Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> >> Are you saying that in WinAmp you "pretend" to have compilation
> albums
> >> by setting Album Artist to "Various Artists", because it doesn't
> >> automatically detect compilations (where songs on an album are
> >> performed by differing artists), and there's no way of declaring an
> >> album as such?
> >
> >essentially yes, but i don't call it pretending.
> >
> So, it doesn't have any support for compilation albums, it just sticks
> them under any artist name you care to put in the album artist field.
> So not only does it abuse the BAND tag, pretending it's Album Artist,
> but it then abuses that Album Artist, pretending that it's something
> that is not an artist!
and thats news?
this is what i have been saying all along, that this it the REALITY in
the MARKETPLACE. this is the reality of mainstream apps.
and stop acting as if thats somehow an endorsement from me. i do not
endorse it, i simply recognize the facts on the ground.
and winamp was late to this party, as was SC. but they now both
recognize the reality, one that gracenote, ie. CDDB, employs.
you can complain til the the cows come home about it, but it won't
change the reality.
now, i'l gladly join you in bemoaning it, but you and i seemingly split
ways when it comes to dealing with it.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
>
> >winamp itself via gracenote denotes the value "Various Artists" in
> >TPE2, and since i can think, i know thats a comp, and i don't really
> >care if winamp knows or not, b/c it doesn't need to know.
> >
> So your problem is that you want SC to downgrade itself into a
> "mainstream" app like WinAmp. Even iTunes is better than that.
no, and thats a ridiculous characterization.
first off, this isn't "my problem." this is a problem SC needs to deal
with, b/c most users coming to winamp will be using a mainstream app,
since SC does not create content.
what i want is for SC to be as compatible as possible via options with
mainstream apps. i daresay thats what slim wants as well.
i don't know why you would not advocate the same. SC is not here to
martyr itself on philosophical convictions, but rather appeal to the
masses. it needs to work for them, not make them work.
now having said that, i am NOT saying that SC shouldn't support comp
tags, of course it should! it should be more advanced and more
flexible than winamp or anything else... it should let users run their
libraries anyway they see fit... *but it certainly should work with the
reality of mainstream apps for users who let them handle things.
and that reality is that gracenote fills in TPE2 for EVERY file.*
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> There are benefits for having proper Compilation indicators. i.e. you
> can browse compilations. In SC, you can find them all in one place at
> the top of the artists list, and you can define what the name of that
> place is ("Various Artists", "Compilations", whatever you like).
> CustomBrowse is even better, in that you can have a "Browse
> Compilations" that does exactly that.
exactly, i know that. its a strawman to say i'm against that, i'm
not.
in fact, thats why i was saying earlier that SC should work with comp
tags AND TPE2 together, (for comp=1 anyway) which you argued against.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> However, if you don't have compilation information, and instead have
> artists that represent compilation albums, you will not find them
> browsable in the same place with the same name. There's no comparison:
> you either have functionality, or you have none. Your idea of a
> mainstream app is one that has no functionality.
my idea of a mainstream app?
so WMP, winamp, etc... these aren't mainstream apps to you?
i agree, they are limited. but thats the reality SC needs to deal
with.
(thus why i can't choose to NOT have TPE2 info for my albums that are
comps)
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> SC doesn't need compilation tags, generally, because it can work it out.
> The rules are not hard. Other apps should copy SC, not the other way
> round.
good luck with that approach. ;) luckily, slim / logitech doesn't see
it that way.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> I still haven't experienced taggers entering album artist (or TPE2) data
> from metadata sources in a consistent manor, especially compilation
> albums. Some may enter an album artist of "Various", "Various Artist",
> "Various Artists", "Compilation", "Soundtrack", blah blah blah...
> There's no standard; it's hardly a solution.
hey, we agree its a totally botched situation. no argument there.
but the reality is winamp has to have a value in TPE2. i have no
choice if i want to be able to browse effectively. and winamp isn't
alone in this regard, and its far, FAR bigger than SC.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> Now, I still don't see your problem. You always have an album artist,
> even for a normal album that has the same performer on every track, and
> even for compilation albums where every track is by a different artist.
> That is unnecessary for SC, but you do that so that less-able
> applications work similarly. You will never have compilation albums as
> such in SC, and your library should be presented the same way as
> WinAmp.
>
> I'm not arguing about that; if that works for you, then so be it.
>
> But in that case, why should you ever want to add compilation tags? If
> you are happy with the lack of proper compilation indicators across all
> of your music library applications, why add them for SC?
well originally, this "debate" started not b/c of comp tags, but b/c
you denied that TPE2 was filled out by winamp or necessary for me to
use on every album to use winamp, or other mainstream apps.
i put it to you that you were wrong about that.
if you don't think you were, the question still stands, how would you
make it all work? it cant be done without filling TPE2 in for all
albums.
as to your question, as i've said i have not yet felt the need to add
comp tags, but in previous posts i laid out some reasons why i might
want to one day. and if i did, winamp would just ignore them, so no
problem there either.
but other people may want to use comp tags, like comp=1, with TPE2, to
sort their comps together. (as just one possible scenario)
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
> >this is hilarious, and exactly the kind of response i expect from a
> >SC-centric persona on the SC forums.
> >
> Must admit, I can't see any funny side to it. WinAmp doesn't support
> compilation tags. You don't care that is doesn't. But you come here
> and expect SC to get rip of Compilation guessing logic, because it's
> not needed in the way you use your library, and may cause you problems
> with your library. Instead of going to WinAmp and asking if they could
> make their application better, like more modern library systems.
the humor in it is that you expect everyone to speak your minority
language instead of you learning the majority language. like i said,
its very SC-centric, but luckily slim doesn't see it that way.
as to winamp, i got them to add support for comp tags to the official
wishlist. whats funny about that is that i have arguments there that
are the reverse of the ones here.
as to SC, i did NOT advocate getting "rid of VA logic." i advocated
making that "logic" OPTIONAL. big difference.
btw, SC is the ONLY application with VA guessing comp logic. i know of
no other, certainly nothing mainstream.
but i am no way advocating downgrading SC. thats a false
characterization.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
>
> >but thats hardly something to complain about.
> >
> Why not, you've complained because SC does!
no i haven't.
i don't complain that SC supports comp tags, (keep in mind, thats not
the same as mandatory VA detection) and i don't complain that winamp
doesn't. i would like them to, but their argument is they don't see a
pressing need for it, and unlike TPE2, any comp tag would be definitely
out of spec (non-standard) and so they aren't going to rush into it.
hard to argue with that.
Philip Meyer;355940 Wrote:
>
> >b/c you are purposely putting your head in the sand.
> >
> What makes you say that? I'm still here aren't I? And still trying to
> be polite, despite your antics.
b/c you refuse to acknowledge reality.
you still seemingly won't admit that TPE2 is assigned by
winamp/gracenote for all albums, and that i must have it for winamp on
all albums. i mean, its frustrating you won't just admit that.
i don't think what i said was impolite tho, i meant no offense.
--
MrSinatra
www.LION-Radio.org
Using:
Squeezebox2 (primary) / SBR (secondary) / SBC - w/SC 7.3b - Win XP Pro
SP3 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram - D-Link DIR-655
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=53822
_______________________________________________
ripping mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
