[SlimDevices: SqueezeNetwork] Better album art?

[thomsens]

willyhoops;241272 Wrote: 
> When I rip music I leave the tags as they are in freedb etc and then I
> gradually edit them into shape as and when I get time. For classical
> music I end up changing basically every single tag and it takes a long
> time (since i wrote the most powerful flac tag tool on the market at
> www.exceltagger.com you can imagine that i am pretty into tags). But
> with BMF it's not the end of the world if it takes you a while to get
> there, and if you are smart and good with a file manager BMF is better
> anyway i think no matter how good your tags end up. For me tags are
> nice for display while the music plays, and useful from time to time
> when you want to search for something. 
> 
> Also one of the reasons I have to do so much work on tags is becuase
> the girlfriend has an iPod which does not have the BMF power. So I am
> forever tinkering with the flac tags and running a convert flac to acc
> program (which i wrote) for her and making sure compliations etc show
> up only once in the cover art album view etc. Eg last night she told me
> her ipod is messsed up by a new 25CD dance-techo set which has added so
> many new aritsts, please can i get rid of all those names. Maintaining
> a real big flac collection and converting into acc for iPod really
> teaches you how much better BMF is.
> 
> I have not convinced you, by the sound of it, that BFM is the greatest,
> but I am glad you think it's a worthwhile upgrade. Now all we need is a
> developer for the few hours work this simple upgrade requires!

This is definitely one area where it seems for non-classical stuff you
should take the 2 seconds to standardize your primary tags (artist,
album, year, genre).  That's easy payback for  greatly reduced tag edit
burden later - even if you never clean it up.  For Classical, tagging is
still a PITA as you know and probably not feasible to do right at rip
time.  From this thread, this appears to be your primary beef as to why
the automatically generated sorts based on tags don't work for you, and
I don't blame you.  You have a lot of music in the "Classical" area.  I
have a limited collection of classical (~68 CDs), so I just go by
composer/album like popular music...this doesn't work well.  Perhaps
another solution is to provide a scope for the tag generated lists -
i.e., ignore these classical directories...

I actually use both methods of browsing, although admittedly I'm big on
tags for the primary method.  I have perfectly tagged stuff (for me) for
artist, album, genre, track title, track#, and year - except for
Classical.  I'm still debating per song year for collections...  And I
arrange the music logically (again, for me) into folders.  My primary
reason for folder management was not for browsing, but rather for
playlist creation (choose directories to include).  For grins I opened
WMP and found that it does include album art when browsing the raw
folder structure as you point out.

I also do tags to minimize burden on others who access my collection
and to simplify conversion to MP3 for devices that can't read FLAC and
use tags primarily.  One other potential issue with BMF vs. the
database method is that it can be slower at times.  That may not matter
in your case.  In any case, I like having both methods at my disposal
and do the tag work to allow that.  I do think I'd like a way to create
music subgroups to limit the view at times, though.  But, I'd like to
apply that to the tag generated lists.

In any case...interesting discussion.


-- 
thomsens
------------------------------------------------------------------------
thomsens's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1352
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39082