slimkid;314225 Wrote:
Hi Erland,
sorry to abuse your time and patience, but could you just confirm what
I think I understand (or assume) from all this:
I just did some tests based on MP3 files with TPE2 tags and no custom
tags.
slimkid;314225 Wrote:
If there is a unique ALBUMARTIST
What's wrong with putting Various Artists in the Album Artist tag if you
are saying that you want this as the Album Artists name.
Nothing really wrong with doing that. It's just a name after all.
However, I don't consider Various Artists to be an artist name; it's another
miss-use of the tag.
Folks - could someone please explain to me why we need this TPE logic at
all. Over the last 2 years I have been following the guidelines for
ripping my music collection using EAC into flac files. These are stored
in the recommended ARTIST\ALBUM or VARIOS ARTIST\GENRE\ALBUM structure.
Until SC7.01
Philip Meyer;314375 Wrote:
What's wrong with putting Various Artists in the Album Artist tag if
you
are saying that you want this as the Album Artists name.
Nothing really wrong with doing that. It's just a name after all.
However, I don't consider Various Artists to be an artist name;
I used to have my library and Slimserver set up just how I like it -
Compilations were correctly listed under Various Artists and
contributing artists did not appear in the main list of Artists. This
seems to have changed, now that I've moved to SC 7
The problem occurs when an album with a main
BBear;314411 Wrote:
Folks - could someone please explain to me why we need this TPE logic at
all.
not sure what you mean by that. one thing is treat TPE2 as ALBUMARTIST
which is fairly straight forward.
the other thing is a function SC has of VA detection logic.
i contend we don't need the
why does SC conflate an albums property, with how that album is named
(named via album artist?)
what i would do, is if something seems like a comp to SC, and there is
no album artist or TPE2 tag for it to use, it should then use the ALBUM
name, and set the COMP field in the positive.
i know you
I have just re-ripped Supernatural using the latest dBPoweramp (V13
Reference) and this automatically sets Compilation=0 which is helpful.
It also sets Album Artist = Santana
I think you'll find that dbPowerAmp stores Album Artist in a band tag.
I have dbPowerAmp (don't use the ripper, only use
I really don't understand the reason to start this discussion again, but
I guess I've probably missed something. No, I'm not trying to silence
anyone, I just don't understand why you guys keeps spending energy on
something that's already solved instead of doing something useful with
your time.
I really don't understand the reason to start this discussion again, but
I guess I've probably missed something. No, I'm not trying to silence
anyone, I just don't understand why you guys keeps spending energy on
something that's already solved instead of doing something useful with
your time.
I
in other words, if it finds a string like Various Artist in TPE2 or
an album artist tag, to then go ahead and classify it as a comp?
doesn't that make sense?
Absolutely not. A compilation album is when there are multiple artists on an
album. If you have guest performers on an album and thus
erland;314024 Wrote:
I really don't understand the reason to start this discussion again, but
I guess I've probably missed something. No, I'm not trying to silence
anyone, I just don't understand why you guys keeps spending energy on
something that's already solved instead of doing something
in such a case, if there is a mismatch, it WILL call that a VA album.
i know this b/c that was the case with one of the 2 albums that was
ID'd i mentioned in my previous post.
the code andy quotes shows this. one mismatch on one track (out of two
or more) is enough to get the classification.
It
we may have discovered a bug with it that also relates to this 8324 issue, in
that i can't find my 'TPE2=Various Artists' albums under the 'Home-Artists'
list.
I find this a strange thing to do. An album artist of Various Artists seems
contradictory. Any artist name being Various Artists
Philip Meyer;314027 Wrote:
I really don't understand the reason to start this discussion again,
but
I guess I've probably missed something. No, I'm not trying to silence
anyone, I just don't understand why you guys keeps spending energy on
something that's already solved instead of doing
Philip Meyer;314030 Wrote:
in other words, if it finds a string like Various Artist in TPE2 or
an album artist tag, to then go ahead and classify it as a comp?
doesn't that make sense?
Absolutely not. A compilation album is when there are multiple artists
on an album. If you have guest
Philip Meyer;314035 Wrote:
we may have discovered a bug with it that also relates to this 8324
issue, in
that i can't find my 'TPE2=Various Artists' albums under the
'Home-Artists' list.
I find this a strange thing to do. An album artist of Various
Artists seems contradictory.
why is
MrSinatra;314029 Wrote:
i don't use comp tags at all. i know very little about them. i don't
really understand the difference between TCMP and COMPILATION. maybe
you can explain it to me?
i also don't use itunes, and while my wife has a ac, i really don't do
much with it.
all i know
i guess i'm lost here. whats the beef? is it with non-standard tags,
or just differences between differing comp tags? is it possible for my
id3v2.3 tags to start with more than 4 characters? ie. TPE1, TPE2,
TCMP?
id3v2.3 tags are held in frames. A frame is named with four characters, like
would you prefer i had TPE2 say Compilation? why would you be
against it anyway?
By setting anything in an album artist tag, you are stating that an album isn't
a compilation album, so to call the album artist Compilation or Various
Artists seems odd. Entering Not a compilation as the album
Philip Meyer;314180 Wrote:
would you prefer i had TPE2 say Compilation? why would you be
against it anyway?
By setting anything in an album artist tag, you are stating that an
album isn't a compilation album, so to call the album artist
Compilation or Various Artists seems odd. Entering
erland;314024 Wrote:
1.
Bug '#8001' (http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8001) makes
MP3 files work as FLAC files, with the new option you can instruct
SqueezeCenter to treat TPE2 as ALBUMARTIST. The result is that MP3
albums with a TPE2 tag will not be treated as compilations
I can accept that there is no harm in having an option to turn off auto
compilation detection.
i really think the current VA logic is silly (from a design POV), altho i
admit it works good for some people (in their estimations).
It's not silly. It works well, and will work correctly for the
Philip Meyer;313874 Wrote:
I can accept that there is no harm in having an option to turn off auto
compilation detection.
then thats the main thing. regardless of anything else, we agree on
that, and so we agree it should not be a forced necessity on users,
like me, who would rather not have
I scanned this thread and decided it was really long enough without me
adding to it. But, here I am anyway
MrSinatra;313887 Wrote:
its the rules that are the problem. the reason it is silly, is b/c it
assumes that any album with a single TPE1 mismatch is a VA / comp
album. that is
htrd;313894 Wrote:
I scanned this thread and decided it was really long enough without me
adding to it. But, here I am anyway
You've made that statement several times in this thread. I assume the
logic behind your statement is obvious to you, but it leaves me quite
puzzled. Could you
Here's what the 'merge various artists' step of the scanner is doing:
Code:
Find all albums not currently marked as a compilation.
For each of those albums:
Get all tracks on the album with role = ARTIST (note: tracks with ALBUMARTIST
don't have an ARTIST role,
its the rules that are the problem. the reason it is silly, is b/c it
assumes that any album with a single TPE1 mismatch is a VA / comp
album. that is ludicrous.
No, it's not ludicrous. The vast majority of albums that have the same artist
on every song are not various artist/compilation
Philip Meyer;313911 Wrote:
that kind of auto-detection would be head and shoulders above what
we
have now.
So instead of looking for COMPILATION=1, it would look for
ARTIST=Various Artists? You really think that's better?
TPE2, not TPE1. and Andy says SC already looks for that
Philip Meyer;313911 Wrote:
its the rules that are the problem. the reason it is silly, is b/c it
assumes that any album with a single TPE1 mismatch is a VA / comp
album. that is ludicrous.
No, it's not ludicrous. The vast majority of albums that have the same
artist on every song are not
Andy, thx for this info, but can you please clarify:
andyg;313908 Wrote:
Here's what the 'merge various artists' step of the scanner is doing:
Code:
Find all albums not currently marked as a compilation.
For each of those albums:
Get all tracks on the
well, i dispute it. as i've said many times, *half* of what it
identified it got wrong. its simply a bad design assumption.
Half of what it identified for *you* may have been wrong. But even then, what
do you mean by half? Half of your music collection, or of all compilation
albums, or of
Forgot to mention that www.id3.org has some information on non-compliant tags
set by apps: http://www.id3.org/Compliance_Issues
Plenty of iTunes, WinAmp and WMP non-compliancy issues listed which you may
find useful.
Phil
___
discuss mailing list
Philip Meyer;313990 Wrote:
well, i dispute it. as i've said many times, *half* of what it
identified it got wrong. its simply a bad design assumption.
Half of what it identified for *you* may have been wrong. But even
then, what do you mean by half? Half of your music collection, or of
hi all...
reviving another old thread b/c the bug its about is due to be
discussed at the next bug meeting.
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=8324
first, lets get back on track.
the question posed by this thread is: Is the VA detection logic
necessary?
i don't see how anyone could
Philip Meyer;309981 Wrote:
I could understand the effect you are seeing if you are trying to browse
albums ordered by year, because what year would an album be sorted
under?
When I browse to an album that has different years in the tracks, it
shows up as multiple albums regardless of whether
If this is a problem in my tagging or there is someway to get around
this, like it sounds you have, I'd like to follow up in another thread.
If you could help.
I haven't got anything special in my tags, just standard YEAR tags for each
song.
Point me at another thread or send me a PM, if you
erland;309543 Wrote:
I completely agree with you regarding this, I'm just not sure that the
VA logic is an important part for average users. I do understand that
it is an important part in libraries that looks like your, but I
suspect your library has a lot more artists tagged on your albums
In general I would say SqueezeCenter is WAY too conservative on what an
album is. The various artists behavior is compounded by variances in
date being treated as separate albums.
Do you mean YEAR tag? Are you sure? I haven't seen any strange effects with
YEAR or DATE tags.
Philip Meyer;309931 Wrote:
Do you mean YEAR tag? Are you sure? I haven't seen any strange effects
with YEAR or DATE tags.
Yes, I'm still running 6.5.2, I don't think things have changed since,
but if you have an album with different year dates on the tracks it
will appear as multiple albums
but if you have an album with different year dates on the tracks it
will appear as multiple albums one for each year.
That definitely doesn't happen for me; I've never seen that effect before
(currently on 7.2). I'm sure I've entered different years for songs on some
greatest hits albums.
Of
erland;309251 Wrote:
You don't have to check folder names, the only things that might need
testing is how it reacts if album artist is set to Various Artists or
if a track has a single artist tag set to Various Artists.
my tags don't have an album artist tag at all. thats a user defined
tag
MrSinatra;309428 Wrote:
i guess i have to wait, b/c i just don't have the time to get into this
aspect of it. i've never been good at programming. also, does it cost
money? i do have a mac, but its the wifes and for now i'd rather keep
SC off of it, (and i'm not mac savvy yet anyway).
MrSinatra;309428 Wrote:
i guess i have to wait, b/c i just don't have the time to get into this
aspect of it. i've never been good at programming. also, does it cost
money? i do have a mac, but its the wifes and for now i'd rather keep
SC off of it, (and i'm not mac savvy yet anyway).
erland,
thats awesome!
so my question to you is what happens on the slim developer side, or
what is needed, to get this option incorporated into the nightly
betas?
i really do believe some users will find this option very useful,
especially infrant users but not limited only to them.
here's
MrSinatra;309158 Wrote:
so my question to you is what happens on the slim developer side, or
what is needed, to get this option incorporated into the nightly
betas?
Logitech regularly looks through bug/enhancement reports with provided
patches and checks if the patch is good enough. If
erland;309207 Wrote:
Logitech regularly looks through bug/enhancement reports with provided
patches and checks if the patch is good enough. If there is an
enhancement, they also decide if they like to add it to SqueezeCenter
and thus also manage the potential support issues later related to
MrSinatra;309211 Wrote:
right... it'll take some experimenting to see if certain strings in
tags or folder names cause one to be considered a comp by SC. my guess
is that SC won't look at strings or folder names with the VA logic
turned off, but its just a guess.
You don't have to
guys...
first, i've been away. i got married. but now i would like to revisit
these issues.
so i am sorry i started these threads / topics and disappeared, but the
wife, well, she wouldn't like me posting during our time. ;)
in any case...
i think we have gotten somewhat off track here.
MrSinatra;308712 Wrote:
first, i've been away. i got married. but now i would like to revisit
these issues.
This thread is dead. Dead. Dead, I tell you. :-)
It's very clear by recent activity in bugzilla that there are very
large changes planned for the database structure and how it will
MrSinatra;308712 Wrote:
first, i've been away. i got married.As I say to all who succumb to this
fate, myself
included...Commiserations, you can't be happy all your life. ;)
--
egd
Internet forums: conclusive proof depth of gene pool is indeed variable,
monkeys can be taught to cut code,
Jim i appreciate the reply, but i don't see why this should have to wait
for 7.3! ...or a whole new database schema.
my hope is that erland or phil or kdf or greg (or someone) will
consider the worthiness of my bug report, and hopefully find it worthy,
and implement the option.
but just waiting
Jim i appreciate the reply, but i don't see why this should have to wait
for 7.3! ...or a whole new database schema.
Because we rather concentrate on doing 7.3 right than wasting time fixing and
breaking again the current logic.
--
Michael
___
MrSinatra;308732 Wrote:
Jim i appreciate the reply, but i don't see why this should have to wait
for 7.3! ...or a whole new database schema.
my hope is that erland or phil or kdf or greg (or someone) will
consider the worthiness of my bug report, and hopefully find it worthy,
and
mherger;308740 Wrote:
Jim i appreciate the reply, but i don't see why this should have to
wait
for 7.3! ...or a whole new database schema.
Because we rather concentrate on doing 7.3 right than wasting time
fixing and breaking again the current logic.
Michael
i am asking this b/c i
Short answer is that it would need to be supported, and that's a lot
easier to say (or request) than do. It's rather obvious with 7.0 - 7.3
all in the targets, that there is a lot on the go.
However, as unsupported goes, SC is, as always open source. Download
the tar.gz version, install
kdf;308767 Wrote:
However, as unsupported goes, SC is, as always open source. Download
the tar.gz version, install activePerl and remove this line from
Slim\Music\Import.pm
Slim::Schema-mergeVariousArtistsAlbums;
It's around line 350 or so (plus remove the two lines before it).
On 9-May-08, at 10:09 PM, JJZolx wrote:
Does this make any bloody sense to anyone?
I'm thinking that anyone who had even ONE braincell willing to think
about this issue and actually make something happen..
lost that braincell in the three threads going on incessantly about
the same thing
kdf;300675 Wrote:
On 9-May-08, at 10:09 PM, JJZolx wrote:
Does this make any bloody sense to anyone?
I'm thinking that anyone who had even ONE braincell willing to think
about this issue and actually make something happen..
lost that braincell in the three threads going on
On 9-May-08, at 11:37 PM, JJZolx wrote:
kdf;300675 Wrote:
On 9-May-08, at 10:09 PM, JJZolx wrote:
Does this make any bloody sense to anyone?
I'm thinking that anyone who had even ONE braincell willing to think
about this issue and actually make something happen..
lost that braincell in
kdf;300681 Wrote:
No one taking part is actually capable of DOING anything. gotta make
you wonder.
This isn't a developer list. That no developers take part in this type
of a discussion is fairly standard. I don't think that anybody expects
them to.
I just learned something because of
forums.slimdevices.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
On 10-May-08, at 12:07 AM, JJZolx wrote:
kdf;300681 Wrote:
No one taking part is actually capable of DOING anything. gotta make
you wonder.
This isn't a developer list.
right...list police, good
No one taking part is actually capable of DOING anything. gotta make
you wonder.
I am capable of doing patches, but there's little incentive - things are
generally working for me (apart from a few minor issues that I've lived with
for a long time), so I'd be trying to change something in a
kdf;300681 Wrote:
No one taking part is actually capable of DOING anything. gotta make
you wonder.
I'm not sure I agree if you really meant no one, but if you change it
to most of the the people I can agree...
But I do agree that this discussion back and forth where the same
arguments
kdf;300675 Wrote:
if anyone comes out of this with a point, please do us all a favour
and make it...then kill anyone who keeps muttering on about the same
points.
-k
For the sake of efficiency, I'll skip over your insulting rant and get
to two points I believe everybody here agrees:
- Artist View (Home-Artists): when ALBUMARTIST tag is present in file,
then regardless of whether the album is compilation or not, it should
not go into Various Artist area. It should be listed as ALBUM by
ALBUMARTIST and be listed under ALBUMARTISTS in artist list
(Home-Artists-ALBUMARTIST).
JJZolx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I've figured out the difference
Jim, glad you figured out the issue - you should open a very specific
bug for this.
Btw, I didn't find this post offensive at all especially in relation
to some of the other posts by others in these threads. Also unlike
slimkid;300768 Wrote:
@kdf, I believe you are listening to these discussions through eMail
and are under wrong impression that this is coming from the developers
forum.
Actually, this is coming form the General forum, and I find your
assumptions about capabilities of the discussion
Phil Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yes, I'd agree with that, although I think it's a bit clearer to think of the
rule as follows:
When the scanner finds and album with an album artist tag, set
Compilation=No.
i.e. the fault is in the scanner that builds the library from scanning
I don't think that's quite right; if I understood JJZolx having
ALBUMARTIST set and COMPILATION=0 is when things break. I have *no*
COMPILATION tags set, and it works for me.
I was trying to say that if there is an album artist, then compilation tags
should be ignored. i.e if there is an album
not only that multiple ALBUMARTIST work on album. One can actually mix
and match various ALBUMARTISTS across the tracks of an album:
very good feature that definitely shouldn't be discontinued.
I doubt that was an intended feature. Sounds really wrong. ALBUMARTIST is for
grouping all songs on
Phil Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My only concern was that SqueezeCenter also stores a contributor
(artist foreign key) within the album record. This can only be one
artist, so what happens if I have two album artists?
As I said above, I was expecting multiple ALBUMARTIST tags not to
just FYI,
attached is slimserver database model. I'd like to turn your attention
to contributor_album table.
@greg, no serious discussion can be based on the premisse I don't use
it and I don't see why anybody else would.
If you want to participate in the real world excercise, I can give you
The way I use ALBUMARTIST and the way I believe it was intended is as a
means of designating the artist(s) to which the album should be
attributed. As an _override_ mechanism to the normal/original behavior
of attributing the album to all of the artists that appear on the
album.
I don't think
slimkid;300504 Wrote:
BTW, there's an issue with the VA that nobody is mentioning - even if
there is unique ALBUMARTISTS and different ARTISTs for tracks, album
will be considered a compilation and placed under Various Artists in
artists view. In album view, it will be sorted among other 'V'
JJZolx;300511 Wrote:
You're right.
IMO, designating an ALBUMARTIST should immediately override the normal
VA determination and make the album a non-compilation. You can do this
yourself with an explicity COMPILATION=0 tag in some file types, but it
shouldn't be necessary.
Setting
JJZolx;300522 Wrote:
That, IMO, is a bug. I think those artists should be suppressed whether
or not the album is a compilation. I think the problem is more
historical than anything else - at one time any album that had more
than one artist was considered a compilation no matter what. It
slimkid;300527 Wrote:
Solution I found is to tag only those tracks with COMPILATION=0.
Again, this is an album property, not a property of the track. If, for
some reason it affects how SqueezeCenter treats the artists on the track
then you're really just exploiting a side effect that could go
slimkid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@greg, no serious discussion can be based on the premisse I don't use
it and I don't see why anybody else would.
SlimKid, you have misinterpreted (or misrepresented) what I wrote.
I counter that no serious discussion can be had with someone such
as yourself
JJZolx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=5108
The example I always use is the Sinatra album called 'Duets', where
Sinatra records each track with a different artist. This is obviously
a non-compilation. It's a Sinatra album and you want it grouped with
JJZolx;300530 Wrote:
Again, this is an album property, not a property of the track. If, for
some reason it affects how SqueezeCenter treats the artists on the
track then you're really just exploiting a side effect that could go
away overnight.
Oh, I'm well avare of that. It just works,
I still can't imagine why anyone would want combinations of artists to
appear under Browse Artists but that of course is your choice. :-)
I don't do that for all artists, in fact not frequently at all. I do it when I
want to put the full names of artists in the ARTIST tags, but the album is
I wonder why I don't see this problem.. I do this sort of thing all
the time. I have the different ARTIST tags on each track, then a
single ALBUMARTIST across all tracks, and no COMPILATION tags anywhere
in my entire library. And I do not see those auxiliary track artists
in the Browse Artists
gregklanderman;300537 Wrote:
I wonder why I don't see this problem.. I do this sort of thing all
the time. I have the different ARTIST tags on each track, then a
single ALBUMARTIST across all tracks, and no COMPILATION tags anywhere
in my entire library. And I do not see those auxiliary
JJZolx [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Albums tagged like this would be marked compilations, wouldn't they?
Do they get grouped under the VA artist when you browse albums sorted
by artist, or do they get grouped with the ALBUMARTIST?
These albums get grouped under the ALBUMARTIST.
See Phil's
gregklanderman;300632 Wrote:
JJZolx JJZolx.395wrz1210368601 (AT) no-mx (DOT)
forums.slimdevices.com writes:
Albums tagged like this would be marked compilations, wouldn't they?
Do they get grouped under the VA artist when you browse albums
sorted
by artist, or do they get grouped
But it shouldn't be necessary to set COMPILATION=0 in most cases. I
think that's because there are guest performers and no album artist has
been set. So setting an album artist (or allowing an option for TPE2 to
be regarded as Album Artist), would fix that problem.
It was required with
CatBus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not the one throwing around the phrase standard tags as if it
meant something and refusing to use ID3 2.4 because it's only been
around for a decade.
It's hard to keep track given the extreme volume and tedium of this
(and related) threads, but which tag
MrSinatra [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ok, but its the same thing. SORT tags will override the VA logic just
like ALBUMARTIST will. (so VA logic is not necessary for you)
incorrect.
___
discuss mailing list
discuss@lists.slimdevices.com
Phil Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
SqueezeCenter library stores an artist id with each album record
(ie. a single artist needs to be associated with the album), so I
wonder what it has stored in this case? I thought it may make
several albums, such that it had a single artist associated
Please nobody break the ability to use multiple ALBUMARTIST tags!
Interesting. I've never thought of adding multiple album artists. What ends
up in artist column of the album table for such an album?
I don't think I can see the need for multiple album artists, as I generally
make a single
not only that multiple ALBUMARTIST work on album. One can actually mix
and match various ALBUMARTISTS across the tracks of an album:
track1 - ALBUMARTIST = a; b
track2 - ALBUMARTIST = a; c
track3 - ALBUMARTIST = b; c
album is listed by a, b, c
very good feature that definitely shouldn't be
slimkid;300185 Wrote:
not only that multiple ALBUMARTIST work on album. One can actually mix
and match various ALBUMARTISTS across the tracks of an album:
track1 - ALBUMARTIST = a; b
track2 - ALBUMARTIST = a; c
track3 - ALBUMARTIST = b; c
album is listed by a, b, c
very good feature
JJZolx;300194 Wrote:
Huh
Of course you can put any damned thing you want in the tags. But
ALBUMARTIST is an _album_ tag. Album tags should be consistent across
all tracks in an album. The example you give would be like tagging
different tracks in the same album with different
slimkid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Huh
the fact that you THINK it makes no logical sense, says only about your
limited experience. I also fail to see the relevance of the analogy to
album reply gain tag.
Good think is that above mentioned scenario works just fine and no
further
gregklanderman;300223 Wrote:
Gotta agree with JJZolx on this one - ALBUMARTIST is by definition a
property of the album. It is nonsensical to have different values for
different tracks.
And, what definition would that be? Nonsensical in what way?
gregklanderman;300223 Wrote:
Why is
Phil Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Interesting. I've never thought of adding multiple album artists.
What ends up in artist column of the album table for such an album?
Hi Phil,
You mean album.contributor? Haven't looked at it in a few months, but
I believe it's set to the first
slimkid [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And, what definition would that be? Nonsensical in what way?
ALBUMARTIST by definition pertains to the ALBUM - in fact, notice
how those are the first 5 letters.
TRACKARTIST (aka ARTIST) pertains to the TRACK.
greg
i want to thank you again for your other post in the other thread.
erland;299582 Wrote:
The current cost of SqueezeCenter is zero as far as I know, so it can't
get much cheaper, but I suppose you are talking about the whole system
including the SqueezeBox hardware.
actually, that works
I really can't see what everyone's problems are with compilation tags.
It's quite simple. SqueezeCenter applies good sensible logic for
determining compilation albums, if the user hasn't set up their own
compilation tags. This is better than all other apps, that don't
auto-calculate, and
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
