16
Questions / Re: Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 10, 2017, 07:06:44 PM »Huh, maybe it's not available there. I would make a wishlist request for it.Thanks, I will.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
Questions / Re: Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 10, 2017, 04:37:08 PM »
I deleted my custom tag and you're right: I found the performer tag in front of the artist tag. Thanks a lot for your time, I wouldn't have found this on my own. 
I still have a problem, though: my custom performer tag was the Album Artist tag (while my Composer tag is my Artist tag). I can swap them in my whole library with a script in MP3Tag, this at least I know how to do. But then, how do I write "Artists: Performer" in the browser column header? All I see are pre-defined tags:
I still have a problem, though: my custom performer tag was the Album Artist tag (while my Composer tag is my Artist tag). I can swap them in my whole library with a script in MP3Tag, this at least I know how to do. But then, how do I write "Artists: Performer" in the browser column header? All I see are pre-defined tags:
19
Questions / Re: Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 09, 2017, 11:07:52 PM »
Sorry for being unclear. Most of my files were tagged long ago in MP3Tag and/or Foobar2K. MB read my multivalued performer tag OK and display it accordingly in the browser. But the list is not sorted.
Performer column multivalued but not sorted:
With virtual tag $Sort(<Composer>), sorted but multiple values on the same line with separator:
Performer column multivalued but not sorted:
With virtual tag $Sort(<Composer>), sorted but multiple values on the same line with separator:
20
Questions / Re: Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 09, 2017, 04:59:01 PM »
Sorry for being dense, I got it. 
Now, for my custom tag (<performer>), I guess displaying it both multivalued and sorted in the browser is not possible at the moment?
Now, for my custom tag (<performer>), I guess displaying it both multivalued and sorted in the browser is not possible at the moment?
21
Questions / Re: Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 09, 2017, 04:10:24 PM »
Thanks for the answers! I'm now with the 3.1.6217 version.
I'm using these tags in the browser. I have 3 columns: Composer (which is actually <artist>), Year and Performer (actually <album artist>). The multiple values are OK. An album by Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim is tagged as such:
Artist: Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim (compatibility tag)
Composer: Sonny Boy Williamson
Composer: Memphis Slim
Album Artist: Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim (again, for compatibility)
Performer:Sonny Boy Williamson
Performer: Memphis Slim
In the browser, the <composer> and <performer> columns display one line each for "Sonny Boy Williamson" and for "Memphis Slim" and none for "Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim" so that's perfect. But they're not sorted, even with the latest patch.
But with this new patch, creating a virtual tag for <composer> works ( $Sort(<Composer>) ). The column is both multivalued and sorted. I still have the problem with the Performer column, though:
Using the <performer> tag as is, the column is multivalued but not sorted.
Using the virtual tag $Sort(<Composer>), the column is sorted but multivalued tags are not recognized, so I have "Sonny Boy Williamson; Memphis Slim" on one line, separated by the semi-colon.
I guess that's because <composer> has been made sortable by default, just like <artist> and <album artist> but <performer> being a custom tag, hasn't.
I'm using these tags in the browser. I have 3 columns: Composer (which is actually <artist>), Year and Performer (actually <album artist>). The multiple values are OK. An album by Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim is tagged as such:
Artist: Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim (compatibility tag)
Composer: Sonny Boy Williamson
Composer: Memphis Slim
Album Artist: Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim (again, for compatibility)
Performer:Sonny Boy Williamson
Performer: Memphis Slim
In the browser, the <composer> and <performer> columns display one line each for "Sonny Boy Williamson" and for "Memphis Slim" and none for "Sonny Boy Williamson & Memphis Slim" so that's perfect. But they're not sorted, even with the latest patch.
But with this new patch, creating a virtual tag for <composer> works ( $Sort(<Composer>) ). The column is both multivalued and sorted. I still have the problem with the Performer column, though:
Using the <performer> tag as is, the column is multivalued but not sorted.
Using the virtual tag $Sort(<Composer>), the column is sorted but multivalued tags are not recognized, so I have "Sonny Boy Williamson; Memphis Slim" on one line, separated by the semi-colon.
I guess that's because <composer> has been made sortable by default, just like <artist> and <album artist> but <performer> being a custom tag, hasn't.
22
Questions / Sorted and multivalued tags
« on: January 09, 2017, 02:22:52 PM »
Hiya!
As I use ARTIST and ALBUM ARTIST with single values for compatibility reasons with some hardware players, I use COMPOSER and PERFORMER for the "real" multivalued artist/album artist tags. But I can't find a way for these two tags to be both multivalued and sorted (without "the" before some band's names) in the browser.
Default is multivalued but not sorted. Creating a virtual tag like $Sort(%Composer%) sorts all right but I lose the multiple values. What am I doing wrong?
As I use ARTIST and ALBUM ARTIST with single values for compatibility reasons with some hardware players, I use COMPOSER and PERFORMER for the "real" multivalued artist/album artist tags. But I can't find a way for these two tags to be both multivalued and sorted (without "the" before some band's names) in the browser.
Default is multivalued but not sorted. Creating a virtual tag like $Sort(%Composer%) sorts all right but I lose the multiple values. What am I doing wrong?
23
General Discussions / Re: GUI changes for v3.0
« on: December 16, 2015, 10:57:40 PM »
Hi Steven!
I know this isn't a request topic but because this 3.0 overhaul relates to the GUI and the general appearance, I don't think I'm out of line by asking if you would consider increasing the maximal size for thumbnails in cover view from 225 pixels to at least 600 pixels? On a 4K screen, a 225x225 image is ridiculously small and defeat the whole point of a cover view.
Again, sorry if this is not the right place for asking this. I already made a request months ago in the appropriate section, but I couldn't resist asking again, seeing as the lasts posts were about these thumbnails in cover view.
I know this isn't a request topic but because this 3.0 overhaul relates to the GUI and the general appearance, I don't think I'm out of line by asking if you would consider increasing the maximal size for thumbnails in cover view from 225 pixels to at least 600 pixels? On a 4K screen, a 225x225 image is ridiculously small and defeat the whole point of a cover view.
Again, sorry if this is not the right place for asking this. I already made a request months ago in the appropriate section, but I couldn't resist asking again, seeing as the lasts posts were about these thumbnails in cover view.
24
MusicBee Wishlist / Re: Bigger thumbnails in artwork view
« on: January 31, 2015, 10:19:59 PM »
I hope not to sound pushy by bumping my own wishlist topic but I feel this feature is more worthwile now than a year ago. We're on the verge of 2k (3440x1440)/4k (3840x2160) screens mass-producted, with several models already available under 1k$. And 8k is the" next step.
With the current Win 10 style changes, an unlimited thumbnail size could be a great thing (a bit like the Facets Foobar component).
With the current Win 10 style changes, an unlimited thumbnail size could be a great thing (a bit like the Facets Foobar component).
25
Questions / Re: Best AIFF/WAV to FLAC converter?
« on: August 11, 2014, 10:20:20 AM »
This topic is a spam magnet.
26
MusicBee Wishlist / Bigger thumbnails in artwork view
« on: December 09, 2013, 10:51:25 PM »
Not a biggie but I think the max thumbnail size in artwork view is rather small. I know they're called thumbnails for a reason but with nowadays 1920*1080 displays, being able to double that max size could be appreciated.
27
Questions / Re: Best AIFF/WAV to FLAC converter?
« on: June 19, 2013, 09:35:13 PM »
For the record, TAudioConverter can transcode most anything, is free, open source and kind of "approved" by the Hydrogenaudio community (a tough crowd 
) : http://taudioconverter.sourceforge.net/
) : http://taudioconverter.sourceforge.net/
28
Questions / Re: Comparison of Audio Player software
« on: May 29, 2013, 11:12:55 PM »
I'm only a user but here's my contribution:
* O.S requirement: Only Windows
Of course, and I don't think Steven will port it to Linux and OSX. Do you realize he should rewrite it almost from scratch?
* Features: Video playback missing and No outbound streaming
Thank god, it's a music player, not a media player.
And I don't see much use for outbound streaming.
* Audio Format ability: Perfect, except for no lossy compression for Real Audio
Frankly, who cares about Real Audio support? This (crappy) format is so 90's...
* Container Format ability: MP4 and Ogg only
I'm not sure some esoteric containers would be much use to anyone.
* Scalable, composite and emulation format abilities: NSF only
Again, few people in the world will use this.
* Protocol abilities: No RTSP and MMS
I don't use streaming, so I'll skip this point.
* Optical media ability: "?" for DVD-Audio and HDCD
DVD-A support could maybe be useful. HDCD sure would.
Now, about this wikipedia page: it's misleading, plain and simple.
* Included are lots of players whose development has been stopped for up to 10 years (Sonique, Zinf, Audion, Musicmatch Jukebox, Listen, XMMS) or some very ultra-specialized players, like Napster or MPXPlay (a console player for Windows, really?).
* iTunes and WMP are not included because they're labelled as "video players". That's ludicrous, since they're probably the most used music players in the world. And where's Winamp? Well, it's a "video player", too. And the same goes for JRiver MediaCenter.
* Tag support is split between two tables:
First is the "tag flexible" column in the "Extended features" table (quote: "Flexible tagging is the ability to read or write custom tags, apart from the default ones like title, album and date. Users can use custom tags to provide additional information to media files. Custom tags work via ID3v2.4 (via the TXXX tag field), Vorbis comments and APEv2"). What about displaying, sorting and filtering them, searching for them, in every part of the player? If it's not possible, then they're useless. Now some of these players can't do that. You can see them in a "properties" windows, and that's about all.
Second is the "Metadata ability" table. Well, I'm sorry, but if you don't support custom Vorbis tags, then your support is not "YES" but it should be labelled as "Partial". Because custom tags are part of the standard from the beginning. Splitting "tag flexible" and "Metadata ability" makes no sense.
* Devoting lots of columns to features nobody cares about is fine, but it doesn't tell you about a player's usability. Same goes for some features, like skinning. And it doesn't tell you how often the player is updated, how reactive and receptive the developper(s) is (are).
In conclusion, not much sleep to lose on this page. MusicBee is already in the top3, features-wise.
Edit: I just saw there's no mention of multivalued tags support, which is nonetheless essentiel.
* O.S requirement: Only Windows
Of course, and I don't think Steven will port it to Linux and OSX. Do you realize he should rewrite it almost from scratch?
* Features: Video playback missing and No outbound streaming
Thank god, it's a music player, not a media player.
And I don't see much use for outbound streaming.* Audio Format ability: Perfect, except for no lossy compression for Real Audio
Frankly, who cares about Real Audio support? This (crappy) format is so 90's...
* Container Format ability: MP4 and Ogg only
I'm not sure some esoteric containers would be much use to anyone.
* Scalable, composite and emulation format abilities: NSF only
Again, few people in the world will use this.
* Protocol abilities: No RTSP and MMS
I don't use streaming, so I'll skip this point.
* Optical media ability: "?" for DVD-Audio and HDCD
DVD-A support could maybe be useful. HDCD sure would.
Now, about this wikipedia page: it's misleading, plain and simple.
* Included are lots of players whose development has been stopped for up to 10 years (Sonique, Zinf, Audion, Musicmatch Jukebox, Listen, XMMS) or some very ultra-specialized players, like Napster or MPXPlay (a console player for Windows, really?
).* iTunes and WMP are not included because they're labelled as "video players". That's ludicrous, since they're probably the most used music players in the world. And where's Winamp? Well, it's a "video player", too.
And the same goes for JRiver MediaCenter.* Tag support is split between two tables:
First is the "tag flexible" column in the "Extended features" table (quote: "Flexible tagging is the ability to read or write custom tags, apart from the default ones like title, album and date. Users can use custom tags to provide additional information to media files. Custom tags work via ID3v2.4 (via the TXXX tag field), Vorbis comments and APEv2"). What about displaying, sorting and filtering them, searching for them, in every part of the player? If it's not possible, then they're useless. Now some of these players can't do that. You can see them in a "properties" windows, and that's about all.
Second is the "Metadata ability" table. Well, I'm sorry, but if you don't support custom Vorbis tags, then your support is not "YES" but it should be labelled as "Partial". Because custom tags are part of the standard from the beginning. Splitting "tag flexible" and "Metadata ability" makes no sense.
* Devoting lots of columns to features nobody cares about is fine, but it doesn't tell you about a player's usability. Same goes for some features, like skinning. And it doesn't tell you how often the player is updated, how reactive and receptive the developper(s) is (are).
In conclusion, not much sleep to lose on this page. MusicBee is already in the top3, features-wise.
Edit: I just saw there's no mention of multivalued tags support, which is nonetheless essentiel.