AAC 256kbps+ (but tbh, at that bitrate I can't tell them apart from MP3), but some things I just couldn't get at good quality

That's a cop-out at best. You still don't own your copy and they can deny you access on a whim. That's just unacceptable to a lot of people.

How is it a cop-out? You still own whatever you owned before (it's not like you delete your local connection once you upload it), you make them worry about bitflips and whatnot, you get access to your collection from wherever you can get an internet connection and you get access to an extended library for as long as you're willing to subscribe.

 

[Chrispy_]

I have a 20GB MP3 collection that is completely obsolete, like the MP3 players I used to need to play them.

 

[lexluthermiester]

You must have had better sources than I did.

CD's or digital stores that sold high bitrate. Google Music(RIP) was excellent for this. I have half my digital library from Google Music. 100% DRM free MP3's. Loved it!

How is it a cop-out? You still own whatever you owned before (it's not like you delete your local connection once you upload it), you make them worry about bitflips and whatnot, you get access to your collection from wherever you can get an internet connection and you get access to an extended library for as long as you're willing to subscribe.

I might be missing some context. Still, don't care. I always have access to my library because I can take my collection with me regardless of an internet connection and I don't have to pay a monthly fee to have access to it. 64GB & 128GB MicroSD cards are useful indeed. And they're inexpensive.

 

[Frick]

I still run it. 2.92 for music and 5.63 for video.




Folks this thread is about WinAmp not foobar.

Any thread about Winamp will also be a thread about Foobar. It has been the rule since the death of Julius Ceasar.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Any thread about Winamp will also be a thread about Foobar. It has been the rule since the death of Julius Ceasar.

Rubbish. Pull the other one..

 

[AusWolf]

I have a 20GB MP3 collection that is completely obsolete, like the MP3 players I used to need to play them.

I still use one of these, and I love it. Fun fact that I've lost it during my travels about 3 times, but I just keep buying it again.