con't from: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=53142&page=6
Philip Meyer;367177 Wrote: > >exactly... thats an erroneous assumption to make. you said there > "was > >no guesswork" and thats false. the "logic" of the assumption can't > be > >described as anything other than guesswork. > > > There is no artificial intelligence in SC. No neural networks - no > guesswork. strawman. i never said there was AI or neural networks or HAL9000 for that matter. what i questioned wasn't even SC's ability to follow the codes instruction as written, we agree it does what its been told to do. what i challenge is this: Philip Meyer;367177 Wrote: > There are logical decisions being made. thats a matter of context. if the context is your SC centric code POV, then yes, as i just said SC does what its told to do, it follows the codes rules, and narrow logic, its told to. but if the context is what i was talking about, then no, what SC does is dopey, it makes no sense. what is the goal phil? to satisfy users or to satisfy SC? the assumption will eventually be wrong in REALITY, meaning it will NOT accurately describe a given album 100% of the time, or in my case, 50%. if one is to design SC, one needs to ask this question: should we ALWAYS assume, as a non-optional rule, that even ONE artist mismatch = compilation? should the only way out of that be to assign an album artist or a comp tag to over-ride it? (choices that oftentimes have their own set of complications and baggage) my whole beef with the logic is the paradigm of it. SC may be following orders, but the orders should be illegal, or at least, optional. you simply can't justify saying every artist mismatch means compilation when there are LOTS of albums with artist mismatches that are NOT compilations, and certainly not compilations of "Various Artists" which is how SC sorts/denotes them. Sinatra's Duets is just one example. you say set an album artist on it then, and i say what if i don't want that? what if i want the various pairings in the artist list? you say set Comp=0 then, and i say thats too much. its silly that i should be forced to set a tag a lot of big apps don't support, and whose only purpose is to "undo" what SC did by force. and duets is just one example, there are lots of such vagaries that different people could treat different ways. Philip Meyer;367177 Wrote: > > >if i have a sinatra CD, duets, and it has differing TPE1 info, does > >that mean its a comp? no it doesn't. its not a comp, no matter how > >you slice it, it isn't a comp. > > > It is, if you haven't set an album artist. what, to SC you mean? and you think thats justified simply b/c SC says so and to hell with the reality? the reality is it ISN'T a comp, no matter what SC determines. what i am saying is that here is an album in the real world that is NOT a compilation, but SC would call it one due to its VA logic. thats what i mean when i say the paradigm is flawed. Philip Meyer;367177 Wrote: > If you have not given enough information in tags, then you may have > undesirable results. I know you have album artist tags, so in your > case this album doesn't appear as a compilation. the undesirable result i got at first was SC making everything with a TPE1 mismatch a comp. it wasn't until later i got the TPE2 8001 option, and even then i had to straighten out all my TPE2 tags, and now as a result, SC thinks nothing i have is a comp. (and gracenote, WMP, etc... had set all my TPE2 tags, i never had before and i had no real use to do so for a long time, until i saw that i would need to use them to get an acceptable exp between SC and winamp and everything else) it would have been better for me if i could have just turned off VA logic, and sorted / denoted everything by either TPE1 or TPE2, EXCEPT those that i would suppress and identify with Comp=1 tags, or better yet, let the user identify tag strings to SC that would mean "this is a comp SC, treat as such." my problem now is that i seem to need SC to know some things are a comp, for things like the html album webpage builder. but that means things will get sorted into the damn "all comps go in here" location and i don't think thats what i want either. this is what i mean by the unintended consequences of all these clever logics that in the end are NOT logical in practice, for SOME users. i'm hardly alone. Philip Meyer;367177 Wrote: > > >sure, it is right SOMETIMES, but as i pointed out before, it got at > >least half of my albums wrong, (ie. of those that it called comps). > > > But as you keep telling me, you have album artist tags religiously set > on all of your music collection, so you should never have any > compilations. If you do, there's something else wrong. > > Anyway, this is off-topic, and discussed to death elsewhere! > > We should end this part of the discussion here. > > Phil yes, i do NOW have it on almost all my albums, but so what? first of all, we're not discussing whats best for ME alone, i always keep the marketplace in mind. secondly, this is only recently that all this has happened, so i don't even have all the quirks worked out yet. thirdly, i am positive that there are better ways to do all this. i'm not saying kill the VA logic, i'm saying make it optional. if it works for users, great, but if not, let them turn it off and figure out another way to do it. assign comp tags, get a string recognition system, whatever. it certainly would not be EXPECTED to a new user that their app has a non-optional compilation detection system, and esp one that says ONE artist mismatch is a comp. -- 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=56078 _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
