By contrast, AIMP's plugins include some real gems. (opens in new tab) Most music player extensions are extra visualizations and skins that, although cool, have little practical use. Your AIMP library can be built using files from multiple directories and ripped from CDs, with automatic track numbering and tag filling to help you get it in shape.ĪIMP supports a huge number of formats, and additional encoders are available as user-created add-ons. browser view through folders and files).Like all the best free music players, AIMP makes organizing your songs a breeze – even if your collection is currently a sprawling mess of tracks in different formats and locations, with incomplete or missing metadata. The best compromise of usability and SQ is imho foobar 0.8.3 - I still hope, that some day there will be a simple Jplayer like Album Player (but with the SQ of Jplay mini and the usability of just having buttons for transport function, abilities for creating playlists rsp. Hi Aleg, I fully agree with you: there is nothing that sounds better than Jplay mini - if there wouldn't be this rudimentary usabiliy (which of course I understand from an audiophile point of view).

But the most important thing for me are not the possible reasons but just the fact that there is a difference in SQ - because I love this sound. wp-content/forum-smileys/sf-wink.gif I for my person can just speculate, what the reasons for the differences in SQ could be. Hi rdsu, I never talked with the developer of foobar about theses differences, and also in future I won't do it, because there will be no use, since he is a member of the bits-are-bits-and-JPlay-is-a-hoax-party. And yes, I'm afraid, that you might be right that your personal skin won't work, since 0.8.3 provides just standard skins. Hi DC, yes this might be true, that in comparisson with JRM, the Foobar 1.*.* versions sound better.

Foobar alternative