Music player that allows large playlists (25000+ songs)

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

Hello everyone,

I am wondering if anyone knows a linux mp3 player that supports a lot of files, right now I have about 25000 songs and there are not many players that support that well.
The latest Amarok (still ~x86 I think) works but takes about 130megs of memory and thats a little over the top for me.

Ive also tried mpd but it just crashes with a large playlist and when I try to enlarge the playlist in the options then it just stops working (or I'm doing something wrong) so I'm wondering what music player for linux does support lists as large as this one.
I prefer sql based players like amarok since they are usually a bit more powerfull but thats not really needed.

*sigh* if Amarok would just keep everything in the mysql database and not putting the entire list in the program then it would work great.

So...is there a player like this around or will I have to write a player myself?
_________________
Have you ever noticed how stable windows is?
Neither have I

alphonce · Apprentice Joined: 10 Oct 2004 Posts: 184 Location: Sweden

Are you really listening to all of those? I mean 25000 song, let's say that the average length of every song is about 3 min, then it will take about 50 days to listen to all the songs. I'm sure you can clean up some gigs of songs.

You can use beep-media-player, i tested to add a couple of songs, i got bored at 50000 songs. so it will make up for your demands.
_________________
no computer at the moment! :cry:

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:29 pm Post subject:

ok defenetly

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:46 pm Post subject:

np @ all

_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

Beep-media-player is working but scrolling and searching is a bit slow, but it does work

And rhythmbox is still busy adding the music (for the last hour or so :rolleyes:
But they both seem to work pretty good

Btw are there qt based applications that can do it aswell?
Since I run kde I do prefer qt :wink:

But rhytmbox seems like a good option so far, beep is a little to slow right now but looks very good aswell.

[edit]Rhytmbox is (finally) done with adding all the music but since the memory usage is also around 100megs it isn't really usable either, I guess beep-media-player is the only usable player right now :roll:

_________________
Have you ever noticed how stable windows is?
Neither have I

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:42 pm Post subject:

hu ???? what do you mean ??
rhythmebox is the ppl uses when they have loads of musics because it allows you to seperate the music by type genre etc and so one bmp is good also, but still has a lot to go on ...
but what is you purpose btw ??
just add all them to playlist and play them or you intend something else ?
_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

malloc · l33t Joined: 19 Sep 2003 Posts: 762

mpd + ncmpc...
_________________
--> Linux ### 2.6.11-ck2 #1 Sat Mar 12 20:21:30 WET 2005 i686 GNU/Linux <--

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

I have restarted rhythmbox now and it uses less memory then before but still a lot if you ask me.
According to System monitor it is using 104.4 MB of memory right now, and starting the app took a few minutes since it had to load all of the songs :roll:

Not really an option like that.
_________________
Have you ever noticed how stable windows is?
Neither have I

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

placeholder · Advocate Joined: 07 Feb 2004 Posts: 2500

Do you have religious reasons for not organizing your music into folders and then making separate playlists, or has that thought just never came to mind?

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:47 pm Post subject:

Yup if you have so many mp3 files just separte them into a bunch of directorys and then just load the ones you whant ..
separate them by Genre or something like date, it would be much easyer or you can always rm *.mp3

_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:45 pm Post subject:

Damn, you dont listen to about 60% of all those musics you have i bet, simply split them nito folders, thats the easyest way to do it and i was just joking when i said that

_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

codergeek42 · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:47 pm Post subject:

If you want a Qt/KDE app, I've heard nothing but good things about amaroK... (I've never used it. I use Rhythmbox.)
_________________
~~ Peter: Programmer, Mathematician, STEM & Free Software Advocate, Enlightened Agent, Transhumanist, Fedora contributor
Who am I? :: EFF & FSF

Shadow Skill · Veteran Joined: 04 Dec 2004 Posts: 1023

I would go with Amarok its almost as powerful as foobar2k or Winamp and uses a library style interface if you are into that sort of thing, but it doesn't sacrifice power unlike other players. [cough rythmbox cough] The only bad things about it are:

1. It's a qt app. [I just cant find any good looking qt app anywhere its sad really.]
2. It needs kdelibs [can take a while to compile if you never did it before and don't have ccache enabled in your features section, it takes me about an hour or so.]
3. see number one.
4. For some strange reason it has started to depend on kdemultimedia for the akode engine which also ends up installing other crap like Juk and other annoying audio apps. It seems like at some point xine engine support became broken and they tacked on kdemultimedia to make the thing actually work. [I hope its just my setup that is broken somewhere.]

Other than those things Amarok is great, far better than any of the other players out there for Linux.
Ps. I only mentioned Xine engine because gstreamer is really crappy and I don't consider it a framework for anything at this point.
_________________
Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

mascanho · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:19 pm Post subject:

damn how could i forget amarok ...

_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

Well like I've said before (in my start post) I have tried amaroK but it really sucks up memory, I have started amaroK again and according to system monitor it is using 182,8 MB of memory.
I can take a little but that is really way too much for me, thats with amaroK 1.21 so maybe I should try another version but like this its just a little too heavy for me.
_________________
Have you ever noticed how stable windows is?
Neither have I

mascanho · Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:52 am Post subject:

and has me and others have said instead of trying diferent programs and versions why dont you simply separate your music ?
its not amarok fault is probably yours, who told you to have 2xxxxxxxxxxxxxx musics in one directory and in one playlist

_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

nevynxxx · Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:04 pm Post subject:

mascanho · Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:49 pm Post subject:

trust me if you put it into seperate folder it would be much easyer , i simply dunno whats the purpose of having 2xxxxxxxxx mp3 on a single folder and want to listen to them all at once
_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141

mascanho · Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:54 pm Post subject:

ok, but if rhythmbox or amarok doesnt go for you i dunno what will serve your purposes ... just in case have you tried mpd ???
_________________
Flatland Life is a Choice !
emerge avatar

Rick · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 18 Dec 2002 Posts: 141