[Logo] Jaikoz and SongKong Forums
  [Search] Search   [Recent Topics] Recent Topics   [Members]  Member Listing   [Groups] Back to home page 
[Register] Register / 
[Login] Login 
Messages posted by: paultaylor  XML
Profile for paultaylor -> Messages posted by paultaylor [7361] Go to Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 236, 237, 238 ... 244, 245, 246 Next 
Author Message

org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException: Cannot parse '\??': '*' or '?' not allowed as first character in WildcardQuery

Fixed in Jaikoz 1.10
In Jaikoz 1.10 (released today) these issues are addressed.

Jaikoz now support Is Compilation and Album Artist Fields. Both are populated by MusicBrainz lookups, MusicBrainz sets the Is Compilation flag if the musicbrainz release type='compilation'.

The Album Artist can be used in the subfolder and file renaming masks. Usually the album artist would have the same value as the artist, but for Compilations album artist is likely to be Various Artist. So all Compilatons can be kept together using this methd.
In Jaikoz 1.10 (released today) the Punctuation Remover disabled by default
In Jaikoz 1.10 released today 'Band/Orchestra/Accompaniment' has been renamed 'Album Artist', and can be selected as a field in Rename Filename/Sub Folder from Tags.
Now displayed on in the Detail Summary tab in Jaikoz 1.10 released today
This is a major release that has a number of improvements related to MusicBrainz and iTunes. The main items are a detail panel that allows you to edit details of the current track quickly and easily. Support for extended iTunes fields such as Sort Composer and Is Compilation, more fields are now populated from MusicBrainz and there is better support for Compilation Albums.

More details at http://www.jthink.net/jaikoz/jsp/news/build1030.jsp
Thanks Ill take this into account when I get to this.

Focher wrote:
I was thinking of a more comprehensive workflow method that should probably be combined with the defined behavior you can define for the Auto Correct function.

Currently, you can tell Jaikoz what order to perform tasks and then it performs these tasks in sequence. For example:

1) Retrieve acoustic ID
2) Match Musicbrainz tags
3) Correct Artist
4) Correct filename

I would change two things. First, I would add a "Save" action that could be added at any step of the way - you could even have it save after every task if you wanted to.

Yes this idea was put forward previously at http://www.jthink.net/jaikozforum/posts/list/151.page

I will add a save task, however this will save all changes to the file and I dont expect most customers actually use the Autocorrecter so i think I will also add a save option specifically for the Create Acoustic ids solution. Performance will be better anyway if the save is incorporated into the task.

Focher wrote:

Second, I would allow the user to change the behavior so that instead of performing the tasks on all files before moving to the next task, allow the user to specify that those tasks run in sequence per file.

I cant do this because the local correct tasks such as Correct Artist work by comparing all the files and selecting the most popular option, they do not work record by record.

Focher wrote:

I guess I don't see the risk there if you handle duplicate files the same way you currently do (append a number to the name).

I think you misunderstood me my point about multiple files was not that there was a risk of data corruption, it was that performance is going to deteriate with multiple saves of the same file because saving to disk is quite a slow task.

Focher wrote:
I was thinking that you could just choose which attributes force a save of the update. This would be good for us who are willing to take the risk of a somewhat automated mass update and save the time of waiting for a file save / directory reorg at the end of the process. 

Like 'Save on Acoustic id Updated', 'Save on Album name' updated ... rather than 'Save during Retrieve Acoustic Id', 'Save during tag from MusicBrainz'.

That sound more complicated to me , and if the saves are attribute level you could end up with multiple saves of the same file, unless extra precautions were taken.

With the original 'Save during Retrieve Acoustic Id' idea would it be expected that any changes to the file so far were saved or only the Acoustic id was saved. For example if the user had manullay edited the artist name before running 'Retrieve Acoustic Ids' would that be saved. My own view is it should not be, the save option should only apply to the Acoustic id itself.
There are a whole of extra reports I would like to add including this one

Al_Truist wrote:

I bought m.m.t. before and it actually has an offline musicbrainz database to improve speed and it is much faster... but doesn´t support acoustic fingerprinting. So it is possible but only without acoustic fingerprints, because they take so much disk space?

Ive tried mmt this but it didnt work very well for me at all, and you have to make decisions over where to check (offline/online)

Al_Truist wrote:

it would be nice if while I am selecting the right tags from the first ten results, the next ten were loaded in background, so I don´t have to wait each time.  

yes, thats a good point. (You can increase how many records are processed in a batch (1-200) if that helps.
The assumption was that if the files already had images, they were likely to be correct, but its a valid point you make.

In the meantime, you could delete the images, run the correcter and then only save the records that images were found for and reload the other records hence preserving their images.
Yes, either by editing the BaseFolder and SubFolder options so that the files are saved to that new location. or by selecting files in the row header and from the pop menu selecting the 'Save and Move...' option, from here you can select the folder to move them to.

Focher wrote:
Perhaps an overall more flexible set of options that let's you specify which info to save automatically? 

Im not sure what else I would like to see automatically saved, Acoustic ids are the only thing that Jaikoz can guarantee to be correct., what else would you like to see ?

Al_Truist wrote:
I bought Jaikoz and I´m very happy with it, thanks!

Thankyou, thats nice to hear.

Al_Truist wrote:
1. what about having a big part of the musicbrainz data stored locally, so that access is much faster? maybe just the most popular 3000 artists or so?

Well it would be impossible to have a big part of the data stored locally because its just too large. I could store a small amount but how do you select the largest artists, and of course the data will be out of date and will not reflect modifications since the data was dumped. There would be extra admin duties for me to keep it uptodate and it extra bandwidths costs I would have to take on. It would provide speed increases for some customers but I don't believe it is a very flexible or scaleable solution. IF I had a lot more customers I could consider mirroring the MusicBrainz Server and providing higher throughput rates for jaikoz connections, but I have nowhere near enough customers at the moment to make this feasible. So for the moment with Jaikoz I aim to make it as automated as possible so for example customers can do their processing overnight with minimal impact.

Al_Truist wrote:

2. It would be nice to have a one-button slolution for:
-loading all files in the music folder into jaikoz
-autocorrecting mp3s the offline way or the musicbrainz way, depending what is possible for each file.
-saving tags
-saving filenames accordingly to the tags

what do you think about those suggestions? 

The first 2nd and 4th options are already available in the AutoCorrecter. If we add Opening a Folder and Saving Files to the autocorrecter we could do what you suggest, yes I think that is a good idea.
Appears to be a problem processing records with ? in it, Ill look into it further.

It is unfortunate that Jaikoz crashed, Im suprised I would have thought it would just return an error. But Focher is correct asking Jaikoz to hold 25,000 records in memory is asking alot, I think when I introduce a File/open using a tree structure customers will find it easier to process subsets of data the time.

There would be some benefit to gaining from having Jaikoz Save Acoustic Ids to file as they are processed on the basis that the acoustic id is ALWAYS correct, takes longer to generate than any other task and I cant see any reason why somebody would not want to save it. However this would break Jaikozes rule of only persisting changes as and when the customer demands and could cause confusion. I could add a setting 'Save Acoustic Id to File as Created' which would save this attribute (but no others) automatically, but this would mean that the status flag would revert to unchanged as soon as it had been saved. What do people think ?
When doing Tag from Filename it does do this kind of thing already, but the local corrects do not have access to MusicBrainz so it only go so far. Im not entirely clear on what exactly you want to happen.
There is a column called 'Band/Orchestra/Accompaniment' which has been renamed for the next release to 'Album Artist'. For compilations this should contain the value 'Various Artists' or similar, for single artist releases it should be the same as the track artist. If you then created your folder structure based on the album artist you would get round this problem.

'Album Artist' is not available from 'Rename Folder From Tags Settings' and 'Album Artist' is not populated automatically from MusicBrainz in the current release of Jaikoz but Ill see if I can squeeze it into the next release.

Nocturnal wrote:
Am I correct in thinking that the MusicBrainz ID only is the same when it is the exact same release of a song? In other words, the MB ID of "Michael Jackson - Billie Jean" on the album "Thriller" should always be DIFFERENT from the MB ID of "Michael Jackson - Billie Jean" on the greatest hits album "Number Ones"? 

Yes that is correct AFAIK whereas the Acoustic Id/Puid should be the same if the same version of the track was put on both albums
Yes but I explained to you why it didn't do as you expected (because it wasn't populating the Description field, because the Unique id Field is not MusicBrainz specific.) This problem will go away when an edit tab which is not ID3 specific, and there will be a field in the Detail tab in the next release
Hi are you talking about 'Local Artwork Correct' or 'Remote Artwork Correct'
Select records using the row header column ( the left most column with row numbers on), and right click to close the selected files.

Is this confusing, your not the first person to ask this - would you prefer it if the close option was available when you select fields in the table itself ?

Yes, they will both identify the same tracks in MusicIPs database
It does, but because they are calculated from the actual music rather than being a field that can be edited they are viewable in the View Pane/MPEG Tab rather than the Edit pane.

In the next release Ive added the actual time to the summary panel within the detail panel.
In the next release, Sort columns (Sort Title,Sort Artist and Sort Album) will be prominent, and the Sort Artist will be populated from MusicBrainz.
You can (I Thought we discussed this in another posting)
Thanks for your idea these are two enhancements Ive added to the list, would this do what you want ?

Add a Musicbrainz option to allow you to only retrieve matches that are 'Official' releases , and from a particular country.

Allow you to select some items with same albumname, and then try and minimize the number of releases the selected tracks are from.

Pitman6787 wrote:
I think that, in addition to the organization of alphabetizing the list of albums and artists individually, you should be able to get alphabetized your list of songs by artist by album, like on iTunes. Like on iTunes, it would be enabled by pressing the artist header twice. 

I thought iTunes was meant to be easy to use, Ive never seen that before!

I think a general mutlicolumn sort might be better

Pitman6787 wrote:
I think that there should be a search field, like the one on iTunes, which allows one to search song names, album names, and artist names all at once and individually, but, also, all the other fields Jaikoz has should be searchable. That way, one can work with specific songs that may not have normally able to become close enough together on the list of songs to work with a specific list of songs together at once. 

This would be a custom filter, this is a good idea, a similar idea is already on the list.

Nocturnal wrote:
Since I doubt the problem is in the output itself, it might be caused by processing the output before it's entirely finished (i.e. it still has to write "npuid>" or something)?

If you need me to beta-test a possible bugfix, let me know.  

Yes I think there is a possibility of reading before output has completed, which would be more likely on a multi-threaded system, I may ask you to beat test sometime this week, thanks.
Profile for paultaylor -> Messages posted by paultaylor [7361] Go to Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 236, 237, 238 ... 244, 245, 246 Next 
Go to:   
Powered by JForum 2.1.6 © JForum Team