MediaMonkey forum

Belgrath wrote:Is there a node withing TI that will show you all of the file names that are not conforming to your standard.

Let's say that I use.

<Album Artist> - <Album> - <Track#> - <Title> as my convention, however, there's a few files that are only tagged
with <Album Artist> - <Album> - <Title>... Is there a way to show those files?

Thanks ahead of time,
Belg

There's a MM node that shows this already under "Files to edit", called 'Unorganized tracks'.

nohitter151 wrote: There's a MM node that shows this already under "Files to edit", called 'Unorganized tracks'.

I don't explicitly see an option in the auto-organize rules where I could set a search pattern of <artist>-<album> etc...

Is it under the Library>Auto-Organize menu in the options?

I'd rather not have MM go out and auto-do something, I'd like to be able to see all of the tracks that don't conform to the rule and then choose what filename tagging pattern to use. In the case of some mixed compilations I have another format that I normally use.

Belg

It won't automatically do anything unless you've checked "Automatically Organize Tracks (during scans or edits)" on that options sheet. You set up your organize rules on there, and then when you go to the "Unorganized tracks" node, it will check the files against those files and display any not matching. Thus, showing you exactly what you want.

There's also a script by Trixmoto which can do this, but it's not as advanced as the built in feature (it only works on the most recently used organize mask).

Mizery_Made wrote:It won't automatically do anything unless you've checked "Automatically Organize Tracks (during scans or edits)" on that options sheet. You set up your organize rules on there, and then when you go to the "Unorganized tracks" node, it will check the files against those files and display any not matching. Thus, showing you exactly what you want.

There's also a script by Trixmoto which can do this, but it's not as advanced as the built in feature (it only works on the most recently used organize mask).

Wow... wow... and more wow.

I've been using this program for 4 years now and everytime when I think I've hit a wall, there's already a script or internal feature that handles my task. Even after 4 years I'm still learning how to use this program. Thanks for all of the help, much appreciated.

Belg

iamsid wrote:The "some tracks misses album art" node doesn't seem to be working right for me. When I open the node, all of the tracks seem to have album art, even after updating the whole album with the same album art, the node keeps returning the same number of tracks needing edit. Also when you expand the node, each track has a (1) beside it. Doesn't this mean there is album art for each track with a (1)? If they all have the (1), they shouldn't be in the node, right? Maybe I'm just not using the node right. I have tried both version 3.9.3 and version 3.9.4.....Any help would be appreciated. --- Sid

You need to close the main "Albums with..."-node and expand it again to refresh changes. If there still is a problem, please provide a screen shot of the issue.

Bex wrote:

iamsid wrote:The "some tracks misses album art" node doesn't seem to be working right for me. When I open the node, all of the tracks seem to have album art, even after updating the whole album with the same album art, the node keeps returning the same number of tracks needing edit. Also when you expand the node, each track has a (1) beside it. Doesn't this mean there is album art for each track with a (1)? If they all have the (1), they shouldn't be in the node, right? Maybe I'm just not using the node right. I have tried both version 3.9.3 and version 3.9.4.....Any help would be appreciated. --- Sid

You need to close the main "Albums with..."-node and expand it again to refresh changes. If there still is a problem, please provide a screen shot of the issue.

Thanks for the reply. Definitely did the refresh thing a bunch already. Still an issue. I think the problem is with the filters. I have a pretty big collection and have filters setup to segment them, by folder. Most of the music - the music I'm working on cleaning up - is in one folder: "Music Main", while the rest is in another folder called "Wifes Music". There are duplicates to be sure, but right now I'm only concerned with the titles (and albums) in "Music Main". However, even with the filter set to just that folder on both the library and in "TI General Settings" (on all nodes), the query still seems to be showing me the filtered side of the whole dataset. Does that make sense?

In other words, if I have 12 songs on an album, 6 tracks in "Music Main" (with album art) and 6 in "Wifes Music" (without album art), and all filters set to only show "Music Main", the Some Tracks Misses Album Art shows the album as having tracks missing album art, but only shows the 6 tracks from "Music Main" - thus all tracks (that I can see) have a (1) beside them. Only when I remove the filter, do ALL the tracks show up and the results make more sense.

Anyway, I don't know if this makes any sense or helps anyone else, but I thought I'd try and explain in case it might help make this already great tool even better. Thanks again for the script. It really is amazing. Let me know if any of this makes sense and if there's a way to stop it from happening.

So I have spent a lot of time trying to organize things and love the script....but is there a way to auto-execute the suggested changes and inconsistencies that are found??

@iamsid,
Thanks for the explanation. I've been away a week so I will look into this later today.

@Spqrbc753,
No sorry, the script currently only finds stuff for you to fix. But I have been thinking to add some correction possibilities, what "suggested changes" do you mean?

Emufan wrote:

Bex wrote:Thanks Emufan!
Most, if not all, of your wishes are already implemented in or planned for next the version. I don't know when it's going to be released though, I struggle with some complex issues to get everything to work properly. In a couple of weeks maybe?

Thanks for the reply. Great news! So I'm looking forwart for the new version.

Are there perhaps any news here?

Emufan wrote:

Emufan wrote:

Bex wrote:Thanks Emufan!
Most, if not all, of your wishes are already implemented in or planned for next the version. I don't know when it's going to be released though, I struggle with some complex issues to get everything to work properly. In a couple of weeks maybe?

Thanks for the reply. Great news! So I'm looking forwart for the new version.

Are there perhaps any news here?

dont know where you found that post you quoted but
the one above is your answer.

check it out he says he has been away, and that he is thinking about adding stuff to it.

Bex wrote:@iamsid,
Thanks for the explanation. I've been away a week so I will look into this later today.

@Spqrbc753,
No sorry, the script currently only finds stuff for you to fix. But I have been thinking to add some correction possibilities, what "suggested changes" do you mean?

Emufan wrote:

Emufan wrote:

Bex wrote:Thanks Emufan!
Most, if not all, of your wishes are already implemented in or planned for next the version. I don't know when it's going to be released though, I struggle with some complex issues to get everything to work properly. In a couple of weeks maybe?

Thanks for the reply. Great news! So I'm looking forwart for the new version.

Are there perhaps any news here?

Sorry, I haven't had any time to work on this script at all yet. So much to do and so little time...

hello, i've just disovered this script this week-end and i just want to say it is AWESOME !

Big thank you for all the hard work.

it is very very usefull.

Thank you, Emrik!

Suggestions like if you have multiple genre's there is an easy way to remove the 2nd or 3rd genre and move the mp3's to that single genre?


"the" inconsistencies, a simple 1 click solution to move all to include 'the' or not include it....etc.

s

I cast my vote for leaving this as a 'report' script and not making it 'repair' script since there are already scripts that other authors worked hard to create to fix the problems found here. Just my opinion.