Skip to main content
Topic: foo_discogs (Read 869186 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2800
Folks, if you're using Windows 7 your OS is now out of support.
The internet cannot be expected to continue to support out-of-date security protocols because you want to use an out-of-support OS.
You continue to use Windows 7 at your own risk.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2801
Foobar2000 discogs tagging stopped working, ruining my life. Also I messed up my OAuth settings in Foobar while trying to troubleshoot this. How do I get a PIN CODE from discogs? It been 2 years since I authorized it I forgot everything.  I use foo_discogs component everyday and really hope it works soon. please help thanks


Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2803
Also, the TLS registry change to 1.2  you were referring to is as follows (in a .reg file):
Yeah, thx. But mine already looks just like that and still nudda.

You continue to use Windows 7 at your own risk.
I hear you. And already have alternative systems for this very reason. But experience has taught me to only ever update when I'm forced to. And even then, I'll try and hang on as long as I can. It's caused me to finally try out the newer QT version though. It definitely has benefits, but operationally, I'm finding it more awkward than NS; like how I can't just sort a column by size -- got to try and setup filters instead. We'll see. I'll have to migrate over at some point so we'll see how this trial goes.

I messed up my OAuth settings in Foobar while trying to troubleshoot this. How do I get a PIN CODE from discogs? 
I think I did the same. Couldn't get it to work again after having messed with it. The good news is it's mad easy though (on a working system anyway).

Go to Settings>Applications in your Discogs Profile. Then either revoke the existing token, or go to 'Manage your applications and API keys here'. From here, you can generate tokens but I'm not 100% sure that applies here. It didn't seem to for me, earlier.

What I had to do (it's amazing how quickly you start to forget) was go to the Configuration>OAuth in foo_discogs and start from there.  Step 1. Click the Authorize button. That opened a page on Discogs that gave me a code (looks something like eFIGuJMGLc) which you then copy and paste into the field next to the button. Step 2 - press the 'Generate' button to populate step 2's fields. Step 3 - Test to see if it works. To help avoid confusion, you might wanna clear out all text boxes before starting. It's as easy as that though (unless I've mis-remembered something already).

Please, tell us more in detail.
Names, links. So we can check.
word. I don't know of ANY site that rivals Discogs. None of the other music databases I've tried or that tag editors often come compatible with come close to giving me the amount and type of info I need. I'd be screwed without it, as the past 24 hours have reminded me.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2804
btw, I love the fact we can export and import our settings so easily. But while doing it I figured I'd ask about something I could never get to work right before.

I want the Label field to be populated, but I've noticed if it's set to $unique(%<RELEASE_LABELS_NAME>%) it doesn't work (or at least, they don't show up in another tag editor). However, if I paste the same string into the COPYRIGHT field, it shows up in the Copyright tag, as expected. This means I have to then use another tag editor which has a rare feature that lets you copy data from one tag file to another at the click of a button.

This works great but it's an extra step that I could do without. Plus you either have to go back and clean up the Copyright field or leave it falsely displaying the label name.

From what I can tell (but would love someone to confirm), there is no copyright info from Discogs, nor seemingly a way to display it in foo_discogs so in that sense, sacrificing the copyright field is a small price to pay. But I'd much prefer to set it all up properly in the first place.

Can anyone shed any light as to why this might be happening and how to fix it? I have a similar issue with getting the Cat No. field populated. I have t do it via the Composer field and then copy/paste as before. Thx

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2805
Folks, if you're using Windows 7 your OS is now out of support.
The internet cannot be expected to continue to support out-of-date security protocols because you want to use an out-of-support OS.
You continue to use Windows 7 at your own risk.

This is bullshit, and an assumption you have to rely on microsoft to protect you. I never update my OS from first install, and have zero problems. Zero. You don't update unless you have problems, or are simply prone to falling for traps. I don't have any problems.
Just because Microsoft decided to end their updates to patch holes in the ones they created in their operating system as they went, causing it to become more vulnerable, and bloated, and slow, doesn't suddenly mean that some how I, personally, am at risk...

Besides, I have another box dualed with 8/10 and it doesn't work there either. If discogs wants to be in league with MS then I'll just tag with musicbrainz, it's not that big a deal.

there are fine alternatives if discogs just up and decided to give us the middle finger.
Please, tell us more in detail.
Names, links. So we can check.

https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_musicbrainz is one. For "Album ID", if you want to use that, it's just the MBID under details on musicbrainz like so: https://musicbrainz.org/release/0916d462-2814-4f01-9c04-29c7723e48c2/details - or, it's just the number after the /release/. Unlike the discogs API, there's nothing special you have to handshake like with discogs (they don't log your actions)...

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2806
Besides, I have another box dualed with 8/10 and it doesn't work there either. If discogs wants to be in league with MS then I'll just tag with musicbrainz, it's not that big a deal.

Lol, enjoy


Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2808
there are fine alternatives if discogs just up and decided to give us the middle finger.
Please, tell us more in detail.
Names, links. So we can check.

https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_musicbrainz is one. For "Album ID", if you want to use that, it's just the MBID under details on musicbrainz like so: https://musicbrainz.org/release/0916d462-2814-4f01-9c04-29c7723e48c2/details - or, it's just the number after the /release/. Unlike the discogs API, there's nothing special you have to handshake like with discogs (they don't log your actions)...
Thats just one single alternative? And, its not really an alternative, its maybe a tiny addition (as a f2k component, I don't talk about picard or the MB-database itself).

To be honest, MB has good a lot of data, but the implementation into the f2k compoent is the worst (or better ridiculous) I ever seen and used. (No offence here to the developers or any user, its just my usecase which don't fit to such a poorly equipped software.)

One can use them, of course, but if you want to tag more than 5 Albums a day you're lost.

Search results suck. Most of the time, I get zero results. Not even a selection of similar searchterms. I have to go to the MB release page and copy the MBID manually and paste it into the component to get the correct tags. While this is easy possible, it takes too much time to work with.

There is NO flexibillity with the tags the component writes as in the discogs component. (Check the Formatting Strings and  Formatting Syntax from the fine discogs component! Hell, zoomorph did such a tremendous work here! Giving us the most flexibillity a f2k component has ever had! I have rarely seen such a flexibly configurable, fast, and robust software in commercial fields)

I could continue to rant, but this thread is not about ranting, its about supporting the fine discogs component. ;-D

And I don't have any usefull to add here (making the component work again), so I will wait a couple of days and cross my fingers that somebody find a solution for us all. Or at least, a workaround or something, which not results in upgrading the operating system to Win10....


Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2809
What I had to do (it's amazing how quickly you start to forget) was go to the Configuration>OAuth in foo_discogs and start from there.  Step 1. Click the Authorize button. That opened a page on Discogs that gave me a code (looks something like eFIGuJMGLc) which you then copy and paste into the field next to the button. Step 2 - press the 'Generate' button to populate step 2's fields. Step 3 - Test to see if it works. To help avoid confusion, you might wanna clear out all text boxes before starting. It's as easy as that though (unless I've mis-remembered something already).

Ok thanks, I tried this and get the following when I click Authorize button

Error: Network exceptionNetwork authentication error (80090326)

Sorry a newbie here, don't know how to properly quote someone, but top was a previous reply I am responding too from DJRenFromDonFM

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2810
It looks like there is a TLS handshake failure when attempting to connect. My guess is that Discogs disallowed all the TLS 1.2 ciphers supported by Windows 7. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this can chime in.

Someone could try asking on the Discogs API forum. However, as was mentioned, they are assholes so I wouldn't be too hopeful about them helping.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2811
One can use them, of course, but if you want to tag more than 5 Albums a day you're lost.
I've done more than 5 a day, so I'm not sure what you're having to do to where you'd be lost... grabbing tags is hardly a strenuous task or difficult with either of these components. I like discogs foobar tagger as much as everyone else, but I'm not going to change my damn OS for it, that's just plain stupidity.
I don't know what you're doing, and I'm not going to defend one component over another. You asked for an alternative, that's an alternative, and it works fine. They each do the job of tagging accurately. If it doesn't work for what ever you're doing than don't use it, what can I tell you - do what you're gonna do.


Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2812
It looks like there is a TLS handshake failure when attempting to connect. My guess is that Discogs disallowed all the TLS 1.2 ciphers supported by Windows 7. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this can chime in.

Someone could try asking on the Discogs API forum. However, as was mentioned, they are assholes so I wouldn't be too hopeful about them helping.
Would it be possible to ghost the header sent to them, I wonder. Like x-forwarding a different OS that can be specified directly into the component. Seems possible.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2813

It looks like there is a TLS handshake failure when attempting to connect. My guess is that Discogs disallowed all the TLS 1.2 ciphers supported by Windows 7. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this can chime in.

Someone could try asking on the Discogs API forum. However, as was mentioned, they are assholes so I wouldn't be too hopeful about them helping.
Would it be possible to ghost the header sent to them, I wonder. Like x-forwarding a different OS header that can be specified directly into the component. Seems possible.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2814
It looks like there is a TLS handshake failure when attempting to connect. My guess is that Discogs disallowed all the TLS 1.2 ciphers supported by Windows 7. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this can chime in.
Yeah, it has to be Discogs. It's like I literally watched them switch it off before my eyes. It would also explain why none of the previous fixes are working either. As much as I'd like to resolve it, I need to keep it moving so I'll do the work I need to do on the Win10 machine for now. Appreciate you chiming in though. Helps to confirm which way to go.
Someone could try asking on the Discogs API forum. However, as was mentioned, they are assholes so I wouldn't be too hopeful about them helping.
I vote refried. You seem like you got the right energy. Go give them some of that rah rah talk. :D

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2815
ok, so I've lived with and worked around this issue for years, but it's time to try and get to the bottom of it, as I'm clearly lacking some understanding here. Hoping someone can help. I've screen-shotted the process to hopefully make it a bit easier to convey and to identify what's going on.

01. foo_discogs: copyright and label tags being mapped


02. foo_discogs: data confirmed showing in foo prior to tagging


03. Tag&Rename: data present is in the composer field but not the copyright field


04. Tag&Rename: the label and cat no tag should be populated but aren't


05. VLC: some data has been passed to the tags, but some not


06. VLC: data present in metadata, but not in tags


Just to confrim, these are mp3 files, though I regularly work with flac and mp4.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2816
I vote refried. You seem like you got the right energy. Go give them some of that rah rah talk. :D
I appreciate the vote of confidence, haha. But, I've tried to work with them while helping build yadg, and they are just unbelievably stubborn, arrogant and anal retentive. They will not budge even when it comes to simple things like proper song titles. For instance, if a title is lowercase or a word in it is lowercase, literally by the artist, they change it to upper case to follow their half-assed guidelines - causing the majority of tags that people get from them to be incorrect.
They're just a nightmare, and the only way to circumvent their horseshit is to make work-a-rounds from your end. This is why I'm contemplating a spoof header so they think it's a different OS for the handshake to get information. But I can't do that, bubbleguuum would.

It's strange, my python script to grab information: https://pastebin.com/raw/hk7ajVbt
Works fine from a non win8-10 OS. Which leads me to believe that their paranoia is in league with MS and targeting the TLS handshake directly from an OS below win8, and in what ever manner the component is using.




Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2817

It looks like there is a TLS handshake failure when attempting to connect. My guess is that Discogs disallowed all the TLS 1.2 ciphers supported by Windows 7. Maybe someone more knowledgeable about this can chime in.

Someone could try asking on the Discogs API forum. However, as was mentioned, they are assholes so I wouldn't be too hopeful about them helping.
Would it be possible to ghost the header sent to them, I wonder. Like x-forwarding a different OS header that can be specified directly into the component. Seems possible.
At the TLS level I don't think they know what OS you have, they just know what ciphers you support and if you don't support the ones they allow, no connection would be possible.

This site analyzes and shows what they allow:
https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=api.discogs.com
Looks like 3 cipher suites for TLS 1.2, none of which are available in Windows 7.

foo_discogs could use its own libraries instead of using the foobar2000 SDK which uses the Windows built-in functions, if it was really important to support Windows 7 and other older OSes, like Chrome and Firefox which is why they work fine. But that seems like a lot of unnecessary bloat for a foobar2000 component, and there's probably no good reason Discogs can't just allow this to work. Maybe there's some way to add newer ciphers to Windows 7, I don't know.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2818
duplicate

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2819
Another update: I knew the act of putting it out there and asking for help would make me want to do more to look into it myself. Not only so I don't look TOO foolish but mainly so I'm not wasting the time of anyone good enough to try and help.

So on that note, ignore me for now. i need to start over. I've already learned more since making all these posts and have alredy changed my mind about some of that I've said.

i.e. apparently, there is no Label tag as such in ID3v2. It's Publisher. It just so happens that the other tag editor I use (tag&rename) has options to include an unofficial Label tag which I've been using, but am now questioning the point for if t&r is the only app that can read it. Some people seem to think it stores them in the comments, but since they're not visible in the comments field in any other program (or even tag&rename), I can't see how.

If anyone's familiar with t&r and can shed some light on some of its quirks or more advanced options I'd appreciate it, but otherwise I need to look that up separately and focus this chat on foo_discogs.

I've also got to learn more about the difference between the different formats and their tagging conventions so I can come up with an all in one solution, or at least know to use slightly different scripts in order to acheive the same thing across formats. What works with mp3s won't work for flacs, so I need to eventually come up with a system that caters for both and it would help if I understood the differences better.

Anyway, I'll try looking into this all a bit more. Although this foobar/foo_discogs combination is super-customisable, fast and powerful, and arguably the best tool I've ever used for this purpose, it's probably the least user-friendly out of them all or at least has a steeper learning curve and requires a depth of understanding beyond mine to really get the best out of it.

The documentation on the plug in is helpful (I can see that I'm eventually going to learn a lot from that syntax page), but the rest iss a bit sparse or outdated, though I'm sure some more digging through the forums will be time well spent. Wish me luck.

Peace.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2820
But that seems like a lot of unnecessary bloat for a foobar2000 component, and there's probably no good reason Discogs can't just allow this to work. Maybe there's some way to add newer ciphers to Windows 7, I don't know.
You're right. And I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts they will not do this. They could easily make it work and unless someone lit a candle under their asses, they won't. I was looking about and realized people have been trying to get TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 & TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384 into windows 7 for like 5 years and MS refused. They are, however, in 08 server. Maybe something will turn up that you can tweak it into win7&8, or discogs gets their heads out of their asses, but I doubt it the latter.

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2821
I don't see where it states in this thread that Windows 7 is the problem but that seems to have been accepted as the issue.  Can someone verify that the plug-in is working with W10?

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2822
I don't see where it states in this thread that Windows 7 is the problem but that seems to have been accepted as the issue.  Can someone verify that the plug-in is working with W10?

+1 ...and/or if someone can verify that it doesn't working under Win10?

Re: foo_discogs

Reply #2823
Definitely working for me now on Win10

 

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020