Fouled Up Beyond All Recognition

I'd like to see a more recent review of this. The version of foobar I have came with the Flac, oggFlac, Monkey's Audio, Rar, etc. support already in it and a volume bar.

Also, I'd like to add that once you get used to it, the bland layout is a refreshing break from all the ostentatious programs, websites, and stuff you see all over computers everywhere except the library.

foobar2k rocks, great for DTS to an receiver etc along with asio4all, rock solid, even in windoze

There IS a volume bar now. Even in the old versions, you can just click at that 0.00dB on the bottom of the window and DA-DA! VOLUME BAR APPEARS!

I hate this type of review written by people who apparently are too lazy or just unwilling to invest any time and effort to come to grips with software they're not familiar with and then complain about lack of features and rate it on the basis of superficialities like that they don't like the looks of it or that the controls are different from what they're used to. Why write such reviews in the first place? Okay, some people will always continue to think their bias is a valid basis to rate products. Granted, nothing can be done about that. But then, why give them a platform by publishing their views in the editorial section? Editor's reviews directly reflect back on the site that publishes them and, frankly, reviews like this make Softpedia look juvenile and amateurish.

I discovered this wonderful player only some days ago.

I used Winamp for some years and used to like that player, but over years it became hungry for resources and slow to load.

Well, when i read that Foobar is created by one of the guys from winamp team, i rushed to download it (version 0.9.6.9).

And for me (power user), the player is simply the best around, the load time and the overall speed to answer to any command is a lesson to all competitors around.

Not only the above, but also we have the huge customization ability.

Finally, i completely agree with "elations" about the review. Please softpedia guys, when you decide to write a review, study the subject with care, because a lot with people will not download this wonderful soft only because you discourage them with some mistaken infos, like "there isn't a volume meter".

Regards and forgive me for the average english

I can't believe this review. Did you ever LISTEN to it? Or actually try to familiarise yourself with it? Foobar is by far the best player I know. Even without improving on its standard performance it appeared to me to have far finer treble resolution than other players, and the equalizer for those who need such things is vastly superior, divided into many more bands. However the greatest thing for me about it is how easily it can be improved, by downloading and using superior digital/analogue converters, upsampling, increasing to 24 bit, etc. I recently played a new two piano concerto CD by mistake in iTunes and only then with foobar - with iTunes the pianos sounded tinkly and tinny, the space shallow, etc. Foobar afterwards was a revelation: the proper sound of the two grand pianos, the full richness of the orchestra, much more detail of the acoustic and sense of depth in the image. Even files ripped in aac at a modest bit rate sound much better played through foobar. If you care about music you have to try this player.

This needs a new Review. The version of foobar I'm using is simply IMPRESSIVE