Anything better than VLC for .flac playback?

Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2002
Posts
1,723
Location
South Wales
As title says really.... I do like the fact i can throw any video or audio at VLC but if there really is a benefit sound quality wise with another software i'd like to give it a go.
 
TBH, I'd doubt it. Any other software, is likely just going to be personal preference of layout, looks, functions, etc.

I use MediaMonkey, solely for music though. I use Windows Media Player Classic Home Cinema, for video.
 
Foobar2000 is imho the best player for audio, extremely powerful, extremely customisable, looks great, fast, incredible number of plugins, supports all formats of sound files... I could go on:)

VLC is my go to player for video.
 
I also use fb2k for music playback, simple and fast interface, loads of features, customizable, as others have said. But to answer your question, don't expect any difference in sound quality. I think it's possible in principle for decoders to affect quality, but assuming both are accurate, any differences in SQ will be due to placebo or a difference in your settings (e.g. ReplayGain enabled vs. disabled, clipping prevention, and so on).
 
Yep, different players may offer better sound processing (DSPs) but in terms of raw audio quality, they should all be the same since all audio is still in the digital domain untill it reaches the output stage of your sound card. If there is any difference in sound, its most likely down to some sort sound processing being applied, an issue with the decoder or placebo.
 
When I was running WinXP foobar gave me an option to run audio via ASIO on my iaudiophile 192 sound card- the sound was very much cleaner than Windows media on the same files. With direct kernel (or wahtever) in W7 this may no longer be the case, Windows Media should sound as good now.
 
Back
Top Bottom