When comparing TuneBrowser vs Resonic, the Slant community recommends Resonic for most people. In the question“What are the best audio players for Windows?” Resonic is ranked 15th while TuneBrowser is ranked 29th.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Really modern, sharp UI
Pro Professional, fast, high quality, nice UI
Very nice and professional function for Hi-Res music and devices. It supports playing DSD and almost all kind of music media files, and it also supports ASIO and WASAPI devices and it has very detail to do those settings. Not to mention, it has really professional and clean looking UI design for lots of information like audio streaming, sampling frequency, playback mode...etc.
Pro Portable version available
Pro Clean interface
Pro Fast
Pro Lightweight
About 8 MB, and about 11 MB with the integrated Soundfont for its MIDI playback synthesizer. Native application, no dependencies (no .NET runtime).
Pro Has a waveform seekbar and analyzers
Has a big single-click waveform seekbar and three real-time analyzer visualizations by default.
Pro Pure sound
Pro Supports all formats
WAV, BWF, RF64, AIFF, AIFC, FLAC, APE, ALAC, WV, TTA, DSF, DFF, MP3, MP2, MP1, M4A, MP4, AAC, MPC, MP+, OGG, OPUS, SPX, WMA, WMA Pro, WMA Lossless, MP4, WMV, AVI (certain codecs), MID, RMI, KAR, IT, XM, S3M, MTM, MOD
Pro WASAPI/ASIO support
High-end audio cards can be easily used to their full potential without any additional software due to WASAPI (Player and Pro) and ASIO (Pro) support.
Pro Most actions can be done with a single click
Most actions can be done without having to double-click. Things like navigating folders, playing files, seeking audio, changing volume are all done with a single-click.
Cons
Con Full version is a bit pricey (£25.99) for an app that is still in development
Con No playlists
Or not yet, at least in the forums they say they're working on it