When comparing qmmp vs MPV, the Slant community recommends qmmp for most people. In the question“What are the best music players for Linux?” qmmp is ranked 12th while MPV is ranked 15th. 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/).
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
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 Clean and simple interface
Pro Depends on libaries
It depends on libaries instead of big fat toolkits like gstreamer.
No matter what OS or desktop you use Qmmp will integrate well
Pro Supports cue sheets
Pro Needs no additional codecs
Everything MPV needs to play media files is contained within which means no outside codecs are needed.
Pro Minimal interface
Click to open files and get Video with sound (and passthrough of codecs like DTS etc) for a perfect cinema experience. Works okay for many files.
Default window is not much more than a title bar - and if you drag/resize the window it resizes the video and leaves no empty areas. There is no visible control or display unless you use mouse/keyboard over the window.
This is the best player to use unless you're going for a media center (then use MPV based Plex Media Player to display and play the Plex Server library).
Pro Integrates with streaming services
When used with youtube-dl.
Pro Caches livestreams
Intelligently caches livestreams and enables jumping within the cached stream.
Pro Extremely responsive
Con Interface is not particularly intuitive
Con Lack of a typical GUI can be jarring to some
The minimal interface comes at the cost of beginner-friendliness. You need to know keyboard shortcuts by heart, settings are set in text files, right-clicking won't bring up a menu, etc.