Good Results for MM

Discussion about anything that might be of interest to MediaMonkey users.

Moderator: Gurus

What Do you like best about MediaMonkey?

You may select 1 option

 
 
View results

Blake
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia

Good Results for MM

Post by Blake »

I did a quick google search on music manager and MM was the 3rd one down the list :D ! No sight of iTunes in the first 5 pages... or any other well known music managers. Good work Mediamonkey!
Lowlander
Posts: 58799
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 5:53 pm

Post by Lowlander »

Because it's the best way to manage my music.
trixmoto
Posts: 10024
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:28 am
Location: Hull, UK
Contact:

Post by trixmoto »

I voted for scripts, but I feel bad about this in a way. The main reason I like MM is that it is so powerful and fast, and provides pretty much everything I need. But I do love this fact that I can create more custom workflows by writing my own scripts, which allows MM to continue being streamlined and not bloat with everyone's own idea of a good feature.
Download my scripts at my own MediaMonkey fansite.
All the code for my website and scripts is safely backed up immediately and for free using Dropbox.
Bex
Posts: 6316
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:44 am
Location: Sweden

Post by Bex »

Lowlander wrote:Because it's the best way to manage my music.
x2
Advanced Duplicate Find & Fix Find More From Same - Custom Search. | Transfer PlayStat & Copy-Paste Tags/AlbumArt between any tracks.
Tagging Inconsistencies Do you think you have your tags in order? Think again...
Play History & Stats Node Like having your Last-FM account stored locally, but more advanced.
Case & Leading Zero Fixer Works on filenames too!

All My Scripts
Nebbin
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:52 am
Location: Australia

Post by Nebbin »

I agree with the above that it's more about the ability to manage my collection than anything else. For a large music collection, I've found MM is in a league of it's own due to it's speed, compatibility and script customisation. Sure, there's more that I'd like to see (bring on v3!) but I'm happy with my choice so far.

Obviously I also use MM for general playback, but typically use N.I.'s Traktor for parties or other events. (Traktor, though, is far inferior in terms of compatibility and organisational tools hence my need for MM.)
Blake
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia

hmmm

Post by Blake »

I wonder why nobody is voting for the look? That might prove something.
paulmt
Posts: 1170
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:06 pm

Post by paulmt »

Well, I do like the look, but that's because I like a database type of layout.
Of course I would like to be able to skin more easily than the current skinning engine allows, but like others have said, for me it's the total package.
The ability to organise my music collection and present in a way I find appealing.
I also like the scripting ability of MM

So, I suppose my vote is "good all round player, though thats not exactly what I think either.
Lowlander
Posts: 58799
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 5:53 pm

Post by Lowlander »

I didn't choose MediaMonkey on looks, actually I choose no software on looks. I choose them on functionality, what they can do for me. If you talk about looks I would only consider MM and WMP as the rest really looks bad.
I also converted to MM before the current look and I actually like the look (blue skin not the new iTunes ripoff skin).
I myself came for DJ2000 which was really bad in comparison with MM. MM got me on it's management qualities as I mentioned above.
Steegy
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 7:17 pm

Post by Steegy »

I feel the same as Trixmoto

and

I wonder what blakeloth1 means with "The compatibility".
Extensions: ExternalTools, ExtractFields, SongPreviewer, LinkedTracks, CleanImport, and some other scripts (Need Help with Addons > List of All Scripts).
Hooah
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 6:30 pm

Post by Hooah »

None of the above.


I like it for it's management ability. Easy to fix the tags. I also like how it can handle large libraries. 65k songs and MM chugs along.
wokou
pah68
Posts: 1504
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 5:26 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by pah68 »

Hooah wrote:None of the above.


I like it for it's management ability. Easy to fix the tags. I also like how it can handle large libraries. 65k songs and MM chugs along.
Ditto
Image
Image
Blake
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia

Post by Blake »

Steegy wrote: I wonder what blakeloth1 means with "The compatibility".
By that I mean the types of songs it can play and also that it can use Winamp
plugins/skins
Nebbin
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:52 am
Location: Australia

Post by Nebbin »

Hooah wrote:I also like how it can handle large libraries. 65k songs and MM chugs along.
I know this was a major factor for me staying with MM all this time. Testing other software with even 20k tracks showed serious slowdowns. Has anyone tested large libraries with the new WMP 11 Beta 2? (I found Beta 1 was still slow, but I'm wondering if any improvements were made with the later release.)

As far as the "look" - MM's GUI does seem designed more for functionality than (eg) the eye-candy look of WMP 11, or the glossy simplicitude of iTunes. This is not to say MM doesn't look good (I like the blue skin) just not as pretty as some.
Blake
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:39 am
Location: Geelong, Victoria, Australia

Post by Blake »

Sorry for posting in an old topic but...

HAVE A LOOK AT THIS!!

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traff ... monkey.com
MarineBrat
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:12 am
Location: Loony left coast, USA.

Post by MarineBrat »

I like it because it's a DATABASE first and foremost. I can do any type of manipulation I like by simply dumping a table out to dBase, using dBase tools to rearrange data, and then host it back to MDB. Then I sync the database changes into the MP3's.
Post Reply