Your Digital Media Has Never Looked So Good

Topic Author
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:27 am

Re: foo_upnp

Sun May 30, 2010 2:16 pm

I am using foo_upnp 0.99.26 on my Foobar2000 1.0.3 installation. I'm a long-term Foobar2000 user and I like its power as a music manager and its simplicity,
quickness, and ease of use. Yesterday I tried foo_upnp's UPnP Controller function, to allow me to "play on" any of my M1000 or two M1001s on my network.
I found that this will allow a Foobar2k playlist of 46000+ songs to be randomized and then sent to the Roku one by one, as opposed to trying to load a
46000+ song playlist into the M1001 which chokes at about 30000 songs.

Foobar's incredibly fast library search function, along with this foo_upnp function allowing it to control the SoundBridge, is a pretty cool combination.

I also have Firefly set up to run against the same music library, and I have been impressed with its speed and simplicity. Nothing can load 20000 songs to
the SoundBridge faster than Firefly. But I started experimenting with foo_upnp because I liked the fact that my Foobar2000 playlists, which are very easy to
set up, work beautifully on the SoundBridge. Firefly takes a bit more effort to create dynamic playlists. I could save my Foobar playlists as .m3u files and then
use them in Firefly, but I haven't messed with that.

I have also fooled with other servers such as Asset UPnP and Squeezebox Server. Something I really like about Squeezebox Server is how it lets you browse
your library by folder.

One thing lacking from foo_upnp is the ability to search your library via the Roku's remote control.

I'm curious about what you've found with foo_upnp as compared to others so far.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests