Skip to main content

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: foo_musicbrainz (Read 207451 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #450
All right, so time for the most boring annoying reply: Got home, rebooted the computer, downloaded the betas, tried to get into precisely where it crashes - and am totally unable to reproduce. Damn ...

I might have gotten it wrong: Is this about searching, i.e. making queries MusicBrainz, or is it about what is written back to files after a search proved fruitful?
It's just searching to get results back. Very rarely will musicbrainz ever have "Limited Edition" or whatever in the album titles.
That's what I thought. This is for getting (more) hits. And because you will get the right hits - and then some - if you cut it off after some whole word, then there is not so much damage done by cutting off after "(" or "[" or "{"; at worst you get too many.

But likely the best would be to go for the full title first, and then a "found nothing, trying to find more"?
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #451
All right, so time for the most boring annoying reply: Got home, rebooted the computer, downloaded the betas, tried to get into precisely where it crashes - and am totally unable to reproduce. Damn ...
I can't decide if I should be happy or sad about that. :)

Quote
But likely the best would be to go for the full title first, and then a "found nothing, trying to find more"?
This is one of those things that is easier said than done. The problem is the multi-threaded nature. Essentially what happens is that regardless of search type (MBID, Artist/Album, TOC) we build out a request, and then it's handed off to another thread which makes the call and then a catchall callback takes the results and makes a request for each album in the results.

From this callback there's no non-hacky way to know what the original search type was, or how to get back to the original calling code block. Without some significant refactoring it becomes kind of a big mess of global variables and "if (callWasMadeAndNoResultsTryThis)".

I don't disagree with you that that's the way things should operate, but we're mostly stuck with trying to fix things up pre-search rather than post. I welcome all PRs though.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #452
More happysadness coming up, I managed to provoke crashes. Will PM you.

As for functionality ... what about a button with "for more hits, try instead [box pre-filled with]"? Then it will do the full routine first, and if the user is dissatisfied, re-run the whole routine with a shorter album title. Point is, user won't have to go back to the list of
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #453
Mostly happiness since people are reporting crashes but I hadn't seen them. Squashed two of them. Try out the new beta5 and let me know if you have issues.

 

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #454
Beta 6 fixes issues with dumb popups when aborting a search. It does not solve the odd crash when aborting, that I think is an foobar issue. Will be opening another thread for Peter to take a look at that.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #455
@MordredKLB
Thanks for your continued work on this component. I use it several times a day, I love it!

For a while I've been puzzled by this scenario: I try to tag an album by TOC..it fails. I then try using the artist/album and select the edition/release I want. The component then makes whatever adjustment to the tag contents, particularly title. However I have never been able to go back and try to retag this album using TOC. I would have thought that the first use would have adjusted the TOC to match the edition I chose. Any idea why this should be?

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #456
TOC needs track lengths (as read from files) to accurately match the TOC in MusicBrainz. Those are unaffected by updating tags.
High Voltage socket-nose-avatar

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #457
Peter helped me track down the last crash when aborting a search, I did a little more cleanup and have officially released 0.4.7. Doing a component update will pull it down for you.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #458
If you uncheck every metadata tag in Preferences > Tool > MusicBrainz Data, with Write MusicBrainz IDs enabled you get MUSICBRAINZ_...
ALBUMARTISTID
ALBUMID,
DISCID
RELEASEGROUPID
RELEASETRACKID
TRACKID
WORKID

But it will overwrite Album, Album Artist, Song, Date (and maybe genre). The only work around I have come up with is to call up Properties dialog for release you're tagging, then run Tagging > Get tags from MusicBrainz by TOC. After updating, cross-paste the overwritten tags from that propeties dialog window manually
I too would like to use this component just to get MBIDs, barcodes, and the like while leaving the rest of my tags unchanged. So let me echo this as a feature request to disable the overwriting of artist, title, etc.

I did find a different workaround, using masstagger to write artist, album artist, album, date, genre, and title to new tags: pre_artist, pre_albumartist, etc. I run the before_musicbrainz script first, do my musicbrainz stuff, and then copy everything back with the after_musicbrainz script. I suppose I could add actions to remove the "pre_" tags to the latter script, but I haven't; I figure I'll use tag sanitizer to do that and other things eventually.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #459
also would be great if it could load the relevant MusicBrainz web page if an id is present
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  ;~)

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #460
I too would like to use this component just to get MBIDs, barcodes, and the like while leaving the rest of my tags unchanged. So let me echo this as a feature request to disable the overwriting of artist, title, etc.

I did find a different workaround, using masstagger to write artist, album artist, album, date, genre, and title to new tags: pre_artist, pre_albumartist, etc. I run the before_musicbrainz script first, do my musicbrainz stuff, and then copy everything back with the after_musicbrainz script. I suppose I could add actions to remove the "pre_" tags to the latter script, but I haven't; I figure I'll use tag sanitizer to do that and other things eventually.
I've been thinking about this for a while because there are obviously some tags a user will probably never want to write, and then some tags a user may want to write sometimes and not others.

I can obviously expand the properties page out to include every. single. tag. but for plenty of fields (artist/album/song title in particular) users will commonly want to opt-in/opt-out of those on a case by case basis. There is a lot of information conveyed on the current tagger dialog but space is very limited (and the size can't be expanded due to small screen size issues) so I'm struggling with the best way to address this.

Masstagger is a smart solution, but also unfortunately it's the only halfway decent one you've got right now. Anyway, it's on the todo list.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #461
also would be great if it could load the relevant MusicBrainz web page if an id is present
Do you mean a right-click: "Open MB Release-Group page", "Open MB Recording page" option? Cause I like that idea.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #462
also would be great if it could load the relevant MusicBrainz web page if an id is present
Do you mean a right-click: "Open MB Release-Group page", "Open MB Recording page" option? Cause I like that idea.
Yes, exactly like the Discogs tagger does it, because I can then bind it to a button and open the appropriate page easily.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  ;~)

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #463
I've used foo_run for something like that. Add any service labels you want and put in a path that resembles whatever address a successful search result has. I have a few other services as well, since I usually end up searching for the album I want to tag there and tagging by album ID when I've found it.

Code: [Select]
Label               Path
MB Album ID         https://musicbrainz.org/release/%musicbrainz_albumid%
MB Artist + album   https://musicbrainz.org/taglookup/index?tag-lookup.artist=$replace(%artist%, ,+)&tag-lookup.release=$replace(%album%, ,+)
MB Barcode          https://musicbrainz.org/search?type=release&query=barcode%%3A$if2(%barcode%,%upc%)&advanced=1
MB Catalog no.      https://musicbrainz.org/search?query=catno%%3A$replace(%catalognumber%, ,+)&advanced=1&type=release

They're also then available for use in buttons under the context menu commands as "Run service/MB Album ID", or what have you.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #464
@MordredKLB
Since it sounds like you may be considering a few modifications to this component...

Would you please consider a fall-back mechanism where-by if tag by TOC fails rather than report no matches could you display the usual tag by artist & album window. If the user doesn't want that he can close it or he can proceed as normal.

Also, in the tagging window - bottom pane where you display: Filename, number and Title, could you make these columns auto size. In most cases there seems to be enough room. This would also be nice in the upper releases pane but there may not be enough room there.

Thanks

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #465
Would you please consider a fall-back mechanism where-by if tag by TOC fails rather than report no matches could you display the usual tag by artist & album window. If the user doesn't want that he can close it or he can proceed as normal.
If it were easy I would have done it already. With the async nature and multi-threadedness of it there's not a "clean" way to do it. It bugs the hell out of me too (enough that I never use TOC) so maybe I can think of something.

Quote
Also, in the tagging window - bottom pane where you display: Filename, number and Title, could you make these columns auto size. In most cases there seems to be enough room. This would also be nice in the upper releases pane but there may not be enough room there.
I noticed this the other day. Will see why it's not autosizing like I'd expect it should. I think it's because there's a max size on filename and the rest are auto, but I'd need to confirm. If that's the case, it may not change since I just set the column attributes and PPUI (?) does the work and filename is the least important of those columns.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #466
I'm having trouble getting tags for one particular album even though I can find it on the MusicBrainz site. (release pagerelease group page). I generally search there, find the id in the url, and get the tags by pasting the album id or release group id into the appropriate dialog from the context menu. For this one album, the tagger come up with "No matching results were found."

I'm not sure why just this album so far hasn't worked. There's only the one digital release; does there need to be a physical one at MusicBrainz too?

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #467
The only thing the component cares about when matching results is that the number of tracks selected matches the release. I don't have any albums with 22 tracks but I selected 22 tracks in a playlist and tested with the release ID and it works.



Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #468
Ah yes, that's it; for some reason, track 6 hadn't made it to that folder. Thanks.  :)

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #469
The only thing the component cares about when matching results is that the number of tracks selected matches the release. I don't have any albums with 22 tracks but I selected 22 tracks in a playlist and tested with the release ID and it works.
I've wondered if I should loosen this restriction in some way. In some situations it's super helpful (old albums with 70 releases but I'm trying to tag a deluxe edition with bonus tracks that only has 2 releases), but when there are no matching counts, it would be convenient to show the other non-matching ones. Would also be helpful if I just needed to fix tags on a few tracks out of an entire album.

I've done this in another tagger I wrote, but the logic gets complicated fast since you'd need to take into account disc/tracknumbers. Curious how important this is to people since it's a substantial dev effort, and would require rethinking some UX to ensure that you don't accidentally overwrite a track you didn't want to, but would ultimately make things a lot more powerful.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #470
I've wondered if I should loosen this restriction in some way. In some situations it's super helpful (old albums with 70 releases but I'm trying to tag a deluxe edition with bonus tracks that only has 2 releases), but when there are no matching counts, it would be convenient to show the other non-matching ones. Would also be helpful if I just needed to fix tags on a few tracks out of an entire album.

I've done this in another tagger I wrote, but the logic gets complicated fast since you'd need to take into account disc/tracknumbers. Curious how important this is to people since it's a substantial dev effort, and would require rethinking some UX to ensure that you don't accidentally overwrite a track you didn't want to, but would ultimately make things a lot more powerful.

It would improve the tagging of incomplete albums with the addition of the possibility of remove or rearrange the tracks.

Also with albums that have tracks with multiple parts that sometimes are splited or joined and don't match with the release in musicbrainz

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #471
@MordredKLB
Whilst you are looking at the comparison of tracks software, it think it would be great if you could have some way to identify mis-matching tracks (colour?). In an album there can be a couple of tracks with tracknumbers swapped or a slightly different spelling. Rather than having to read each track title and compare it with the one suggested, having a mis-match indicated with, say red text, would be my ideal.

Also, just a reminder about the fall-back from TOC match to artist/album without user interaction would be good.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #472
Whilst you are looking at the comparison of tracks software, it think it would be great if you could have some way to identify mis-matching tracks (colour?). In an album there can be a couple of tracks with tracknumbers swapped or a slightly different spelling. Rather than having to read each track title and compare it with the one suggested, having a mis-match indicated with, say red text, would be my ideal.
Yeah, I've thought of that myself. It's difficult to do properly and I think would generate a ton of false "positives". The currently tagged song title isn't displayed in the grid, and adding it would probably not be helpful -- so then I'm comparing the MB title (or artist, etc) to information that isn't visible. It may or may not be visible in the song title (artist often isn't at least), so then do I highlight everything in red and force the user to mouse over to get a tooltip or something to see what the difference is? It's not straightforward.

Quote
Also, just a reminder about the fall-back from TOC match to artist/album without user interaction would be good.
As I've stated at least 2-3x before, this would be great, but there isn't a clean way to do it. It's still on my list of things to consider if I can think of a good way to do it that just doesn't become a maintenance headache. You're welcome to either make a pull-request or stop asking. :)

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #473
It would improve the tagging of incomplete albums with the addition of the possibility of remove or rearrange the tracks.
Yeah, but again there's lots of problems to solve.

Quote
Also with albums that have tracks with multiple parts that sometimes are splited or joined and don't match with the release in musicbrainz
Couldn't help with that though. If MB doesn't have a release with the tracks split what am I supposed to do with track 4, 5 and 6 which are a three part suite that on some copies is just track 4, but your web release has them split? There's no way to know what the split stuff would be. Be aware though, you can edit the track information yourself before hitting the tag button.

Re: foo_musicbrainz

Reply #474
Understandable. Sure it could be not trivial
Maybe i didn't explain myself correctly with the example. I'm not suggesting that the component resolve the conflict by itself. I will be more than happy if i could load the release. This could give a lot of shared tags (IDs, label, etc) and the amount of manual adjustment will be reduced a lot.
So I was trying to say that only with a relax in the number of files to match releases will make things more versatile.
   



 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021