Is there any reason to use anything different?

>>56422136
/thread

>>56422136
nope, unless you care about album art and other shit

but since you want a program that lets you listen to music and not a JPG viewer, fuck everything that is not winamp. It's just needless bloat.

It's non-free software and should be burned at the stake for that.

every time I install a new windows SO I install winamp 3 afterwards

>>56422136
My favorite music player.
I wish more software could stand the test of times as that one did.

>>56422136
Foobar is better and is far more capable

Winamp was okay 10 years ago, but I don't really know why you would keep that meme alive.
My current music setup is not much different to what I had 10 years ago, but it has improved.
Winamp has not improved over the years.

>Using closed source software
>Using software that hasn't been updated in 3 years

it's good if you never want to watch h.26x video or encode anything better than an MP3

>>56422136
You might as well use WMP if you use such a featureless program.

>>56422136
Foobar exists.

Foobar is obviously better

Foobar2000 shits all over.

P
Undigested peanut shit

>>56422391
>being freetard subhuman

Only if you want a program that doesn't suck the llamas ass

>>56422136
Let's see... Hmmm..

Closed source, owned by AOL/Time Warner... What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

You know, besides it phoning home data about your music library that could be passed on to the RIAA.

>can't just play from folder structure
I fuckin hate id3 tags

I was a long time Winamp fan and always defended Shitamp against foobar2000 but then I actually took the time to set it up and well, if you actually care about music there is no way around foobar. When using Winamp, have fun retagging all your shit, taking 10 minutes to load your music folder, actually worse audio, bloat etc.

>>56423831
>I fuckin hate id3 tags
tagging is the only way to organize a larger library. relying on folder structure is pleb shit. you rely on file names and what? windows search? come one. you can't store enough info in folder and file names and it's all in the same field anyway, so no filters either. it's unusable and not practical at all.

hipster crybabies have a hard time grasping the fact that music is just music for some people.

the idea of a simple amp to just play music without showing the coverart, lyrics & artist biographies, is way past their ability to comprehend

>>56423947
>the idea of a simple amp to just play music without showing the coverart, lyrics & artist biographies
Literally foobar2000

>>56423939
>you can't store enough info in folder and file names
what do I need besides title and album?

We use the spiritual successor of winamp these days aka AIMP.

>>56422136
Foobar clean cut

File: Untitled-1.jpg (37KB, 170x247px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 170x247px

>>56423987
pic related are my tag based filters. two levels of the same filters, e.g. choose 'date' 1969-1974 first, then 'genre' rock (psychedelic) > album selection stands. and it's instantaneous in f2k.

other example for tag based stuff. i always have album artist and track artist(s). features go into track artist. search library for e.g. "50 cent feat." > any songs with 50 cent and a featured artist show up instantly.

>>56424091
i mean, fuck, does winamp even have autoplaylists. probably not right?

don't get me wrong i have winamp installed too but only to listen to music i'm not sure yet i want to keep or haven't proberly edited the tags on. it's in fact the program i have tied all audio files types to when double clicking them. because my f2k is portable and open 24/7 anyway i the background.

>>56424091
yeah I really don't need that
I just wanna listen to music nigga

File: audacious.png (31KB, 276x434px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 276x434px

Use Audaicious
>available for windows
>based on linux winamp clone xmms
>under active development
>supports all major/relevant formats
>has a foobar200-like gui
>can use classic winamp skins

>>56424207
that's ok. just as the library grows i appreciate these features more and more. it's a lot more comofortable.

>>56424237
time for rice yet?

>>56424346
why? when i use it, it's minimized in the background

File: 1472948378130.jpg (199KB, 900x427px)

199KB, 900x427px

>>56422136
>he chooses to use winamp

Just what the fuck is wrong with you?

>>56424383
lol don't get defensive with me. just looking for an excuse to post my own (which is far 'worse'). it's funny when people through a fit over it.

>>56424237
Thank you, there is literally no reason to use winamp when audacious exists.

File: Untitled-1.jpg (406KB, 1920x1051px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 1920x1051px

Check out that rice!

File: Untitled-2.jpg (447KB, 1920x1047px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 1920x1047px

>>56424754

>>56424440
>defensive
and i just posted how I use it friend

>still using a barely functional music player that gets its functionality from plugins copied from sketchy as fuck russian sites way back when this pile of shit was first conceived
Why do people use fucking fubarover9000 again?

Oh right, windows lusers. Same people that use mpchc which is the exact same concept: barely functional video player with botnet codec packs to do any fucking thing.

>>56424804
it's okay bruv

>>56424848
see
>>56424854

>>56422136
foobar

>>56422136
Spotify.

Foobar is better in every way.

I prefer foobar over winamp but haveny used windows in idontknowhowlongago so things might have changed

Not a kid, so I dont stay home and browse 4chan with music on. get a life dweebs