Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Rhythmbox vs qmmp, the Slant community recommends qmmp for most people. In the question“What are the best audio players for UNIX-like systems?” qmmp is ranked 15th while Rhythmbox is ranked 22nd. The most important reason people chose qmmp is:
Qmmp allows the user to drastically change its look via skins. It can use Winamp and Xmms skins, as well as a list of 12 skins made specifically for qmmp that can be found [here](http://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/files/skins/qmmp-skins/).
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Loads of features
Rhythmbox allows you to extract CDs to MP3s while listening, and you can also burn CDs from playlists. You can listen to Last.fm and podcasts through Rhythmbox, which has support for lyrics and more.
Pro Plugins add only the features you want
Rhythmbox has built-in support for first and third party plugins. Instead of adding a bunch of features not everyone will use, you can download just the plugins that you want.
Pro Podcast management
Rhythmbox features built-in podcast management.
Pro Pre-packaged!
Rhythmbox comes pre-packaged with distros like Ubuntu, so you can just start listening to your favorite music - no apt-get install!
Pro Internet radio
Rhythmbox has built-in support for users so that they can add their own streaming audio / internet radio channels.
Pro Reliable
Pro Good organization
Music can be browsed by the usual artist and album, but Rhythmbox also allows for genres which aren't supported by all music players. It also has a very useful queue box.
Pro Offers some skinning options
Qmmp allows the user to drastically change its look via skins. It can use Winamp and Xmms skins, as well as a list of 12 skins made specifically for qmmp that can be found here.
Pro Small single-window interface
Unlike more popular players that draw a huge window taking up the entire screen, with tons of knobs and menus popping out in new windows, qmmp gives you a single tiny window (that looks pretty much the same as Winamp used to look) with the basic controls and the playlist. The rest is available through a menu.
Pro Lightweight and supports almost all formats
Pro Plugin based
You can extend it with plugins.
Pro Qt-App
No matter what OS or desktop you use Qmmp will integrate well
Pro Clean and simple interface
Pro Depends on libaries
It depends on libaries instead of big fat toolkits like gstreamer.
Pro integrated file browser
Pro Supports cue sheets
Cons
Con Buggy and slow when there's a large music collection
Can't cope with a large music collection.
Con Not crossplatform
The only bad part of RhythmBox is that I cannot install it on other OS's.
Con No album artist field
Most other modern music players come with an Album Artist Field when sorting music. Collaboration is very common these days and often a song would feature multiple artists, but sometimes it's easier to just sort for Album Artists. It's a rather simple feature, yet Rhythmbox has repeatedly shot down its users for making that request.
Con No folder browse/add-to-playlist view
So few music players seem to let you browse by your directory structure and add songs to a playlist that way. That's unfortunate because it's a really useful feature and eliminates the problem of mistagged music.
Con Still no built-in equilizer
Rhythmbox has been around for a good while now and yet there is still no default built-in equalizer. An equalizer allows users to tweak the audio to their preference. It can also help compensate for hardware (for example, lots of headphones are bass heavy, but to get a more balanced sound an equalizer can tune the bass down a touch).
Con Crashes often when there's a large music collection
Con No CUE file support
Con Interface is not particularly intuitive
