2. pc-audio
  3. 1228287975

Foobar 2000 or MediaMonkey v.3?

My PC runs Windows XP 2000 w/ Service Pack 3. My music library, so far, contains tracks dowloaded from Amazon.com. My audio player is WMP.

Audio out is via Behringer U-Control (dedicated USB cable, 16/48 DAC); RCA's from Behringer to Parasound pre (analog inputs only, no internal DAC) to NAD amp. I will soon upgrade from the Behringer to an Edirol UA-1 EX (24/96). I'd love to get something like a used Bel Canto DAC, but do not have the bucks.

I'm wondering if Foobar 2000 or Media Monkey will afford better sound than the WMP. I don't care about all the bells and whistles - just the sound. If yes, which is better - Foobar or Media Monkey? Where does J River fit in?

If I download one of these, should I also get ASIO and/or Kernel Streaming?

Thank you. Mike19
mmarvin19

Showing 1 response by seekburk

seekburk
126 posts
 
I'm using JRiver Media Jukebox 12 and it is a far cry better in sonics then WMP9 that i was previously using. I am using the WAVE and not the Direct sound and that also improved the sound in my system. I agree witht he previous posts about gaining soundstage and just overall better presentation. The sound card i am using has a thing called "pure wave" and that sounds really good. Blindjim, i read on the JRiver forums that there is no sonic improvement going from Jriver media jukebox to the JRiver media center. The only advantage there is that there are more features for pictures and videos etc., where as the jukebox is just for streaming your audio files. If anyone has compared the two and can speak to the contrary i would certainly like to know as it may be worth the investment. I just want to stream audio and if there is an improvement to that end then i may do that upgrade but like i said the information i read from administrators on that forum indicate otherwise.
More to discover