MediaMonkey forum

I think i'm done with mediamonkey. I feel like they made so many weird decisions when developing there product. It was like they decided to throw logic out the window. With the release of 4.0, I as a gold member, had to repurchase a gold licence and hardly anything changed and a lot of the things I hate about it stayed. Anyone have any suggestions on an alternative to mediamonkey? I just downloaded MusicBee and it seems okay but just want to know what else is out there.

MediaMonkey 3!

There is NO alternative to MediaMonkey!

I dont want to go back to MM3 because it is insulting that they would make me pay for a new gold licence when they did very minor changes and call it a new version. Mediamonkey should be disgusted with themselves.

Actually there are huge changes in MediaMonkey 4, the addition of tabs, video capability, UPnP/DLNA, Art Browser to name a few. If you don't like the changes in the looks from MediaMonkey 3 you can change the skin (Tools > Options > Skins) and move the panels to your liking.
If you have any specific issues you should report them, there might be a solution for them already or once mentioned can be something that gets changed/implemented in a future version.
Lastly, there is a refund policy on license purchases so contact support to see if you qualify for one: http://www.mediamonkey.com/support/inde ... &_a=submit

chrislabs12 wrote:I dont want to go back to MM3 because it is insulting that they would make me pay for a new gold licence when they did very minor changes and call it a new version. Mediamonkey should be disgusted with themselves.

No one "made" you buy anything. You were welcome to test the standard version before buying just like anyone else.

Perhaps you should give foobar2000 a try. I've never come across such a great piece of software to handle your music. You can rate, tag and organize your music collection (i.e. convert, rename or move files according to specific patterns (i.e. move selcected files to: %album artist%/['('%date%')' ]%album%/[%discnumber%.]%tracknumber%. %title%), customize the UI almost at will, add numerous great plugins (i.e. dr-meter, podcast support, lyrics support, VST support), enable/configure DSP chains, set ReplayGain-behaviour, customize sort-schema of playlists or your library according to patterns and so much more.
But still, it's very lightweight and runs/starts faster than most of its competitors.
Of course,depending on how a clean foobar2000 installation suits you needs, you will have to spend some time to get used to it and if you like fancy UIs it will take even longer - unless you find a theme on the internet - but I think it's worth it.

nicholasstorm wrote:Hi
Definitely a newbie here. Permit a (perhaps) odd question. Before I dig in and explore (MM was recommended to me). What exactly is it that MM can do that Itunes can't (I'm a heavy itunes addict).
Just few words -- layperson terms. Thx.

The list is long, but for me the main thing is the robust querying capabilities, with Gold license you can see your data any way you want using "auto playlists" (in MM terms) (basically canned SQL queries). Now you can layer that capability with "collections" (also a MM term) for a very powerful database interface. Also MM will play any media format on the market, I use lossless (FLAC and APE) files a lot. The capability to script and automate the program is also something iTunes cant do (its programmed in VB similar to how you can automate Excel or Word with VB macros). The list is long, since the free version does collections try it out, the auto playlists are very similar to collections but collections are meant to be higher level "views" (in database terms) allowing you to section up your library into discreet massive "chunks". It cant hurt to try it.

iTunes vs MM - not even close.
MM actually manages the music the way you like it, iTunes kinds dictates what u can do.
With MM u kow you own the songs with iTunes looks like the songs are loaned to u.
In MM u can manually add lyrics, album art, auto playlist etc - u need to use it to appreciate it.
The ONLY thing that is good in iTunes is podcats management - MM 3 is not even close, but not many are too concerned about podcats.

As for the one seeking an alternative - its is going to be a long painful search.

So give MM a try. I have purchased MM4 but not installed it as yet because of the bugs I see being discussed.

Ricky

rctechy4 wrote:iTunes vs MM - not even close.
MM actually manages the music the way you like it, iTunes kinds dictates what u can do.
With MM u kow you own the songs with iTunes looks like the songs are loaned to u.
In MM u can manually add lyrics, album art, auto playlist etc - u need to use it to appreciate it.

You can do all of this with iTunes as well.

In fact iTunes can do most of what MM can do that isn't part of the scripted add ons.

The big difference is that with large libraries iTunes becomes unusable while MM has no problem with those.

There is no any alternative of mediamonkey.

Onweerwolf wrote:

rctechy4 wrote:iTunes vs MM - not even close.
MM actually manages the music the way you like it, iTunes kinds dictates what u can do.
With MM u kow you own the songs with iTunes looks like the songs are loaned to u.
In MM u can manually add lyrics, album art, auto playlist etc - u need to use it to appreciate it.

You can do all of this with iTunes as well.

In fact iTunes can do most of what MM can do that isn't part of the scripted add ons.

The big difference is that with large libraries iTunes becomes unusable while MM has no problem with those.

So what you are saying is that Itunes CAN play FLAC, APE, WavePak, etc. files out of the box at full bit rates? I have FLAC files ripped from LP's that are well over 6000 kbps due to the high sampling rate I used to rip the LP at 24 bits wide and 192kHz (raga turntable --> ortofon cartridge --> Musical Fidelity RIAA preamp --> RME ADI-2 D/A converter --> Computer AES/EBU (true 24 bit) input --> Audacity --> Hard Drive --> EAC --> FLAC). Does Itunes downgrade these rates? Hope not because they sound better than any CD and as good as the turntable. I'm not being rhetorical, just wondering if Itunes can perform at an audiophile level on a Windows machine. Also will it handle over 200,000 tracks of lossless files? For video can Itunes play VOB and FLV? I am not very familiar with Itunes but would like to get better informed.

I can vote for MediaJukeBox 14, but you have to use the old version 7 or 8 to be able to print nice covers.
Work both on Win7. Install 14 first or it will remove the old one.

windcrest77 wrote:

Onweerwolf wrote:

rctechy4 wrote:iTunes vs MM - not even close.
MM actually manages the music the way you like it, iTunes kinds dictates what u can do.
With MM u kow you own the songs with iTunes looks like the songs are loaned to u.
In MM u can manually add lyrics, album art, auto playlist etc - u need to use it to appreciate it.

You can do all of this with iTunes as well.

In fact iTunes can do most of what MM can do that isn't part of the scripted add ons.

The big difference is that with large libraries iTunes becomes unusable while MM has no problem with those.

So what you are saying is that Itunes CAN play FLAC, APE, WavePak, etc. files out of the box at full bit rates? I have FLAC files ripped from LP's that are well over 6000 kbps due to the high sampling rate I used to rip the LP at 24 bits wide and 192kHz (raga turntable --> ortofon cartridge --> Musical Fidelity RIAA preamp --> RME ADI-2 D/A converter --> Computer AES/EBU (true 24 bit) input --> Audacity --> Hard Drive --> EAC --> FLAC). Does Itunes downgrade these rates? Hope not because they sound better than any CD and as good as the turntable. I'm not being rhetorical, just wondering if Itunes can perform at an audiophile level on a Windows machine. Also will it handle over 200,000 tracks of lossless files? For video can Itunes play VOB and FLV? I am not very familiar with Itunes but would like to get better informed.

I'm not sure if iTunes downgrades the sound of your files but I see no reason why it would?

I'm convinced iTunes won't be practically operable with 200,000 tracks, no.

Not sure about video at all, as I don't use music players to play video.

Unless I am mistaken Monkey - as I have stated before - is the only media player that allows you to scan CD's without downloading the tracks and retains the information. You can then export the information to excel or whatever you like and even convert to a pdf or html. Very useful for insurance purposes and for sticking on a mobile device like a phone or hand held so that when you go shopping you don't buy any duplicates.

I've yet to try out 4.0 I like 3.0 and even used 2.0 today to restore all my lost files.

And finally: the folks on here have been great not just with the artwork of which many have spent countless hours designing but also the help and assistance.

I can't wait for a decent Windows tablet - Windows 8.0 That's when the cheeky Monkey will come in to its own.

KorkyKat wrote:Unless I am mistaken Monkey - as I have stated before - is the only media player that allows you to scan CD's without downloading the tracks and retains the information. You can then export the information to excel or whatever you like and even convert to a pdf or html. Very useful for insurance purposes and for sticking on a mobile device like a phone or hand held so that when you go shopping you don't buy any duplicates.

I've yet to try out 4.0 I like 3.0 and even used 2.0 today to restore all my lost files.

And finally: the folks on here have been great not just with the artwork of which many have spent countless hours designing but also the help and assistance.

I can't wait for a decent Windows tablet - Windows 8.0 That's when the cheeky Monkey will come in to its own.

Windows 8 is gonna blow the doors off the mobile world. The whole OS is supposed to become HTML5 based, meaning Windows itself will be inherently very tightly integrated with web mobility as to be indistinguishable.