View Full Version : tracks appearing under multiple albums (7.4)

2009-10-10, 14:31

I have upgraded to 7.4.1 (nightly build - see below). Have run the clean db and re-scanned the library (twice now), but now I see under the Album view, the same Album twice, but certain tracks repeated under each Album instance, e.g.:


1. TrackName
2. TrackName
3. TrackName
4. TrackName
5. TrackName
6. TrackName


4. TrackName
6. TrackName

The first instance of the Album has ALL the tracks, the second has some, sometimes 1, or 2, or 3.

This is happening on certain Albums only (no pattern I can see) - is NOTHING to do with the tags as on 7.3 all the Albums and Tracks were organized perfectly, and still are

This is happening for about 1 in every 10 albums.

Note I am also seeing two Albums when going to the Artist menu, and when I search for the track. There is DEFINITELY only one of each track !

Anyone ?

Version of SBS :

Version: 7.4.1 - r28758 @ Fri Oct 2 09:29:04 PDT 2009
Hostname: home_nas
Server IP Address:
Server HTTP Port Number: 9000
Operating system: Netgear RAIDiator - EN - utf8
Platform Architecture: sparc-linux
Perl Version: 5.8.8 - sparc-linux
MySQL Version: 5.0.24a-Debian_3.infrant1
Total Players Recognized: 1

2009-10-10, 14:42
Have you tagged the albums with MusicBrainz at all? There is a specific issue in 7.4 if files have been tagged using an old version of MusicBrainz Picard.

The newer versions of Picard tag your files in a slightly different way and this is what is now supported in Squeezecenter. I had exactly the same issue with about 300 of my albums (tagged way back when). Running them through the latest version of MusicBrainz Picard and rescanning sorted the problem out for me.

If not, there are a few other possibilities - do the files have Disc tags at all and/or are they compilation files? If two of the files have DISC=1 tags and the rest don't, that may give the behaviour you are seeking.

A bit more info would be good too - eg file format, tag format whether you have ID3v1 and 2 tags (and/or APE tags), whether you are using MusicIP or iTunes integration.

The other possibility, if tracks 4/6 are appearing twice in your library, is that you have them in a playlist.

When SC scans your music library folder and playlists, it adds all individual tracks to your Music Library. SC determines what an individual track is by the file path and name. If your playlists reference your songs in a different way to your music library folder, SC does not know they are the same song but assumes they are two different songs.

So M:/Media/Song.mp3 in a playlist and //ENT/Media/Song.mp3 (music library) will show up twice in the library.

To check this, go to one of the duplicate songs and click into the file info - is the file path the same as what you have set as your Music Library? If not, there's your problem. Luckily it's easy to sort. Amend your playlists so they have the same file path to your songs as SC has set as your music library (in the example above //ENT/Media/Song.mp3). I have a small script which will do this semi automatically, but only works on Windows. Any text editor which supports find/replace will do this however (just open up the playlist, amend the file paths and do a full clear and rescan).

2009-10-10, 15:26
yep - one of your suggestions was bang on correct. The duplicated tracks are indeed in playlists that were imported from the 7.3 server.

I will modify the playlists so the paths match, then clear and rescan the library.

thanks for you help :-)

2009-10-10, 15:27
You need to make the playlist show the same file path as Squeezecenter using find/replace (as described above) then do a playlist only rescan.

2009-10-10, 15:50
sure, got it. Basically every file path has changed from /media/blah/blah to /c/media/blah/blah

Now I can't believe that my Readynas has changed its directory structure (it hasn't) - therefore the squeeze software must have changed its own "music root".

ONCE AGAIN it begs the question: WHY WAS THIS NOT TESTED IN 7.3 -> 7.4 ?

Seems every problem I've had (and I've had a few!) boils down to inadequate testing of the upgrade process. The software may have been ready but the migration process around it sure isn't.

tut tut logitech must do better next time