Ctrl-Alt V (Analyze Volume)

[KetchupKid]

I find no reason why I would enter the Analyze Volume function and NOT want to analyze the volume of the file in question. Be it one or many. It is not a major thing, but can you just make it so whatever file or files are selected when entering Volume Analysis, are checked by default?

In this way, especially when one does a lot of editing one file at a time, the file can be (1) selected, (2) Ctrl-Alt-V and (3) Enter ... to analyze a file more quickly without having to tell the dialog that you wish to analyze the volume of the selected file. I find no other reason this function would be engaged other than to analyze the file volume.

Okay? Thanks!

SUPER great editing application - I love it!

[psychoadept]

-1 for default.  I actually often select my entire library so that I don't have to hunt down the few tracks that need volume analysis. 

But as a permanent setting, or automatically selecting all when there's only one track/album selected would make sense.

[KetchupKid]

Yes, I think you got it ... when editing a file, one needs to see the new volume setting. That's part of editing MP3 files. My whole library has long ago been analyzed, but when one edits a file, it changes. Therefore, a new volume analysis is needed - one file at a time as I edit them.

[phred]

-1 for default.  I actually often select my entire library so that I don't have to hunt down the few tracks that need volume analysis. 

Have you forgotten about Tools > Tagging Tools > Other 'Files to Edit' Filters > Show Files with no Volume Analysis

[KetchupKid]

You forget - ALL the files I edit have already been analyzed. When I edit a file, chances are the volume will have changed and I want to see what the new volume is. As often as not, that IS the reason I edit a file.

[psychoadept]

I think phred was talking to me.  I had forgotten, actually. I hate the "show files with..." filters.  I find them to be buggy and not at all conducive to any kind of big editing projects.  For this use-case, it might actually be worthwhile, although it adds four layers of menus to the process.

[phred]

I think phred was talking to me. 

Yes, that's correct.

I had forgotten, actually. I hate the "show files with..." filters.  I find them to be buggy and not at all conducive to any kind of big editing projects.  For this use-case, it might actually be worthwhile, although it adds four layers of menus to the process.

But you're only scanning the files that need re-analyzing and not your entire library.  Four  clicks vs how many minutes?

[hiccup]

While the implementation of loudness normalisation in MusicBee is already one of the better ones, I also agree there are some improvements to could be made about it.

One of the open request is:
"It would be very nice if the resulting (integrated) LUFS value after analysis would also be written in a tag.
That would give a very good and easy to find indication if a track indeed has the 'loudness' that you want it to have."

http://getmusicbee.com/forum/index.php?topic=15808.msg93407#msg93407

Steven seemed to be willing to have a look at that at a later moment in time.
If this specific wish could be implemented, you could then have the option to only re-analyse files that have a different LUFS value than the one you aim for for your library, and also give a direct insight (e.g. through tag-inspector) in how loud a track actually is.

It's probably wise to leave these requests for a while, until after v3 is on the road and running fine.
And then assemble the several wishes on this matter, so that Steven (if willing) could address them at once.

[psychoadept]

I had forgotten, actually. I hate the "show files with..." filters.  I find them to be buggy and not at all conducive to any kind of big editing projects.  For this use-case, it might actually be worthwhile, although it adds four layers of menus to the process.

But you're only scanning the files that need re-analyzing and not your entire library.  Four  clicks vs how many minutes?

Huh?  It doesn't take any extra time.  Only the files that need analysis are selected in the dialogue & analyzed.

[phred]

I actually often select my entire library so that I don't have to hunt down the few tracks that need volume analysis. 

So you're saying that when using this method, the entire library isn't scanned?  Only the files that have not yet been analyzed will be scanned?  If so then it is indeed a draw between this and using the four-step menu process. 

[psychoadept]

That's the OP's complaint: the dialogue itself filters out (by leaving them unticked) the tracks that already have analysis, so they're not affected.  (There is a master "select all" check box for reanalysing, but if you only want to redo some and you've selected many, it would be a pain to tick them all.)

[Steven]

i am not understanding whats wrong with the current approach. By default MB only ticks the files that have no analysis - its smart enough to select all album files if only one of the album file is missing replay gain values. And if you want to force recalculation then its a simple case of ticking the select all tick box

[KetchupKid]

But if I have only one file selected and I open the analyze volume dialog - what reason would I have to open the dialog other than to scan whatever I have selected??? It makes NO sense not to have my selected file pre-ticked. What other reason would a person have to open the Analyze Volume dialog??

It is such a simple thing, so why not just make it so even a single file selected is pre-ticked in the check box?

Can you tell me any other reason a person would open that dialog?

[Pingaware]

Psychoadept literally gave you one in his first reply to your post.

[KetchupKid]

Well, I like the program and have donated so I am going to keep using it, but programmers are just being stubborn on this simple issue for no reason. Am I the only MusicBee user who actually EVER edits MP3 files occasionally? I use Goldwave. I just don't get half of these responses. It is such an incredibly simple, obvious thing.