Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 44
  1. #1
    MrSinatra
    Guest

    feature request: file vs track calculator

    i'll post an enh request in bugzilla once this idea is vetted, if its worthy, but here's the idea:

    for various reasons, SC occassionally has issues locating songs and putting them into the music library. i have a bug right now about missing albums when a track has v1 tags but only RG tags on v2. and we all over the years have seen the issues strange characters like upsidedown question marks or latin thingees can cause, etc... and probably more random issues i can't recall at the moment.

    the problem never seems to be the scanner being unaware of a file, but rather how it handles it. meaning that regardless of the bug, the scanner knows that an *.mp3 or *.wav is an audio file and was found existing in the location, it just doesn't always represent it.

    what if we had SC on a directory by directory basis count the number of audio files it found, and then compared that to the number of tracks SC reports in the music library at those directory locations?

    in theory, this would not only show the amounts of the discrepencies, (if any existed) but it could also actually locate the directory the discrepencies are in, which would really help the user find out whats problematic and enable them to fix it and get it to show up in the library.

    so in a sample library of 1000 audio files of differing types, SC might report:

    1000 audio files were scanned, 997 are represented in the library; the following locations have audio files not in the library most likely due to an error in their tag content:

    c:\music\artist\album\
    ditto
    ditto

    ...

    in other words, i think it is straightforward (and easy) for SC to calculate the number of audio files it scanned. it should then only be slightly harder to compare the number scanned per location to the number of tracks actually in the library for the same given location.

    seems like a worthy "double check" if u will.

    thoughts?

  2. #2
    MrSinatra
    Guest
    2nd try, this time i'll be brief:

    i want a calculation to compare/contrast the stats of the media library, (specifically number of tracks), to the actual number of audio files scanned.

    if this could only be done in aggregate, so be it, but if it could be done on a per folder/directory basis that would really be useful for determining if SC actually accounts (in ML) for everything it scans, (not always the case).

    thoughts?

  3. #3
    Senior Member aubuti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,825
    It's not something I've ever felt the need for, even after reading your explanation of why you think it's needed. And if one wants to check it's easy to do so using existing OS-level tools (e.g., in Windows: dir *.flac *.mp3 *.wav /s). Although then if the grand total doesn't match up it would be handy to have the per-directory breakdown you mention, which should be pretty easy to put together in perl.

    Anyway, your post has me thinking enough to go check the totals on my library to see what I get.

  4. #4
    MrSinatra
    Guest
    yes, i could use windows to get a file count but thats rather cumbersome, and as u said it wouldn't help find the discrepancies, it would just let you know you had some if that number was different from the SC total songs (tracks) number.

    i should be clear that i am requesting a feature here, not saying there is a bug. but it would certainly help those affected by a bug, (like me), and / or who are trying to track down character set issues and other strange phenomena from keeping their music from showing up.

    and the best part is, it would unmask a very masked issue. in other words, you could have problems and never know it, b/c if your library is large, (mine is imo, 25k+ audio files), then a random track missing here or there, for whatever reason, could be very hard if not impossible to notice.

    i have seen a LOT of threads on this board about issues just like this that such a feature would go a long way towards solving and eliminating.

    it would also be good for when winamp or mp3tag or whatever says one thing, and SC says another, for figuring out who is correct.

  5. #5
    Senior Member aubuti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,825
    The 'dir' (or 'ls') command is cumbersome? Sorry, I don't see a compelling, or even interesting, case for the enhancement. But it did get me interested enough to check the totals (took all of about two dozen keystrokes), and now I'll sleep well tonight. But maybe others will see the same need you do. Good night and good luck.

  6. #6
    MrSinatra
    Guest
    let me try putting it another way, b/c think ur missing the point, and i'll post my own screenshots later showing a discrepancy.

    this function imo should be part of the normal scan routine, altho if one wanted to opt out, ok. regardless the point is that with every scan an automated doublecheck will make sure the two amounts are equal, and that no known, or unknown, issue has crept in to keep SC from using all the files it should.

    i add music fairly often, and given the unpredictable nature of the unexpected, along with the fact that the software itself is not static in how it scans and handles files, such a function as what i am proposing i think would be a welcome double check to ensure no discrepencies exist, and if they do, it would help identify them.

    this circumstance has been reported in the forums many times, and moreover, its the kind of masked issue that could be affecting a lot of people who are otherwise unaware of it. given its usefulness, i don't see why someone wouldn't want it?
    Last edited by MrSinatra; 2008-07-02 at 20:30. Reason: discrepencies

  7. #7
    Senior Member aubuti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,825
    No, I'm not missing the point. I see the point and I disagree. Others might agree with you, but this is starting to seem like déjà vu all over again to me....

  8. #8
    MrSinatra
    Guest
    what, exactly, do u disagree with?

    if i hadn't noticed the best AC/DC album in my ML was missing, which i noticed purely by dumb luck and b/c it was back in black, i wouldn't even have known anything was wrong. it led to me filing bug 8380

    however, if this function was in place, SC would have alerted me to it regardless of how unobservant i am.

    but its not only bug 8380 that can cause tracks to not appear despite being scanned. consider this case:

    http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=48195

    my proposed function would have really helped him out.

    btw, i love streamripper, thx again for that.

  9. #9
    Senior Member aubuti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    8,825
    Quote Originally Posted by MrSinatra View Post
    what, exactly, do u disagree with?
    I disagree with the idea that it should be a built-in feature of SC. I don't think it's necessary. I think it would add to bloat and complexity -- probably not by a lot, but enough so that the costs outweigh the meager benefits. I expect SC to serve music, not to do my basic file housekeeping for me. You asked "thoughts?" and I gave you mine. Now I'll shut up and let others share their thoughts on your suggestion.

  10. #10
    MrSinatra
    Guest
    i appreciate your thoughts, but i guess "meager" is a matter of POV. certianly not meager if you're affected. i also expect SC to serve music, but its hard for it to do it if it can't see it. i don't consider these issues to be basic filekeeping but rather basic scanning issues. the files exist just fine on the HD; its SC that isn't getting them from there to the ML.

    but in any case, yes, i hope others have some thoughts as well. thx again.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •