PDA

View Full Version : Linux Music Player - Wich do you guys use?



sapo
August 9th, 2005, 10:29 PM
Man, i ve always used xmms, but it was missing "something" then i tried to install amarok here, but.. it didnt work (gnome)..
now i m using rythmbox, but is too damn simple, i really like the library and the docking stuff, but its too lame...
i had and .exe in my mp3 folder.. it plays the .exe making a lot of noise, it doesnt have an equalizer.. and i think it dont even have a buffer cause every time i read something in the harddrive the music skips...

Man.. isnt there something with a music library, equalizer, docking that is simple and at same time can do the work well done?

btw.. what do you guys are currently using?

edit: Sorry, forgot BMP in the poll ](*,)

PeP
August 9th, 2005, 10:32 PM
amarok, it should work with gnome, if it doesn't post a new topic for help or file a bug

fng
August 9th, 2005, 10:34 PM
Since a couple of hours, i just rediscovered my music with amarok :)
It's really great.

sapo
August 9th, 2005, 10:35 PM
amarok, it should work with gnome, if it doesn't post a new topic for help or file a bug

It works, but the arts stuff didnt work... it says that can start the sound server and bla bla bla.. so i gave up.. i dont want to need another sound server to run just amarok ](*,)

fng
August 9th, 2005, 10:36 PM
It works, but the arts stuff didnt work... it says that can start the sound server and bla bla bla.. so i gave up.. i dont want to need another sound server to run just amarok ](*,)

install amarok-xine and you can use the xine output plugin instead of arts

sapo
August 9th, 2005, 10:37 PM
install amarok-xine and you can use the xine output plugin instead of arts

lol.. now i m feeling really stupid ](*,)

But thanx for the tip... didnt know that...

SKLP
August 9th, 2005, 10:50 PM
I use Muine.

poofyhairguy
August 9th, 2005, 10:53 PM
I use Muine.

Me too. Sounds like what the original poster is asking for.

sapo
August 9th, 2005, 10:56 PM
Me too. Sounds like what the original poster is asking for.

Do you have a link or screenshot?

thanx! :D

poofyhairguy
August 9th, 2005, 11:09 PM
Do you have a link or screenshot?

thanx! :D

http://muine.gooeylinux.org/

Looks a little better than that screenshot.

tommy04
August 9th, 2005, 11:51 PM
Beep-Media-Player.

Forked from XMMS, much more stable.

WildTangent
August 9th, 2005, 11:55 PM
totem

-Wild

bored2k
August 10th, 2005, 12:09 AM
II juggle between Rhythmbox and Beep media player http://www.sosdg.org/~larne/w/Screenshots
At times I feel like Muine wich is also cute . http://muine.gooeylinux.org/muine.png

drummer
August 10th, 2005, 12:41 AM
I use Quod Libet
http://www.sacredchao.net/quodlibet

bored2k
August 10th, 2005, 12:46 AM
http://muine.gooeylinux.org/

Looks a little better than that screenshot.
It's the simplest and -IMO- greatest for cataloguing albums. Not that its more complex than amarok, but its just a breeze.

Edit: Muine also supports Scrobbler wich is cool :) .

bored2k
August 10th, 2005, 12:48 AM
I use Quod Libet
http://www.sacredchao.net/quodlibet
I never managed to compile that one.. grr

Edit : http://newstuff.orcon.net.nz/ubuntu/quodlibet/
not even this works

TravisNewman
August 10th, 2005, 12:57 AM
muine or beep.

I used to use one that seemed to be a Mono implementation of the bastard child of Rhythmbox and Muine. It was amazing. I can no longer find it. I've lost it twice before as well.

bored2k
August 10th, 2005, 01:02 AM
muine or beep.

I used to use one that seemed to be a Mono implementation of the bastard child of Rhythmbox and Muine. It was amazing. I can no longer find it. I've lost it twice before as well.
Sonance ?

Ok I finally got QuodLibet to work, but ATM i'd prefer something officially supported or backported. Exfalso is great though.

Edit: Nevermind. ALthough I had to disable sound server, I might use it after all.

raf@box:~/Desktop$ quodlibet
Supported formats: flac, mod, mp3, mpc, oggvorbis That's awsome.

drummer
August 10th, 2005, 01:03 AM
I never managed to compile that one.. grr

Edit : http://newstuff.orcon.net.nz/ubuntu/quodlibet/
not even this works
Hmm, it didn't need compiling for me. All you do is download the tarball, extract and run the executables. There is also a setup script (python i think) that puts or links the executables in bin and makes menu entries.

Curlydave
August 10th, 2005, 01:04 AM
Amarok, of course. I don't like the look of rythmbox, and XMMS and beep are bugged; neither of them will cycle to the next song after finishing one. (no, I dont' have no advance playlist on)

bored2k
August 10th, 2005, 01:05 AM
Hmm, it didn't need compiling for me. All you do is download the tarball, extract and run the executables. There is also a setup script (python i think) that puts or links the executables in bin and makes menu entries.
Hmm.. maybe they made that after I tried it. *Removing deb, downloading pkg*

Edit: Still have to disable sound server on ESD, wich makes BMP bananas :-/ . It barely uses any resources so its a good app ;),

npaladin2000
August 10th, 2005, 02:22 AM
Honestly, I think all Linux music players kinda suck a bit. I miss my Windows apps for this stuff....scary but true. Not much topped RealPlayer for that sort of thing, plus tag editing, plus making audio and jukebox CDs....except MusicMatch, but that ONLY because it would normalize the CDs as you burned them (Both types).

So, anyway, I use Rhythmbox while I whine about what it can't do. And as usual the Linux community in general says "if you don't like it, write something yourself." So I'm learning Python and intend to write the baddest-ass music player/manager around....then I'm gonna add photo management and slideshow SVCD burning (with a musical background of course)...then maybe video file management....

This is nuts because I haven't even finished learning the stinking language yet! ;) But I DO have some idea of how to lay out the program, what backends to use, etc, so I suppose I'm in the design phase. Just give me a few years O:)

RastaMahata
August 10th, 2005, 03:19 AM
heh, I miss foobar2000

I use rhythmbox for music organizing, although I wish for a player that:
-could edit tags easilly, also allowing editing of album, etc
-could encode from/to mp3/ogg/mp4/flac/wav
-Could have an album database
-Easy playlist management
-Tray Icon
-Low resources

I'm downloading muine as I type this...

edit: great, segmentation fault whenever I try to run anything on it. Oh well, back to rhythmbox...

PeP
August 10th, 2005, 03:29 AM
that's amarok ! :-)))

poofyhairguy
August 10th, 2005, 03:31 AM
Honestly, I think all Linux music players kinda suck a bit. I miss my Windows apps for this stuff....scary but true. Not much topped RealPlayer for that sort of thing, plus tag editing, plus making audio and jukebox CDs....except MusicMatch, but that ONLY because it would normalize the CDs as you burned them (Both types).

So, anyway, I use Rhythmbox while I whine about what it can't do. And as usual the Linux community in general says "if you don't like it, write something yourself." So I'm learning Python and intend to write the baddest-ass music player/manager around....then I'm gonna add photo management and slideshow SVCD burning (with a musical background of course)...then maybe video file management....

This is nuts because I haven't even finished learning the stinking language yet! ;) But I DO have some idea of how to lay out the program, what backends to use, etc, so I suppose I'm in the design phase. Just give me a few years O:)


Thats the spirit!

Be sure to look at this first though:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=3&url=http%3A//sonance.aaronbock.net/&ei=AWf5QoX0HsP-4AGfg8yMDg

TravisNewman
August 10th, 2005, 04:32 AM
Sonance ?

Ok I finally got QuodLibet to work, but ATM i'd prefer something officially supported or backported. Exfalso is great though.

Edit: Nevermind. ALthough I had to disable sound server, I might use it after all.
That's awsome.
word. For the third time, someone has saved my sanity.

drizek
August 10th, 2005, 04:35 AM
Honestly, I think all Linux music players kinda suck a bit. I miss my Windows apps for this stuff....scary but true. Not much topped RealPlayer for that sort of thing, plus tag editing, plus making audio and jukebox CDs....except MusicMatch, but that ONLY because it would normalize the CDs as you burned them (Both types).

So, anyway, I use Rhythmbox while I whine about what it can't do. And as usual the Linux community in general says "if you don't like it, write something yourself." So I'm learning Python and intend to write the baddest-ass music player/manager around....then I'm gonna add photo management and slideshow SVCD burning (with a musical background of course)...then maybe video file management....

This is nuts because I haven't even finished learning the stinking language yet! ;) But I DO have some idea of how to lay out the program, what backends to use, etc, so I suppose I'm in the design phase. Just give me a few years O:)
foobar 2k runs in wine if anyone is interested.

@npaladin, have you tried amarok? it doesnt have much(if any) cd burning features(this is handled by k3b), but it is a great music player. very very cool, especially the 1.3 betas, whcih have a wikipedia thing built in that brings up a wikipedia page about hte artist of the current song inside the interface.

npaladin2000
August 10th, 2005, 05:30 AM
foobar 2k runs in wine if anyone is interested.

@npaladin, have you tried amarok? it doesnt have much(if any) cd burning features(this is handled by k3b), but it is a great music player. very very cool, especially the 1.3 betas, whcih have a wikipedia thing built in that brings up a wikipedia page about hte artist of the current song inside the interface.

I've managed to get this far without installing the KDE libs, and I think GNOME should have something at least as good as KDE does.

Besides, why should an app like this need K3B? (madman or whatever it is for Qt uses it too) or even GnomeBaker? Why not just use the command-line tools as burning backends? And I found a NICE Python script for normalizing audio files and then burning them to CD (I forget if it's audio or MP3 jukebox or both). But I mean come on...Mp3 manager acts as front-end for GUI burning program, which acts as front-end for command-line burning programs. :)

Wikipedia is a nice idea though....have to steal that...bwa ha. :)

drizek
August 10th, 2005, 05:41 AM
I've managed to get this far without installing the KDE libs, and I think GNOME should have something at least as good as KDE does.

Besides, why should an app like this need K3B? (madman or whatever it is for Qt uses it too) or even GnomeBaker? Why not just use the command-line tools as burning backends? And I found a NICE Python script for normalizing audio files and then burning them to CD (I forget if it's audio or MP3 jukebox or both). But I mean come on...Mp3 manager acts as front-end for GUI burning program, which acts as front-end for command-line burning programs. :)

Wikipedia is a nice idea though....have to steal that...bwa ha. :)
why? amarok is great, and it runs under gnome. no need to reinvent the wheel. the NIH(not invented here) attitude is bad for linux. it would be much more productive if you joined the amarok team rather than making yet another music playing app.

you misunderstood, amarok launches k3b and uses that to burn hte cd. its not a dependency or anything. its nice to have a gui for cd burning, because it makes it much more powerfull. again, no need to reinvent the wheel in amarok by making another cd burning GUI when you can just use one that already exists.

jyank
August 10th, 2005, 06:01 AM
I hop around between beep and totem

npaladin2000
August 10th, 2005, 06:04 AM
why? amarok is great, and it runs under gnome. no need to reinvent the wheel. the NIH(not invented here) attitude is bad for linux. it would be much more productive if you joined the amarok team rather than making yet another music playing app.

you misunderstood, amarok launches k3b and uses that to burn hte cd. its not a dependency or anything. its nice to have a gui for cd burning, because it makes it much more powerfull. again, no need to reinvent the wheel in amarok by making another cd burning GUI when you can just use one that already exists.

There's no app for GNOME that does what AmaroK does. KDE apps will never integrate well with GNOME because they use a completely different toolkit, and completely different themes (try running a KDE app in GNOME without having touched or installed QTConfig or the KDE Theme utility. They look HORRID).

Plus I think that people who are perfectly happy with their GNOME desktop shouldn't be required to install a bunch of KDE/Qt libraries AND K3B AND whatever else just to have a music management application equal to what you can get for FREE in Windows.

ANd if the NIH attitude was so bad for Linux, why did someone go and invent GNOME after KDE was already started? Or VLC even though MPlayer exists? What's GOOD for Linux is COMPETITION between great applications, so that each one improves in order to gain greater acceptance. Competition between KDE and GNOME has improved both choices.

Besides, the AmaroK devs say the GStreamer backend is great (sorry, right now Xine's better), they use Qt/KDevelop (I prefer the GTK/GNOME toolkit) and it's in C/C++ which I don't know and I'm not interested in learning. I AM interested in learning Python, and a GNOME-based high-function multimedia app sounds like a fun project.

drizek
August 10th, 2005, 06:17 AM
There's no app for GNOME that does what AmaroK does. KDE apps will never integrate well with GNOME because they use a completely different toolkit, and completely different themes (try running a KDE app in GNOME without having touched or installed QTConfig or the KDE Theme utility. They look HORRID).

Plus I think that people who are perfectly happy with their GNOME desktop shouldn't be required to install a bunch of KDE/Qt libraries AND K3B AND whatever else just to have a music management application equal to what you can get for FREE in Windows.

ANd if the NIH attitude was so bad for Linux, why did someone go and invent GNOME after KDE was already started? Or VLC even though MPlayer exists? What's GOOD for Linux is COMPETITION between great applications, so that each one improves in order to gain greater acceptance. Competition between KDE and GNOME has improved both choices.

Besides, the AmaroK devs say the GStreamer backend is great (sorry, right now Xine's better), they use Qt/KDevelop (I prefer the GTK/GNOME toolkit) and it's in C/C++ which I don't know and I'm not interested in learning. I AM interested in learning Python, and a GNOME-based high-function multimedia app sounds like a fun project.
first of all, windows and free dont belong in the same sentence. second of all, dont insult amarok by comparing it windows media player.

" ANd if the NIH attitude was so bad for Linux, why did someone go and invent GNOME after KDE was already started?"

i dont know, im not that old. But one of the advantages of there being only one DE is that you wouldnt be sitting here complaining about how ugly amarok looks under gnome.

gstreamer is great, and xine is better. but what difference does it make? amarok supports both.

NoTiG
August 10th, 2005, 06:20 AM
http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=561

npaladin2000
August 10th, 2005, 06:39 AM
first of all, windows and free dont belong in the same sentence. second of all, dont insult amarok by comparing it windows media player.

I was comparing it to the free version of RealPlayer10 for Windows. And there's nothing wrong with Windows and free being in the same sentence. Firefox for Windows is free. GAIM for Windows is free. Don't get all "only open source is free and..." etc....it's the coder's option whether or not he opens his source.


i dont know, im not that old. But one of the advantages of there being only one DE is that you wouldnt be sitting here complaining about how ugly amarok looks under gnome.

No, I might be stuck using something that looks like KDE. Which I don't want. :)

And I think this is straying a bit off the thread topic ;)

drizek
August 10th, 2005, 06:58 AM
I was comparing it to the free version of RealPlayer10 for Windows. And there's nothing wrong with Windows and free being in the same sentence. Firefox for Windows is free. GAIM for Windows is free. Don't get all "only open source is free and..." etc....it's the coder's option whether or not he opens his source.



No, I might be stuck using something that looks like KDE. Which I don't want. :)

And I think this is straying a bit off the thread topic ;)
it was confusing because you said get for free IN windows, not for windows, so i thought you were talking about something that was inlcuded by default.

ya, lets just stop talking :smile:

Ampersand
August 10th, 2005, 10:02 AM
I currently use Xfmedia most of the time, also works with video files and dvds. I use beep media player for my alarm, since I can't seem to control xfmedia from the command line, and also when writing journal entries, since what I'm playing in BMP is picked up by drivel.

sapo
August 10th, 2005, 03:39 PM
wow.. i m using amarok right now.. what can i say.. its wonderfull :D

http://img352.imageshack.us/img352/9699/screenshot4vn.th.jpg (http://img352.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot4vn.jpg)

I m even organizing my mp3 collection right now.. i loved amarok :D

but the equalizer didnt work.. when i enable it.. everything goes mute ](*,) what could be the problem?

A-star
August 10th, 2005, 04:23 PM
beep Media Player

jdodson
August 10th, 2005, 05:21 PM
I am pretty crazy for Gnome, I use the default Rhythmbox music player. It works well for me.

somuchfortheafter
August 10th, 2005, 06:41 PM
i wish i could revote. I changed everything over to amarok after hearing such good things about it, now its the default media player.

sapo
August 10th, 2005, 07:30 PM
i wish i could revote. I changed everything over to amarok after hearing such good things about it, now its the default media player.

man.. i m loving it.. i have a lot of discographies.. and my mp3 files are well organized.. so... now i have covers and all the stuff inside amarok.. it rlz!

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/9584/screenshot10kv.th.png (http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot10kv.png)

cowlip
August 10th, 2005, 08:04 PM
Well, I won't use a music player unless it can play videos too, like Winodws Media Player, so Kaffeine is my pick. I just wish it could monitor folders.

I've looked at Juk and Amarok, but they scare me, and Rhythmbox is to simplified.

EDIT: I also love Beep Media Player :D

Curlydave
August 10th, 2005, 08:49 PM
I wish I could get xmms and beep to continue on to the next song after finishing one...

sapo
August 11th, 2005, 04:38 PM
wow.. amarok r0x.. finally found a use to those useless "windows" keys on my keyboard...

Win + Z to Play the previous Song
Win + X to Play a song
Win + C to Pause
Win + V to Stop
Win + B to Play the next..

it r0x :D

Buffalo Soldier
August 11th, 2005, 05:04 PM
Rhythmbox user.

Stormy Eyes
August 11th, 2005, 05:07 PM
I've taken to using Quod Libet. It does everything I need, and Ex Falso blows EasyTag out of the f---ing water.

poofyhairguy
August 11th, 2005, 06:19 PM
I've taken to using Quod Libet. It does everything I need, and Ex Falso blows EasyTag out of the f---ing water.

The only problem with easy tag is that its name is misleading. I think its very powerful.

rippon
August 11th, 2005, 06:24 PM
I use Noatun. Becuase it is the only one that played WMA files.

gray-squirrel
August 11th, 2005, 06:42 PM
I use Noatun. Becuase it is the only one that played WMA files.

I was able to get amaroK (which I voted for in this poll) to actually play WMA files. The only problem I encountered was that the time on the OSD was something outrageous, but it didn't update itself at least. The sound quality was great, too. Once I get actually can my computer to boot properly (i.e. not using recovery mode), I can see if there were any special tricks I used to make this possible and share. I don't think I had to resort to any, though. . .

(In case any wonder, this post has been composed under Windows while I'm researching a solution.)

I should check out Noatun, though. It's on my system (I don't know why), but I haven't used it. BMP and XMMS I have tried, but they reminded me too much of Winamp. I'm trying not to get into that feeling of nostalgia. ;-)

super
August 11th, 2005, 09:44 PM
i use eclair (http://www.get-e.org/User_Guide/English/_pages/4.1.html) when i'm in GNOME or E17 and XMMS with the shell plugin when i'm in FVWM.

i've tried rhythmbox and amarok in the past and they work great! but i like my media players to be unobtrusive and as lite on my cpu as possible. so i don't need equalizers, libraries and all the rest.

i've seen some nice looking screenshots of quod libet tho, so i'm gonna give that a whirl.

kvidell
August 11th, 2005, 11:07 PM
Anyone know if there are any plans to port Foobar2000 to Linux?
I'd _really_ love that. XMMS and BMP are "okay", I'm using Muine right now and it's mediocre at best (I don't want media management, I just want a player... but the EQ in BMP and XMMS is all messed up so I'm just not using it period.)

Ah well.

Ideas?
Also: Eclair seems to hate me. I wanted to use it but it wont let me queue music. I click on "Add Files" and it just sits there staring at me like there's food stuck in my teeth.
- Kev

drizek
August 12th, 2005, 01:29 AM
foobar runs fine in wine.

Josh4518
August 12th, 2005, 01:55 AM
I'm using Rythembox. It's simple, clean and easy to use.

zenwhen
August 12th, 2005, 02:54 AM
Mpd

npaladin2000
August 12th, 2005, 03:30 AM
http://www.gnomefiles.org/app.php?soft_id=561

Quodlibet. Nice looking program. Looking at the source can be educational for me.

One problem. It wants the soundcard all to itself rather than going through ESOUND. So it won't work right for the 75% of the world that have onboard sound with no hardware mixer. Like me. ;)

drummer
August 12th, 2005, 04:19 AM
I'm pretty sure you can make QL use esd from a config file.. not sure at the moment (I'm at school) but will check when I get home.

DoktorSeven
August 12th, 2005, 06:15 AM
I always head back to XMMS after trying all these players; one thing or the other always trips me up and makes me not like them. Unstable, overly complicated playlist management (the delete one/all / add one/directory scheme in XMMS is perfect for my use), and although it's neat in other players to have everything organized by album/artist/preferences/which day of the week the album was recorded ( ;) ) a simple list seems to work for me...

KiwiNZ
August 12th, 2005, 09:32 AM
For me XMMS does the goods , simple no fuss

drummer
August 12th, 2005, 09:52 AM
To get Quod Libet to use alsa (not esd as I said above) instead of oss, or whatever it is by default, open /.quodlibet/config and fine the line "backend=..." and change it to "backend = ao:alsa09" (without the quotes) and QL won't hog the sound system.

npaladin2000
August 12th, 2005, 11:38 AM
To get Quod Libet to use alsa (not esd as I said above) instead of oss, or whatever it is by default, open /.quodlibet/config and fine the line "backend=..." and change it to "backend = ao:alsa09" (without the quotes) and QL won't hog the sound system.

Alsa does indeed hog one's sound system when the card doesn't have a hardware mixer. Same with OSS. The idea is to get a program to use the ARTS (KDE) or ESound (GNOME) mixer daemons.

hard_i
August 12th, 2005, 11:57 AM
Beep Media Player

agger
August 12th, 2005, 12:05 PM
I use mostly xmms and xine for RealAudio files

doclivingston
August 12th, 2005, 12:43 PM
I use Rhythmbox for music while I'm doing things at my computer, Totem if I just want to hear a file without bothering to add it to my library, and other Muine/amaroK/BMP when I feel like trying something different.

drummer
August 12th, 2005, 01:56 PM
Alsa does indeed hog one's sound system when the card doesn't have a hardware mixer. Same with OSS. The idea is to get a program to use the ARTS (KDE) or ESound (GNOME) mixer daemons.
Alsa doesn't hog it for me, after followint this: http://ubuntuguide.org/#configuresoundproperly and I have onboard sound (nForce3)... Maybe that's a hardware mixer though, didn't know there was a difference. As for the config file, you can always put something else there (arts, esd), I'm just not sure what exactly need typing.

kvidell
August 12th, 2005, 11:27 PM
foobar runs fine in wine.
Give me some of your magic beans then because it runs _terribly_ for me. None of the menu items in the context menus do anything and none of the toolbar menu items work. I can pull them down but if I select anything nothing happens. :-\
- Kev

nrayever
August 13th, 2005, 08:46 AM
i use xmms, pretty similar to winamp, simple, and nice. i tryed a bit with amarok..... but i don't know, there's something with that program that i don't really like.

and for old time, have someone used k-jofol?? that was a really great music player!!! i miss k-jofol!!!!

delsdog
August 13th, 2005, 04:28 PM
I mainly use Amarok, but occasionally slip back into using Beep, just for the nice small simplicity of it.

papangul
August 13th, 2005, 06:33 PM
I use music player daemon, I think it's light on memory and starts up fast. I intend to use my old hardware with MPD as a wireless remote music system, but MPD is a little simplistic for that.

lothar_m
August 13th, 2005, 10:34 PM
I use xmms about 90% of the time. it works fine with me.

the other 10% are splitted between real player and totem.

I like amarok a lot. I think its great but..... i really don't want to install kde libs.