PDA

View Full Version : Default grouping of multi-disc albums to on?



mherger
2009-11-20, 00:54
There's been discussion about adding more options to the TinySC UI. But we want it be as simple as possible. Which means we have to find the best defaults possible.

One of the prefs mentioned in that other discussion was the grouping of multi-disc albums. I'd definitely vote for a default of on. Don't know why we haven't done this before.

Comments?

Mark Miksis
2009-11-20, 00:59
On

Philip Meyer
2009-11-20, 01:10
>One of the prefs mentioned in that other discussion was the grouping of multi-disc albums. I'd definitely vote for a default of on. Don't know why we haven't done this before.
I agree - On by default is probably best.

iTunes sort of groups multi-disc albums so all tracks are seen on a single album, whilst a lot of people rip multi-disc albums and tweak tags to make track numbers contiguous, so On by default is consistently treating multi-disk albums as a single album.

Mark Miksis
2009-11-20, 01:11
Hi Michael, I added a forum poll to your post. Hope that's OK.

pippin
2009-11-20, 01:13
a definite "ON".
My Audiobooks with 8 volumes horribly clutter up TinySC.

mherger
2009-11-20, 01:30
Thanks Mark! I'll never get used to the great new world of forums :-).

> My Audiobooks with 8 volumes horribly clutter up TinySC.

Exactly. Two/three dics sets are bad enough...

funkstar
2009-11-20, 04:14
Definite default to on please :)

Can I ask, who voted 'no' and why?

Not looking for an argument, I would just like to know the reasons that's all :)

Phil Leigh
2009-11-20, 04:47
There's been discussion about adding more options to the TinySC UI. But we want it be as simple as possible. Which means we have to find the best defaults possible.

One of the prefs mentioned in that other discussion was the grouping of multi-disc albums. I'd definitely vote for a default of on. Don't know why we haven't done this before.

Comments?

Yes Yes Yes (did I say yes?)

Philip Meyer
2009-11-20, 05:11
>Can I ask, who voted 'no' and why?
>
Maybe someone misread "No" as being "On"?

I thought vote results pages showed who voted? I've seen that in other vote threads. Perhaps there's an option to either show/hide voter names?

rotho
2009-11-20, 06:35
I've voted Yes also.

Mherger, where did you see this discussion about adding more options to the TinySC UI ? Is there a dedicated thread ?

Personally, I would also be interested by the addition of a kind of custom browsing in the TinySC UI.
This would be particularly useful for classical music, because if you want to browse by orchestra, by conductor, or by composer, it is quite a mess to merge all that in the Artists browsing.
I am not asking for something as powerfull as Erland's Custom Browse, but at least a "Tiny" custom browsing, where we can mention the tags (for example : band, conductor, composer, label, ...) for which a browsing menu entry can be added in the Touch UI.

What do others think about that ?

Themis
2009-11-20, 07:22
On, of course : there are enough albums in an album list as it is. :)

aubuti
2009-11-20, 10:02
On, please.

erland
2009-11-20, 10:31
Personally, I would also be interested by the addition of a kind of custom browsing in the TinySC UI.
This would be particularly useful for classical music, because if you want to browse by orchestra, by conductor, or by composer, it is quite a mess to merge all that in the Artists browsing.
I am not asking for something as powerfull as Erland's Custom Browse, but at least a "Tiny" custom browsing, where we can mention the tags (for example : band, conductor, composer, label, ...) for which a browsing menu entry can be added in the Touch UI.

What do others think about that ?

In my opinion it would be better to focus this on the normal Squeezebox Server first and then introduce it on the TinySC later (or at the same time). It sounds like what you want is the new schema functionality planned for the 8.x release:
http://wiki.slimdevices.com/index.php/NewSchema

mherger
2009-11-20, 10:45
> In my opinion it would be better to focus this on the normal Squeezebox
> Server first and then introduce it on the TinySC later

Sure, I would implement it in the main code anyway.

sebp
2009-11-20, 10:52
On, of course : there are enough albums in an album list as it is. :)
+1

The only drawback I could see to defaulting to discs grouping is for some huge music box sets.

JJZolx
2009-11-20, 11:01
Yes, On.

This option is the most obvious one, but I think a couple more option defaults should also be reexamined.

Second on the list would be 'Group compilation albums together'.

mherger
2009-11-23, 06:26
Changed in revision 29418.

andyg
2009-11-23, 09:07
Unfortunately I had to revert this change for now. Group Discs logic is broken in the scanner due to various workarounds for Greatest Hits bugs, etc. I need to write some more tests and fix those bugs before this can be re-enabled.

JJZolx
2009-12-29, 17:06
Unfortunately I had to revert this change for now. Group Discs logic is broken in the scanner due to various workarounds for Greatest Hits bugs, etc. I need to write some more tests and fix those bugs before this can be re-enabled.

Am I mistaken or is the grouping logic now fixed? I've tested it both in the 7.5 embedded branch, with FLAC files, and in TinySC, with MP3 files. For TinySC I manually edited server.prefs and set:

groupdiscs: 1
variousArtistAutoIdentification: 1

One thing I do is to set COMPILATION=1 (or TCMP=1) tags on all of my compilations. But I'm seeing the same behavior now in embedded/Tiny as in 7.5 trunk. I haven't tested it yet without COMPILATION tags, but if I'm not mistaken muti-disc compilations won't be correctly grouped in BigSC without this tag.

If it's fixed then perhaps the new default settings can be restored.

andyg
2009-12-29, 17:12
On Dec 29, 2009, at 7:06 PM, JJZolx wrote:

>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> A poll associated with this post was created, to vote and see the
> results, please visit http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71609
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Question: Should grouping of multi-disc albums default to on?
>
> - Yes
> - No
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> andyg;488474 Wrote:
>> Unfortunately I had to revert this change for now. Group Discs logic is
>> broken in the scanner due to various workarounds for Greatest Hits bugs,
>> etc. I need to write some more tests and fix those bugs before this can
>> be re-enabled.
>
> Am I mistaken or is the grouping logic now fixed? I've tested it both
> in the 7.5 embedded branch, with FLAC files, and in TinySC, with MP3
> files. For TinySC I manually edited server.prefs and set:
>
> groupdiscs: 1
> variousArtistAutoIdentification: 1
>
> One thing I do is to set COMPILATION=1 (or TCMP=1) tags on all of my
> compilations. But I'm seeing the same behavior now in embedded/Tiny as
> in 7.5 trunk. I haven't tested it yet without COMPILATION tags, but if
> I'm not mistaken muti-disc compilations won't be correctly grouped in
> BigSC without this tag.
>
> If it's fixed then perhaps the new default settings can be restored.

I enabled groupdiscs as a default, I couldn't reproduce the problems I had with it. There are likely to still be some bugs though. I'm confused about what you are seeing, is something broken?

JJZolx
2009-12-29, 17:25
I enabled groupdiscs as a default, I couldn't reproduce the problems I had with it. There are likely to still be some bugs though. I'm confused about what you are seeing, is something broken?

No, I'm saying the same thing - it's doesn't appear to be broken. Sorry, I missed your 29682 checkin on 12/23.

I assume the new defaults weren't changed in my TinySC server.prefs because the file already existed. That might be something to make known to Touch beta testers.

andyg
2009-12-29, 17:29
On Dec 29, 2009, at 7:25 PM, JJZolx wrote:
>
> I assume the new defaults weren't changed in my TinySC server.prefs
> because the file already existed. That might be something to make known
> to Touch beta testers.

Ah yes, that would do it. Glad it's working for you otherwise.

Davidg1
2011-02-18, 07:59
I know this is an old thread, but I have a suggestion related to this topic, and as, I think, just about all the key guys have contributed to this thread it seemed a good place to flag a suggestion.

I have just spent a few hours getting to grips with WinSCP, with the sole goal of getting some consistency between my SQ Touch and my other two SBSs (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=612018#post612018). If you are pretty techie it's not that hard, but it is [I]certainly not[/] a "user task"!!

It seems to me that a very large number of new Squeezebox owners will have at least 2 SBSs, in some form, "fat" and/or "Tiny", some more than 2 - I currently have 3. It is not unreasonable for even regular, non-techie, users to expect their Squeezeboxes to display Artists/Albums/Compilations etc. etc. the same way across all devices by default. At the moment, due to the pseudo-hardcoding of the TinySC this is almost impossible, and even synchronising "fat" servers is a pain.

I assume the reluctance to clutter the TinySC UI is as much about code space as anything else.

Why not have a set of preferences which you set up on mysqueezebox.com. Then, by default, each SBS/TinySC gets its (non hardware-specific) prefs from there when connected to mySqueezebox.com, unless "Use preferences on mySqueezebox.com" is un-ticked in the SBS control panel. Instantly all SBSs would be sync'd.

Easy for me to say, but it should be a doddle to implement. All the SBSs need to do is copy down the "server.prefs" file from mySqueezebox.com and add any hardware-specific settings to the file. I think it could make a real difference to the end-user out of the box experience.

I can't imagine you have not thought of this yourselves, it's hardly rocket science. But maybe you have not fully appreciated how poor it looks when it is just about impossible for a mere mortal to get, especially, music on a Touch to display consistently with those served by a regular SBS!

I'm very interested in your thoughts.

(apologies if this is "multi-posting" I posted the result of my hacking to my own thread before thinking about how to get some visibility. I looked for a "suggestions" thread in vain!)

Phil Leigh
2011-02-18, 13:01
I know this is an old thread, but I have a suggestion related to this topic, and as, I think, just about all the key guys have contributed to this thread it seemed a good place to flag a suggestion.

I have just spent a few hours getting to grips with WinSCP, with the sole goal of getting some consistency between my SQ Touch and my other two SBSs (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?p=612018#post612018). If you are pretty techie it's not that hard, but it is [I]certainly not[/] a "user task"!!

It seems to me that a very large number of new Squeezebox owners will have at least 2 SBSs, in some form, "fat" and/or "Tiny", some more than 2 - I currently have 3. It is not unreasonable for even regular, non-techie, users to expect their Squeezeboxes to display Artists/Albums/Compilations etc. etc. the same way across all devices by default. At the moment, due to the pseudo-hardcoding of the TinySC this is almost impossible, and even synchronising "fat" servers is a pain.

I assume the reluctance to clutter the TinySC UI is as much about code space as anything else.

Why not have a set of preferences which you set up on mysqueezebox.com. Then, by default, each SBS/TinySC gets its (non hardware-specific) prefs from there when connected to mySqueezebox.com, unless "Use preferences on mySqueezebox.com" is un-ticked in the SBS control panel. Instantly all SBSs would be sync'd.

Easy for me to say, but it should be a doddle to implement. All the SBSs need to do is copy down the "server.prefs" file from mySqueezebox.com and add any hardware-specific settings to the file. I think it could make a real difference to the end-user out of the box experience.

I can't imagine you have not thought of this yourselves, it's hardly rocket science. But maybe you have not fully appreciated how poor it looks when it is just about impossible for a mere mortal to get, especially, music on a Touch to display consistently with those served by a regular SBS!

I'm very interested in your thoughts.

(apologies if this is "multi-posting" I posted the result of my hacking to my own thread before thinking about how to get some visibility. I looked for a "suggestions" thread in vain!)

Well, first of all I want NOTHING to do with my.sb.com! Indeed, I may not even have an Internet connection. Then, why would I have a library on a usb disk attached to a Touch AND the same library (or even a different library) on a real server? - surely I only want ONE library? - heaven knows it's a full-time job managing one :-)

TinySC is NOT a replacement for SBS (at the moment).

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound disparaging...

Davidg1
2011-02-18, 13:36
I'll explain why we use both. The main server is not always on and there are members of the family that find it easier to use the Touch, "iPod style" and just play locally without having to boot the server up. Yes, I know there's wake-on LAN etc. But it is all time and complexity for people who just want to listen to music.

Believe me I don't fully get the issue myself, but if you are not computer literate or interested it is all really hard.

Any way, be disparaging all you want :), Squeezebox has a multiple servers architecture with a wealth of options. Fact is TinySC can deal with all those options (it is not a problem of TinySC performance), just a normal user cannot set them. If those options are there it should be possible to get all your servers into sync with each other, preferably without having to resort to SSH!

(of course there would be a default config file, for if there was no Internet connection, but given the way Squeezebox works I believe it will be rare that no one ever configures mysb.com)