Pinterest Stumbleupon Whatsapp
Ads by Google

Everyone has a music player, it’s one of those programs that most of us use on a daily basis. I am sure you must have tried several music players over the years and now found your favorite. So like we did in the past, we are asking you to vote on it. Help us find the best music player out there (at least among MakeUseOf readers).

I tried to include all popular music players, but I am pretty sure I must have missed a few. If your favorite media player is not listed then please let us know about it in comments. Thanks!

Update: Like I said, it seems that I missed a couple of good music players. These are Foobar2000 and Amarok. Check them in download links below.

Please vote !

Download Links

Ads by Google

  1. joe
    December 31, 2009 at 7:29 am

    VLC player! It's the most universal player I've heard of. I know it's not ideal for audio, but the only problem I had with it is silence time between songs in the playlist (maybe there is a setting to remove that, I didn't look).

    At first I used WMP when I had my music organized by playlists, then Winamp when I had my music organized by folder. One day I accidentally clicked on the Winamp library, and my computer got owned, thus I removed it. After that I tried foobar which seemed ok but didn't appeal to me.

    I had to download VLC for video anyway, so I figured why install a second software for audio?

    It's all about being universal. VLCs only interest is making a quality media player. iTunes, Windows Media, RealAudio, are all focused on their platform specific file types, which spells out to me "steer clear!".

  2. v sreelakshmi
    August 23, 2009 at 11:14 am

    BILLY is the best.Consumes very less space.
    No fussing about it.

  3. Chrisclap
    July 22, 2009 at 11:05 am

    People people people it is all about Moovida, i use it every day "fubar" ahahah fucked up beyond all recognition lol :)

    Seriously though moovida is bangin

    you should check it out http://www.moovida.com

  4. Ari
    May 15, 2009 at 10:31 am

    iTunes.

  5. amit
    May 9, 2009 at 8:24 am

    Winamp

  6. tim
    October 26, 2008 at 7:38 am

    foobar2000 FTW!

  7. Antony Jones
    August 21, 2008 at 5:01 am

    I still use mpg123 to play streams:

    mpg123 -@http://www.somafm.com/gs8000.pls

    simple, and it rocks!

  8. lowen
    August 21, 2008 at 4:46 am

    I use Aqualung , it doesn't add spaces between tracks and that is important to me . I love the music of "ENIGMA" and he blends many tracks together , sometimes 4 or 5 , so that it is like a very long track . Aqualung plays his music like he puts it on a CD , with no spaces ! ! I will not use any other player !
    LOWEN

  9. Jason
    June 24, 2008 at 4:26 pm

    Media Player Classic. Small and used as a great alternatives as in Real Alternative and Quicktime Alternative.

  10. Melinda
    June 15, 2008 at 11:15 am

    Helllo people!!! I think streaming radio is the wave of the NOW!!! Both Jetaudio and Spiderplayer offer radio with a minimal memfootprint. The stations are better than your average stations and Jetaudio in particular handles all the rest with ease. WMP, Winamp are resource hogs, in my opinion.

  11. sreevatsa
    June 15, 2008 at 3:38 am

    Have you heard of Billy. This doesnt have lot of features as other media players have. But this is one of the best music player when it comes to memory. It occupies around 1.5 MB. It does more than expected.

  12. Jacob
    June 12, 2008 at 11:40 am

    I guess I am in the serious minoritym but I use Rhapsody exclusively. The subscription is reasonable for an unlimited supply of CD quality music.

  13. Micha
    June 11, 2008 at 10:47 am

    Amarok. It's just powerful.

  14. moloch
    June 11, 2008 at 6:34 am

    i use TheKmplayer, love the features and doesnt even use more then 15mb ram, love it!

  15. ciko
    June 11, 2008 at 2:08 am

    Media Player Classic is the player of choice. With Necessary codecs it plays anything unders the sun.

    Media Player Classic

    Cons: No Linux Version until now

  16. Becky
    June 10, 2008 at 10:10 pm

    Rhythmbox is the only program that's really worked for me in Linux; everything else with comparable features has run slowly. I run Gnome, not KDE, so this has probably influenced my results.

  17. BullDozer
    June 10, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    man i'm surprised that no one here uses JetAudio!!

    anyhow, i vote for it

  18. Marc
    June 10, 2008 at 1:00 pm

    Banshee cause I m on linux (Gnome)

  19. helena
    June 10, 2008 at 10:29 am

    ubuket is a great multimedia player, try it out!

  20. f2kfan
    June 10, 2008 at 7:35 am

    I'm vote for foobar...

  21. Mo3e
    June 10, 2008 at 4:02 am

    Just 1% for Quintessential (QMP), I wonder why!?

    It is the best player in the list (at least IMHO), and yet minimum exposure to the public gave it less the 10 votes...

  22. Transcontinental
    June 10, 2008 at 3:50 am

    I remain stunned how nowadays, concerning media, be it audio, be it video, main and most concerns seem to be those of accessibility, speed, fashion.... and so little of quality : a grand movie on a four square inch screen, Bach or the Beatles as if whatever sound. Ladies and gentlemen, are we omitting art or are we eating it like plain hamburgers?

  23. saiko
    June 10, 2008 at 12:45 am

    Foobar2000
    and
    Mediamonky!

  24. Sabina
    June 9, 2008 at 10:39 pm

    VLC, free and reads almost everything

  25. Slim
    June 9, 2008 at 12:33 pm

    Foobar2000

    FooWorldOrder.com

  26. Jasmine
    June 9, 2008 at 11:51 am

    I use streamzy.com as my music player.

  27. Shrihari
    June 9, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Another vote for Foobar !
    Till two days back i was using Winamp.. Thn, i came to know abt Foobar and was amazed at its performance... Not to mention, its very very lightweight ! :)

  28. AskTheAdmin | Karl Gechlik
    June 9, 2008 at 10:49 am

    FOOBAR 2000!

  29. GM
    June 9, 2008 at 10:12 am

    Why Foobar?
    * Handles large library of music with an album list which I can view, sort and filter pretty much any way I want to. Tabbed play list are quite nice too.
    * Default non fussy user interface which can be made fussy if you want.
    * Light weight, not that it matters much but if all it's doing is playing music then it should eat your ram.

    Really all I want to do is enqueue some music easily, hit play and minimize the window. All without windows complaining. It looking basic is a plus for me but under the hood it ain't at all basic.

  30. BLU
    June 9, 2008 at 10:09 am

    MPD + Sonata

    Daemons FTW!

    • turbo
      August 21, 2008 at 1:46 pm

      MPD should be in the List like BLU said. Just that it is hard to find a good client... I used Sonata for quite some time but now i like Gimmix better. Don't know if it is still worked on though. For shortcuts mpc is class.

  31. Unclehank
    June 9, 2008 at 9:47 am

    Doesn't anyone use Spider Player? It's quick and easy, Kinda like the older versions of winamp.

    Also, if I want more, I'll use atunes (instead of itunes)

  32. zennf
    June 9, 2008 at 9:20 am

    XMplay because it is a lightweight, low memory footprint, portable application. As an added bonus, it is compatible with many Winamp plugins.

    Mediamonkey to rip-tag-rename.

    And SMplayer for videos. A nice front end for Mplayer, which comes with most codecs integrated out of the box. And it is portable too!

  33. zennf
    June 9, 2008 at 9:17 am

    XMplay because it's a lightweight, low memory footprint, portable application. As a bonus, it is compatible with most Winamp plugins.

    I also use Mediamonkey to manage my music library. It handles the cumbersome process of ripping-tagging-renaming.

    Finally, SMplayer for web radios, DIVX and DVD. It's a front end for Mplayer, an open source media player which comes with most codecs integrated out of the box.

  34. Mark O'Neill
    June 9, 2008 at 7:50 am

    OK, I think we can safely say we got our bottoms kicked in this poll for not including Foobar!!!

    But I had a look at it just now and I really can't understand what all the fuss is about. The screenshots make it look a lot like a basic version of Windows Media Player (at least to me anyway). So what's so great about it?

    I'd rather have Winamp because then I can have it up at the top of my screen where it is out of the way.

    • Womble
      June 9, 2008 at 11:46 am

      Most audiophiles are great believers in the KISS principle which is probably the main reason for it's success, with the plain interface and features like kernel streaming, Foobar adheres to this philosophy.

      To be honest though even the author of Foobar admits most players sound pretty much the same now, so it's pretty much just a case of finding one that works for you!

    • tim
      October 26, 2008 at 7:56 am

      Foobar2000 is completely customizable. Keyboard shortcuts, fonts, plugins, everything is exactly the way I want it. Whenever I am bored I do an overhaul. It is the antithesis of iTunes.

      Never mind small footprint, infinitesimal launch time, and badass icon.

  35. bdeferme
    June 9, 2008 at 7:42 am

    Windows: Foobar2000
    Linux: Amarok
    Sync Portable devices: iTunes (got myself an iPod Touch, so I'm kind of stuck to iTunes)

    • Mackenzie
      June 10, 2008 at 3:09 pm

      Amarok does iPods.

  36. GB
    June 9, 2008 at 6:19 am

    KM Player has an incredible amount of audio tuning possibilities and plays video as well.

  37. Optimistus
    June 9, 2008 at 6:02 am

    I'm fond of AIMP2 too! Recommend it to everybody, you can download it here:
    http://aimp.ru/index.php?do=cat&category=aimp

  38. Vanilla Cokehead
    June 9, 2008 at 5:48 am

    Most of the time, I use the old "ActiveMovie" control from Windows 95/98/ME. It's small, quick, and does the job for virtually all MP3 and WAV files. I snagged the amovie.ocx file, registered it, and associated it with WAV and MP3 files. Works like a charm.

  39. Transcontinental
    June 9, 2008 at 4:56 am

    AIMP2 is now my default audio player, after many years with XMPlay. Both use BASS technology which in my opinion handles sound "like no one". AIMP2 is outstanding!

  40. cristiano007
    June 9, 2008 at 4:30 am

    Foobar of course, big mistake not to add it on the poll...

  41. Sufi
    June 9, 2008 at 4:19 am

    XMPlay. Small, lightweight, does exactly what I want it to.

  42. Bn
    June 9, 2008 at 3:00 am

    Another vote for Foobar2000

  43. AussieRodney
    June 9, 2008 at 2:51 am

    Toss-up between GOM & VLC.

  44. vvvlad
    June 9, 2008 at 2:42 am

    AIMP2 - small but with many functions and easy to use.

  45. astralnocturne
    June 9, 2008 at 2:41 am

    zune player!

  46. Lee Mathews
    June 9, 2008 at 2:35 am

    Wow, no love for EvilPlayer? I used to hate the interface, but since my coworker swore by it I ended up getting used to it - and loving it. Come on! I supports Elmer Fudd as a language!

    Elmer Fudd!!!!

  47. Nishith
    June 9, 2008 at 2:24 am

    Amarok ofcourse. The list seems to be very windows oriented.

  48. foobar ftw
    June 9, 2008 at 1:58 am

    Another vote for Foobar. Though customizing is a little awkward and the learning curve is high, this player does it all for free.

  49. xvalentinex
    June 9, 2008 at 1:24 am

    Another vote for Amarok. I can't believe it wasn't included in the list. Boooo!

  50. Adam
    June 9, 2008 at 1:19 am

    Windows: foobar200
    Linux: Amarok

    Like many commenters, eagerly awaiting Amarok for Windows.

    -Adam

  51. Justin
    June 9, 2008 at 12:01 am

    Wow, a lot of foobars. I LOVE songbird, but I also use CD Art Display to show the album art and so I go with iTunes since it doesn't support songbird.

  52. Garret
    June 8, 2008 at 11:34 pm

    Winamp for me.

    I've tried just about every player on the list, and none of them could compare to Winamp. With great plugins, skins, and a massive community, it's really a no-brainer.

  53. Mackenzie
    June 8, 2008 at 11:23 pm

    All of these exist for Windows. Two of them for Mac, I think, and one for Linux. Perhaps another poll for various Mac music players and also one for various Linux music players is in order? Or do I need to do an article on Linux music players before that poll is possible?

    Personally, I stick to Rhythmbox, though I've experimented with Banshee, Exaile, Songbird, and XMMS as well.

  54. me
    June 8, 2008 at 11:10 pm

    MediaMonkey.

    It's not a music player, it is a music organizer, and as such not comparable to those toys like foobar, wmp or itunes. As a player, I like my Roku Soundbridge connected to my stereo, so I can listen to music as it should sound like, and not so sound from the PC :)

    • Womble
      June 9, 2008 at 12:21 am

      I hear you there! It's for this reason I always buy albums that I like, But PC is a great tool to try before you buy :D

    • Mackenzie
      June 9, 2008 at 12:34 am

      I've got an old (30 years-ish....from when my dad was in college) Sanyo record player for my albums, but I can't carry that thing and the receiver to the office! There is, unfortunately, no room for it in my apartment at the moment. I need another table or something.

  55. cidman2001
    June 8, 2008 at 11:07 pm

    I like to use Slacker. It's customizable internet streaming radio. It learns your likes and dislikes and after a short time all you do is listen. It seems to play stuff I like across many genres all the time. You can use a desktop app or listen right in your browser. They also make a portable player. Their algorythm seemed to track my likes and dislikes much better than Pandora or some of the other services I've tried.

  56. Chuqui
    June 8, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    I prefer (and love) Amarok and Vlc, which are way better than any other.

  57. Kathleen
    June 8, 2008 at 9:05 pm

    I use iTunes because I have an iPod, but I too am surprised that Foobar2000 wasn't mentioned.

  58. JK
    June 8, 2008 at 8:10 pm

    I use real player 10 (not the latest version) :) I didn't know it was so unpopular. Anyway, I just want to listen to music and thats all. No skinning, no equalizing, no short cutting, just plain music. (and also low memory usage).

  59. Brad Ross-MacLeod
    June 8, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    Real media junkies and tech geeks gravitate to the mac-daddy of them all: JRiver Media Center. It does absolutely EVERYTHING and does it well. There's a learning curve, but when you get the eureka moment there's no turning back. And they now have a totally free version with a somewhat limited feature set (but that still blows the others out of the water)--JRiver Media Jukebox.

    The fact that there's no Linux version is the only thing keeping me on Windoze. Amarok is OK, but they really need to improve the interface, especially as far as browsing album covers goes. There's promise to Songbird but it's still too raw for daily use at this point.

  60. Womble
    June 8, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    I too voted Foobar.

    How can you have an audio player poll without the audiophiles favourite?

    Wonder how many of those Itunes votes were from windows users? I would have expected winamp to be top amongst them.

  61. Sean
    June 8, 2008 at 6:49 pm

    I personally chose mediamonkey, but foobar really needs to be included in the poll. It's such a huge one to miss that I would recommend just remaking the poll. Foobar is really useful and sometimes I have to open it to do certain things that mediamonkey doesn't let me do.

    A note to Ken Burkes, foobar2000 is NOT open source. If amarok ever comes to windows it will be the only big open source player I'm pretty sure.

    • Ken Burkes
      June 9, 2008 at 5:26 pm

      Excuse me for making that mistake. I was thinking about its SDK and got that confused when I made that comment. Sean is correct, Foobar2000 isn't open source, but you can download an SDK where you can add more features to Foobar.

  62. surfmadpig
    June 8, 2008 at 6:46 pm

    one more vote for foobar!

  63. foobar
    June 8, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    foobar.

    Hands down.

  64. Andrew Min
    June 8, 2008 at 6:17 pm

    If you use Linux, definitely Amarok.

  65. James
    June 8, 2008 at 5:06 pm

    I prefer RhythymBox.

  66. holycow
    June 8, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    i like winamp for music. when i want to listen to music while surfing, i can minimize it and keep it "always on top" and it hardly takes up any space. it doesnt interfere and doesnt slow down my average specs computer. i also like using shoutcast.

    for movies i like using wmp11. only because i can tweak the ffdshow audio filters to give me a more surround sounding experience. and also i can set it so that it doesnt use overlays which tends to over saturate the picture in the movies.

    and occasionally, but very seldom ill use vlc for stubborn videos that wont play on wmp11.

    : )

    • Big D
      June 14, 2008 at 12:17 pm

      I used to like Winamp, and frankly I'm shocked that it won the votes it did. I used to like it because it ran with minimal resources, it is highly customizable, and it had a kick**s equalizer. However, the latest versions have been extremely buggy when released, and now it has become this monster in my screen that wants to throw everything at me at the same time. No longer can I have a small player running in the background, just doing what it's supposed to do: Play music! Now it's similar to iTunes. I'm very dissappointed, and I'm willing ti give other players a try. My next install will be Foobar and we'll go from there.

  67. Jakob
    June 8, 2008 at 4:55 pm

    Foobar2000 ofcourse

  68. Jason
    June 8, 2008 at 4:39 pm

    Another Foobar2000 vote, lightweight and it plays music.

    While I use iTunes to sync music/podcasts to all my portables, it's too much of a resource hog to leave running just to play music.

  69. Jesse
    June 8, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    In windows I prefer Foobar, in nix nothing compares to amarok and I am eagerly awaiting a windows release.

  70. Manhattan
    June 8, 2008 at 4:27 pm

    If I have to choose from the free ones, WMP. But I personally use Albumplayer. It's very organized and it doesn't consume a lot of resources :)

  71. Famf
    June 8, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    I love Foobar. Lightweight, extremely customizable, plays everything I've thrown at it, has tons of tools for converting, ripping, tagging, moving your entire music collection into organized folders based on tags, etc. I could go on forever.

    I use Media Player Classic for playing individual songs though. If I just want to have my friend listen to a song, I go to 'My Music' and find the song and just give it a play through with MPC.

  72. Ken Burkes
    June 8, 2008 at 3:38 pm

    I chose 'Other' and I've very surprised that Foobar2000 wasn't mentioned. I absolutely adore Foobar2000.

    1. It's extremely customizable. I'm not the type of person who cares about skinning their music player, but I do like keyboard shortcuts. It's nice to change songs without having to Alt-Tab and change the song manually.

    2. Plays all sorts of audio formats, including OGG, FLAC, AAC, MP4, AU, AIFF, and much more.

    3. There is an included tool for ripping and converting audio.

    4. It's also Open Source so third party developers can add onto Foobar200.

    I also really like VLC, though I use that more for video than for audio. It is one of the best video.audio players out there. Worth trying out for those of you who don't already have it.

    • Gregor
      June 9, 2008 at 6:30 am

      I totally agree with Ken,

      Foobar2000 should get listed in the votes options! So i choose Other and give me 50 cents to foobar2000. best music player. ever! :)

    • skwerp
      October 24, 2008 at 11:29 pm

      last time a poll like this was up, i saw foobar2000 show up in the comments... i thought hey, if this many people on makeuseof like it, it's gotta be good right?! lol the commenters were right. i've been a diehard realplayer fan as long as i can remember (i know, i know) but now i have foobar for music and media player classic for video, realplayer's only still on my computer because i'm too lazy to remove it.

  73. Eric
    June 8, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    another vote for Amarok (when running Ubuntu) and looking forward to the new version for Windows.

    For Windows however, I use iTunes, even though I don't really like it that much. I mostly use it to sync music with my iPod. I don't use Windows often though.

    I had never heard of Foobar2000 until now and my quick google search impressed me. Next time I'm in Windows I will have to check it out.

  74. Michael
    June 8, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    I use amarok since I'm in Linux all the time. The next version of amarok is supposed to be available for Windows though.

    • MikeP
      June 9, 2008 at 12:46 pm

      Yes, 100% Amarok!!!! It's the best!

Leave a Reply

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