Take the 2-minute tour ×
Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've been thinking about switching to Ubuntu full time, but there are still some programs left behind that I haven't found any equivalent to yet. Does anyone know of a music player similar to Foobar2000 (I've read it doesn't handle well in WINE)?

share|improve this question
what exactly don't you wanna miss from foobar2000? –  type May 19 '11 at 21:55
foobar2000 works better in wine than other windows-migrated software: I have tested (and they still work) specialized features like tags editing with plugins, lyrics download/display/embedding, converting audio files, detailed media library access with foo_facets. the way it looks is not that good , it's true, but there are tweaks that can be made that i didn't tried... for common use I don't like running Wine and therefore use DeaDBeef (see answer below) –  cipricus Apr 3 '12 at 20:58
update: foobar works fine in wine, and even looks good - especially with improvements mentioned below (more on that here) –  cipricus Jun 24 '13 at 22:41

7 Answers 7

I like Clementine Install Clementine.

Exaile Install Exaile is an alternative. Look for Clementine in Ubuntu software Center

share|improve this answer
+1 For Clementine :) –  red Jul 13 '11 at 8:41

The strict fact is that there is not another like that - no more in linux than in windows after all. (I mean that Foobar2000 can be used with a such large variety of features/addons that can transform its functions and appearance according to each user's needs. Myself, I use it especially for the "facets" addon to access my media library)

Foobar2000 works in Wine and is useful for special purposes like detailed tagging, converting, or especially detailed library handling, or even as default music player. Foobar2000 still holds a good chance of taking the main role: its tabbed display of playlists and other features, which all are extremely configurable makes it very attractive.

  • As a relative alternate I recommend: DeadBeef

(what it lacks in Foobar2000-features it compensates in being light and up-to-the-point - the most straightforward and non-bloated music player/handler I have seen until now in Ubuntu).

With File browser plugin:

enter image description here

With Infobar plugin:

enter image description here

to install it:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:alexey-smirnov/deadbeef
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install deadbeef 

Or download as .deb and install (i686 or amd64)

To install plugins, wich are .so files, they should be put into a certain folder.


or: /usr/lib/deadbeefs (if the player is installed from PPA)

if the player is installed as .deb, it is /opt/deadbeef/lib/deadbeef

For the static portable version it is deadbeef-versionnumber/plugins

Considering problems of incompatibility and other issues in using the plugins, see this related answer

To convert audio files, see this question+answer.

Considering memory use, Deadbeef is much lighter than other players that might be considered foobar-like

enter image description here enter image description here

(here it's deadbeef 0.5.5 with gtk2 gui. I guess newer versions with gtk3 might be somewhat heavier but still the lightest in that list)

But coming back to Foobar 2000 itself:

  • Foobar2000 was always related in my mind to the use of a lot of addons; but only when monitoring a large media library accessed through the 'Album List' or the 'Facets' addons does it becomes a bit heavy through Wine
    enter image description here

The image above that shows the use of 92MB of RAM is related to the use of a 270 GB media library. Otherwise, Foobar2000 in Wine is very light even with many addons.

But even in this case it looks lighter than very recommendable Ubuntu native players and it is not heavier than it used to be in Windows with the same addons installed.

And what about it's version without manually added addons and naked interface ? It looks extremely light!

enter image description here

Also, considering the looks of Foobar in Wine, a good method of improving this is:

1. enable font smoothing - fire one after the other these lines in Terminal:

wget http://files.polosatus.ru/winefontssmoothing_en.sh

bash winefontssmoothing_en.sh

(select third option in terminal)

2. install a windows msstyle file in Wine/Configure Wine/Desktop Integration enter image description here

3. increase the screen resolution in Wine/Configure Wine/Graphics enter image description here

It comes to smth like this (but colors and fonts are customizable): enter image description here

share|improve this answer

Why no one mention DeadBeef http://deadbeef.sourceforge.net/?

share|improve this answer
superb handling of playlists and of media library with a special file browser –  cipricus Apr 3 '12 at 19:34

Try Guayadeque.

enter image description here

It is an extremely customizable music player, and should support most of the features you are looking for. I'm not sure if it will match foobar2000 100%, but at least it should fill the gap :)

share|improve this answer
++1 for Guayadeque –  Takkat May 1 '11 at 21:39
++1 for Guayadeque from me too! –  Rinzwind May 1 '11 at 21:43

Maybe you are happy with audacious Install audacious a lightweight skinnable player that can be extended with many plugins.

share|improve this answer

Wikipedia has a Comparison of audio player software which could be helpful.

Amarok seems to be a decent match functionality-wise, but it probably depends on which features are most important to you.

share|improve this answer

Honestly, I've been in the same position as you for years, looking for a comparable music player to Foobar2K in linux...

MPD & GMPC is good, as is gmusicbrowser... clementine is coming along nicely, but nothing can take the place of foobar for me, and thankfully with the newer builds of wine nothing has too - try installing winepulse from the ppa here https://launchpad.net/~c-korn/+archive/ppa.

Listening to Foobar 1.1.7 on Natty right now, and it runs flawlessly :)

share|improve this answer
That or you could look into Amarok, Banshee, or Rhythmbox –  zkriesse Jul 13 '11 at 4:35
daedbeef. as for Amarok, Banshee, or Rhythmbox, maybe having powerful new computers can be an obstacle against seeing that such players are excessively resource hungry and bloated considering what they do and what they ask (and considering the quality of other players like deadbeef, clementine or quod libet !) –  cipricus Apr 3 '12 at 19:55
without media library foobar is as light as deadbeef. with media library still lighter than Exaile, Quod Libet, Amarok, Banshee, or Rhythmbox –  cipricus Nov 16 '12 at 15:59

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.