Recommend free CD burning software
- Thread starter Souron
- Start date
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
I use Nero or Alcohol 120%
Both quite nice (well, Nero certainly is way too bloated to my taste) but not exactly free as the thread title says
Both quite nice (well, Nero certainly is way too bloated to my taste) but not exactly free as the thread title says
www.updatepack.nl has a nicely non-bloated version of Nero. Still costs the same as the full thing though.
Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
Ghost Ranger
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 357
The burning software built into XP- Yes it sucks, and w/o certain plugins doesn't support DVD/ .iso files, but it is fine for me.
Pentium
Digital Matter
Seconded
(not only is this the best burning software, its name actually means KDE Burn, Baby, Burn
Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
But can it run on windows?
Aramazd
Deity
No, it doesn't.
I'll be sure to get it after I burn my Ubuntu CD.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
I'll be sure to get it after I burn my Ubuntu CD.
You never actually specified what OS you were using
. K3b for burning and Amarok for music. Two programs that many windows users are missing out hugely on, because they are just simply amazing.Now this may be a little threadjacking but what's so special in these two that I should envy Linux users especially for them? IMGBurn seems to do everything I want burning software to do (i.e. burn the discs) and very rarely have I hoped that foobar2000 could do something it can't while listening to music. I'm just curious, not flaming
Pentium
Digital Matter
KDE4 is supposed to run on Windows too. The Win port is currently still in alpha, but they're using the Qt framework which is cross-platform.
What's special about K3B:
It does pretty much all the things Nero does. Apart from burning CD's, DVD's, ISO files and everything, it can rip both music and videos. CDDB is supported out of the box. I really don't know of a thing it misses.
What's special about Amarok:
For me, the way it handles collections, with either SQLite or MySQL database (configureable, depending on the size of your collection). It autodetects every music file in the specified directories and adds them to the collection. Mass renaming and collection organizing is quite easy, as it communication to media devices. And a huge amount of scripts. Really huge, from lyric search scripts to control from a desktop widget. Its only downside it (obviously) a rather large memory footprint.
They both also look really nice, are highly customizable, and each of them has a couple of different back-end engines to choose from.
What's special about K3B:
It does pretty much all the things Nero does. Apart from burning CD's, DVD's, ISO files and everything, it can rip both music and videos. CDDB is supported out of the box. I really don't know of a thing it misses.
What's special about Amarok:
For me, the way it handles collections, with either SQLite or MySQL database (configureable, depending on the size of your collection). It autodetects every music file in the specified directories and adds them to the collection. Mass renaming and collection organizing is quite easy, as it communication to media devices. And a huge amount of scripts. Really huge, from lyric search scripts to control from a desktop widget. Its only downside it (obviously) a rather large memory footprint.
They both also look really nice, are highly customizable, and each of them has a couple of different back-end engines to choose from.
Personally I don like that kind of bloat. I don't want a burning software that makes me coffee because I know my Moccamaster does it better
Can't see much foobar can't do (without plug-ins I have to manually rescan media library after adding files but it's only two clicks away). Otherwise foobar is on par. Some of the stuff may require scripting and some of it may be considered a bloat by me but that's not the point.
Fortunately foobar has rather small one. One of it's original bragging abilities was the ease it handled huge playlists and its smallish system requirements.
Strider
In Retrospect
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 8,984
You are missing the entire scope of scripts/features/etc. Amarok has. It's capabilities are massive. Foobar isn't even close to matching Amarok in configuration or features. Also being able to place your music collection into an actual database is awesome (and it's extremely simple).
Lyrics, Albums, Radio, new releases, Amarok handles pretty much everything. It can also normalize .mp3's a feature I have never seen in another music player.
That might be correct. I just don't see much I'd actually miss.
What's the actual benefit?
Lyrics: I personally prefer either a separate lyrics-tag or just a website. I see no point to let my mp3-player wander around the web.
Albums: Not sure what you mean. Pretty much any player recognizes album tags.
Radio: That clearly the most obvious flaw in foobar among the ones you've mentioned. On the other hand I don't listen to radio much.
New releases: Again, not sure what you mean. Foobar isn't a program for online music shopping, it's just for listening what you have. I don't need it to show me news.
Not fully sure about the terms but how does it differ from ReplayGain in foobar?
Similar threads
