MediaMonkey forum

This is Meghan Trainor's latest album. I originally had 16 tracks. All fine with MMA. I added Track 17 in MM5 when it became available. I had to adjust several tags and removed Disc IDs, etc. Did a sync in MMA and Track 17 sorts at the top of the list now rather than at the bottom [after Track 16] the way you would expect. What else does MMA take into account when displaying the album?

Check Track#, Disc#, Album and Album Artist.

Lowlander wrote: ↑Sun Jan 04, 2026 6:15 pm Check Track#, Disc#, Album and Album Artist.

The only difference is that Artist is different. Some tracks add another artist along with Meghan Trainor. Album Artist is the same for all tracks. [I removed all Disc #'s because I have been told that MMA might not handle them well?]

Which Build (Help > About) of MMW are you using and did you do a USB 9r wifi Sync?

There is no issue with using Disc# in MMA.

Lowlander wrote: ↑Sun Jan 04, 2026 8:59 pm Which Build (Help > About) of MMW are you using and did you do a USB 9r wifi Sync?

There is no issue with using Disc# in MMA.

2024.2.1.3200 I thought @Peke told me that MMA had issues with Disc#.

Track 17 now appears between Tracks 3 and 4. Weird stuff. I think I did another sync from MMA.
EDIT: There is something changed in this version of MM5. Add/Rescan is MUCH slower than in previous version. And, in MMA, WiFi sync is abysmally slower than before? What's going on here?

Were files updated outside of MediaMonkey? It would explain both.

Is every scan of the same folder slow? Did you set MediaMonkey to rescan each file?

Lowlander wrote: ↑Mon Jan 05, 2026 6:46 pm Were files updated outside of MediaMonkey? It would explain both.

Is every scan of the same folder slow? Did you set MediaMonkey to rescan each file?

1. Whenever i make changes using Windows Explorer, I add/rescan to pick up any changes. But, yes, it's probably better to use Add/Change.
2. The graphic above looks like Options>Library in MM5.
3. Overall, I was trying to add the bonus track 17 after altering the tags and file names to match up with the other 16 tracks. I tried deleting the entire album and then using the bonus track album in it's entirety [with track 17]. It works fine now.
4. It does seem like Add/Rescan is still a bit slower than usual, but not as bad before.

It is actually slower as more is read during scanning. This is still being fine tuned.

Lowlander wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 5:52 pm It is actually slower as more is read during scanning. This is still being fine tuned.

I made sure that "Manual" was selected and not "Manual and Continuously". Scan results has been reporting 17,140 updated files. I am not sure what that means. I just did two Add/Rescans in a row. This is not what I want. It might explain why MMA is so abyssally slow when I do a WiFi Sync. All these updated files [if that is really what's been happening] would slow things down? It would be nice to be informed about what I consider to be major changes?
EDIT: If @Peke had time to do a remote it would help immensely.

Subsequent scans still show large amount of updated files?

Lowlander wrote: ↑Tue Jan 06, 2026 6:20 pm Subsequent scans still show large amount of updated files?

Yes. That's why I ran the Add/Rescan and got the same number of updated files. Something is wrong here. That's why I hoping that @PeKe could do a "Remote Session".
EDIT: One thing we can agree on is that if you run Add/Rescan twice in a row w/o changing anything, updated files should not be exactly the same?

TheEmpathicEar: I reproduced the rescan problem with some file types like AAC and MPC. I will fix it soon as: https://www.ventismedia.com/mantis/view.php?id=21916

Problem was fixed, it should be a lot better from the next beta build. Scan time could be somehow slower, because new version now checks also existence of external artworks during rescan (we consider to make it optional too), but the main problem was related to the unwanted "updated" flag assigned for some files, which were in fact not updated, it added these files to the updated statistics and consequentially slowed things down a lot.

MiPi wrote: ↑Wed Jan 07, 2026 7:09 am Problem was fixed, it should be a lot better from the next beta build. Scan time could be somehow slower, because new version now checks also existence of external artworks during rescan (we consider to make it optional too), but the main problem was related to the unwanted "updated" flag assigned for some files, which were in fact not updated, it added these files to the updated statistics and consequentially slowed things down a lot.

As you say above, v3201, is a bit faster. If external artworks are extending the time of the scan, it would be nice to be optional?