Setting EQ per song on computers

Posted by: drakino

Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 00:37

I am playing around more and more with the applications that came with my new system, and wonder if anyone here knows of another MP3 player that allows per song EQ settings like this?
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 00:40

I don't have an answer to your question, but damn I wish Windows had a UI that pretty.
Posted by: drakino

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 01:26

but damn I wish Windows had a UI that pretty.

Well, this site tries to help out with that.

Overall my impressions of OS X are mixed. I like the Unix core, and the way things work. I'm still getting used to the "Macintosh way" of doing things, but OS X isn't as harsh a transition as going to OS 9 would be. I'm basically using a used iMac to see if I really like things on this side, so I can then decide if I'm getting a Powerbook after the next revision or two down the road. (I figure my PIII800 laptop work gave to me should do for now). I have found replacements for almost everything I do on my laptop now, so the transition should go well.

And so much of this I owe to that one guy sitting at the opposite end of the table from me at the USA owners meet. I had a crappy beta of XP to show off, while he brought OS X on a Powerbook . It rekindled my interest enough to start seriously looking.
Posted by: wfaulk

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 01:58

I've been running OSX since the beta and there are a lot of things I love about it. But the one thing that really, truly sucks is how slow the UI is. OS9 programs running through the ``emulator'' are faster. Once they get some real video acceleration going, it will be truly wonderful.

On the other hand, at this point, I will refuse to buy another Intel laptop. Apples laptops are so brilliantly stable that Intel machines pale in comparison. Plus, they've got built-in NTSC and PAL video out, ethernet, FireWire, and 802.11b. Now if they could just get one of those 1600x1200 displays in one of them....
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 10:31

Interesting. I had played around with another (different) product which allowed skinning Windows, but it was slow and buggy. I'll look at that one and see if it's worth playing with.
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 08/11/2001 10:37

Hmm. I thought it was a site with an alternative application to WindowBlinds. Now I'm not so sure, I can't seem to find a link to a single skinning application, only links to a bunch of little applications. I'm not sure what to download and try.
Posted by: Diznario

Windows Shell Replacement - 08/11/2001 12:24

I hear ya, Tony.

Back when I was running 2000 Pro, I tried Window Blinds, and Desktop X, and they looked great, but were both a little too slow and buggy for me. I have since upgraded to XP, and am really happy with it. Not quite as slick looking as OS X, but it's about as close as you can get on the Win32 platform. And a lot more stable then 2000 was with a shell.

Desktop X was my favorite of the ones I've tried, but You might also want to check out Lightstep, or Nextstart. I've never tried either of those two, but they have some of the best looking desktops I've ever seen, and a ton of skins.

If you want more info, check out some of these sites:

A great Windows Tweaking site:
WinCustomize

Online artist community, with a ton of skins:
Deviant Art

Another cool site, but currently under construction:
skinz.org
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Windows Shell Replacement - 08/11/2001 12:27

Thanks for those links, I'll check them out.
Posted by: jwickis

Re: Windows Shell Replacement - 09/11/2001 22:19

Talisman lighttek was one from awhile back as well. I also tried Nextstart & WindowBlindz last but not least eFX. They all seemed kinda buggy and unpredictable at times for me, so I stopped but I think I'm going to try this.
Posted by: mcomb

Re: Setting EQ per song on computers - 10/11/2001 00:29

> But the one thing that really, truly sucks is how slow the UI is.

I have been running OS X as my primary OS since it was Rhapsody DR2 (1997 I think?). I love having a unix with a truly usable windowing system. XWindows just rubs me the wrong way. Anyway, the GUI was always reasonably fast up until beta when it slowed a lot. 10.1 was a big improvement though. I would bet that with another release or two it will be as fast os OS 9.

-Mike