philchillbill wrote:
> Aha, indeed more complex. What's the advantage of embedding a cue-sheet
> in a flac rather than just regular tags?
This is an increasingly less popular format: whole CDs ripped to a
single flac with all the metadata (track list cuesheet, album art, liner
notes & etc.)
gharris999 wrote:
> Not quite. All the cuesheets are embedded in the flacs. The script
> would have to extract all the cuesheets from 6,670 flac files via
> metaflac, presumably -- and that would involve extracting ALL the
> VORBIS_COMMENT tags, and then determining which VORBIS_COMMENT is
philchillbill wrote:
> Not commenting on the sanity/desirability of the requirement to do so,
> but if you need to add a single line of text to hundreds of files then a
> 3-line script in e.g bash/Perl/Python will do it in a jiffy. No need to
> do it by hand.
Not quite. All the cuesheets are
mherger wrote:
> > Hmm I see in the comments for the pull request that Michael wasn't
> > totally convinced of the logic behind it and said it would be easy to
> > revoke if it caused issues. It has caused issues.
>
> Please define "issues", and some number to allow for the plural :-).
>
> If
mherger wrote:
> > Hmm I see in the comments for the pull request that Michael wasn't
> > totally convinced of the logic behind it and said it would be easy to
> > revoke if it caused issues. It has caused issues.
>
> Please define "issues", and some number to allow for the plural :-).
>
> If
Hmm I see in the comments for the pull request that Michael wasn't
totally convinced of the logic behind it and said it would be easy to
revoke if it caused issues. It has caused issues.
Please define "issues", and some number to allow for the plural :-).
If the issue is a change in behaviour
gharris999 wrote:
> Yes, I think they're all related. What I'm unsure of is if the intended
> result was to force everyone to have to manually tag all their cuesheets
> if they wanted them to be recognized as compilations. That seems like a
> really big change in fundamental behavior for the
gharris999 wrote:
> So, apparently, the only way to get multi-artist cuesheets to show up in
> Various artists now is to add:
>
> REM COMPILATION 1
>
> ..to every cuesheet that you want to show up under Various Artists. In
> my case, to do that manually, would be hundreds of hours of work.
>
So, apparently, the only way to get multi-artist cuesheets to show up in
Various artists now is to add:
REM COMPILATION 1
..to every cuesheet that you want to show up under Various Artists. In
my case, to do that manually, would be hundreds of hours of work.
So again, my question is: why
Yes, I think they're all related. What I'm unsure of is if the intended
result was to force everyone to have to manually tag all their cuesheets
if they wanted them to be recognized as compilations. That seems like a
really big change in fundamental behavior for the scanner and I'm
surprised
gharris999 wrote:
> Am I understanding this commit:
>
> https://github.com/Logitech/slimserver/commit/68ec4e69d55e9746c8d4dee4fa1c74617a5464e9
>
> ..correctly? That it's asking that I go back, extract embedded
> cuesheets from about 8,000 flacs in my library, identify which ones are
>
Am I understanding this commit:
https://github.com/Logitech/slimserver/commit/68ec4e69d55e9746c8d4dee4fa1c74617a5464e9
..correctly? That it's asking that I go back, extract embedded
cuesheets from about 8,000 flacs in my library, identify which ones are
compilations and then manually add:
OK, just to be clear, the "Various Artists" compilation behavior is
broken in 8.2 & 8.3 for me for whole-album-flacs with embedded
cuesheets.
I've identified the commits that break the behavior:
Code:
OK: Logitech Media Server Version: 8.2.0 - git-e5255b339 @
gharris999 wrote:
> I'm late to the party in terms of using 8.3. I've just cloned the repo
> this evening and scanned my music library. I can't seem to get my
> compilation albums to show up under:
>
> Genres->Genre Name->Various Artists
>
> ..i.e. there's no "Various Artists" in the list
14 matches
Mail list logo
