Music Player Review: qmmp vs audacious

Basic_Interfaces
These players have more in common then not. Audacious seems to have more options though and supports WinAmp skins. If you are looking for a linux app to replace (the look and feel of) WinAmp these are the two best options I’ve found, slight edge given to Audacious. Although, I personally like the qmmp default skin better. Other than options, they are practically the same program.

Look you can rearrange them in similar ways (and arbitrary)Interface-customize
And they both can become “1 Liners”:

how_small_can_you_go
So Audacious “wins” cause they have more plug-ins, options, and skins by default. Also they have a voice removal pluging (a little bit buggy) but quite awesome if you want to get some karaoke going. I will definitely be looking for that feature in more music players. (Neither is continuing in my review, as they are competiting more with each other, than the others)

Both are very light weight and good players, Go give them a try, Ubuntu users click below.

Who’s left? Amarok, Ario, aTunes, Banshee, Sonata, gmusicbrowser, Videolan Client, Quod LIbet, Exaile, Rhythmbox, Sondbird

10 thoughts on “Music Player Review: qmmp vs audacious”

  1. >You're my hero! I've been using mplayer at the command line (wow, I know, right?) for years since xmms went away. Nothing has impressed me since.

    But audacious? Winner!

  2. >I am very much looking forward to hearing your comparison/review. Thanks for taking the time to do it.

    Personally I am getting very friendly with Songbird on Ubuntu (shame it isn't in the repos though).

    It was the only player I found that could sync to my iPod Nano 4th Gen and the plugin library is just as much fun as the one for Firefox.

    Now it does iTunes syncing both ways, it is getting very interesting as a decent replacement.

    You're on my RSS reader!

    Have fun.

  3. >Because of your blog, I give a try to qmms. Unfortunately, all of my XMMS plugins (Freeverb, crystality, etc) won't work. I must agree with you, audacious2 is clearly a winner.

    It's such a shame that none of the modern players being able to do the job what XMMS more than ten years ago already achieve. If you can point of today's modern GNU/Linux music player that able to exploit my headphone, I'll try to stick with it.

    Until then, I'm enjoying your review here. Thanks for the information. ๐Ÿ˜›

  4. >@jpmrblood

    None of your XMMS plugins work with audacious either, how does that make it a clear winner?

    And in case you mean something like this, both audacious and qmmp support it, as well as a few other players.

    DISCLAIMER: I prefer mpd/ncmpc, audacious2 and amarok2, in varying orders based on whim.

  5. >With everyone talking about how great Amarok, Banshee, and RhythmBox are. It's good to see some coverage of the lighter weight music players. That's not to say the heavy weights aren't good.; I just think it's time the light weights got some coverage too. ๐Ÿ™‚

    Personally, I use Audacious everyday. It's great!

  6. >@anonymous:
    Hmm… may be you are right. But, my 2 favourite audio effects are usable in Audacious2 (Freeverb3 and crystality). With an audioscrobbler, what else would I ask?

  7. >And qmmp 0.3 is now able to handle the .cue files (also the embedded ones) very well ๐Ÿ™‚

    Congrats and thanks to the developers!

  8. >Qmmp has an mplayer plugin, for seemless video playback support, but on the downside no real dsp plugins & no gapless or it would be perfect.

    Audacious on the other hand is right there with everything EXCEPT AN MPLAYER PLUGIN!

  9. >I was using Audacious2 but the playlist editor and equalizer kept disappearing after minimizing and maximizing the player. Found out that it's a known bug. So I'm using qmmp now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *