INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => Media Center 12 (Development Ended) => Topic started by: sirrahmit on May 14, 2008, 05:21:44 pm
-
I am finally in need of re-ripping my collection. For whatever reason, over the years I have acquired lots of tracks that have errors in them and figure I might as well bite the bullet an re-rip using the latest and greatest technologies.
I have seen a lot of old posts out there requesting a re-rip feature in MC, but I haven't seen anything to indicate it was ever added. I also haven't seen anything on the topic in recent months.
I know there are 'work-around' ways to re-rip based on previous posts, but I was hoping someone could tell me if this is a feature that might be available in MC soon. If so, I'll hold off until it is available.
Thanks for any input!
Listening to: 'Siberian Khatru' from 'Close to The Edge' by 'Yes' on Media Center 12
-
There's no feature in MC to do this unfortunately.
You're right about old posts, there are alot of them as this is something thats done quite often by people as they get more into their music collection and they want to either upgrade their old 128kb/s to some VBR -extreme or to go the step beyond that even and do lossless. Sadly however these posts are the only way to do it.
I had to do this like a month or two ago and I still haven't got around to actually doing the move over to replace the old album info onto the newly ripped albums :(
-
+1 for this feature request... I read some of the old threads and the work-arounds sound like a real headache.
As I get better gear and as hard discs get cheaper, I'm leaning more towards re-ripping to a lossless format, too.
-
+1, I would find this feature very useful
-
<aol>Me too!</aol>
-
I would also vote for such a feature. Sounds uselfull!
-
I've been looking for this feature too, and even got to the point of creating a plug-in in an alpha stage but ran out of time.
-
one more vote!
-
+1
My goal is to preserve a track's database contents/tags, while replacing the associated music file.
1. Select the database record.
2. Re-rip the track from CD, OR select an external file that already exists (I do a lot of digitizing of my vinyl collection into .wav, then have MC rip the .wav into .mp3 and/or .flac).
3. Have the new rip become the file part of the existing database record, rather than a new db record.
4. Write the tags from the database into the new file.
In other words, swap out the media file of an existing database record, with the option to either re-rip or import to get that media file.
-
Just adding my vote to the list. This would be an extremely useful feature that I would absolutely utilize.
That said, I'm not sure how this would be implemented. I'm curious to hear some opinions on what the best approach would be for some of the details. For example, what conditions would have to be met for a rip to be considered a "re-rip"? Would it be an issue of album and artist tags matching? If the track names were slightly different, how would the system handle this situation -- would it assume that the existing imported files have the correct names, or would it assume that the CD had the latest information?
Thanks for feedback,
Larry
-
It seems there are two ways a track's media file might be updated, presumably to a higher-quality file. In both cases, the goal is to swap out the media file of an existing database record, without messing up the record, and with the ability to then write the database tag data into the new file.
Option 1: Replace existing tracks by re-ripping them from the same CD, exactly the same tracks, to update the media files without altering the tracks' existing database records, then update the embedded tags from the database records.
Option 2: Replace an existing track by selecting a new file, which might be from a CD (but just one track) or another file (such as a .wav digitized from vinyl, or a purchased download), also without altering the track's existing database record, then update the embedded tags from the database record.
-
MusicHawk has it. That's exactly what I need it to do.
To comment on lalittle's comments/questions:
That said, I'm not sure how this would be implemented. I'm curious to hear some opinions on what the best approach would be for some of the details. For example, what conditions would have to be met for a rip to be considered a "re-rip"? Would it be an issue of album and artist tags matching? If the track names were slightly different, how would the system handle this situation -- would it assume that the existing imported files have the correct names, or would it assume that the CD had the latest information?
I think is would be a safe assumption to always use the data in the MC library when re-ripping, otherwise the user would likely just delete the file(s) from MC then use the rip function. Basically start over.
I know I have spent years getting my MC library data the way I want it and I would hate to see a re-rip function that tried to fill those fields on its own and wipe out years of work.
I would think the process of when or what to re-rip would normally be defined by the user. Something like right click an album and select re-rip. Or select re-rip after inserting a CD.
That being said, I suppose it could be automated just like the current Rip feature is and controlled through options. At a minimum, there would need to be confirmation messages (that could probably be turned off if desired).
Here is some (bad) psudocode for what an automated re-rip process might be like:
Insert CD
If CD is detected in the MC Library
CD is a re-rip candidate
end if
If re-rip candidate
If options set to auto re-rip
perform re-rip process (verify with prompts based on options settings)
else
if user requests to re-rip
perform re-rip process
end if
end if
else
normal rip candidate
end if
re-rip process (start)- determine which tracks from the CD are in the MC library based on track number only (file names could be ambiguous)
- re-rip the existing MC tracks to a temp directory (ignore tracks numbers not already in MC library or maybe use options/prompts to rip all tracks or just existing MC lib tracks)
- copy or move the newly ripped files over the existing files using the current MC library file name.
- update the tags of the new files from the MC library
- update the MC library from the tags (gets the new bitrate info, etc.)
- set some sort of property to identify the file as having been re-ripped. maybe a re-rip date field or something like that.
re-rip process (end)
If the process is not automated, it would simply depend on selections made by the user, but the re-rip process outlined above is really the same.
I really like Option 2 as outlined by MusicHawk for just doing a file replace rather than a re-rip.
This might be very useful if you had a damaged CD that you wanted to re-rip. Since the CD is damaged and you cannot re-rip it without errors.
You could purchase the damaged track(s) from an on-line source for cheap.
A function to easily replace the existing files with the new files would be great.
Anthem
Listening to: 'Six Degrees Of Inner Turbulence (II. About To Crash)' from 'Six Degrees of Inner Turbulence - Disc 2' by 'Dream Theater' on Media Center 12
-
BIG TIME vote for this "feature". IMHO, should have been part of the basic feature set.
-
The only way that I've found to accomplish a "re-rip" is to set the "Overwrite files that have the same name" in the File Managment section of the Advanced CD Ripping Settings. This way if I have a CD that I originally ripped at 160 kbps and rip it again at 256, it just overwrites the file, everything in the database stays (minus last played/number times played). Maybe that will help you sirrahmit.
-
>> Overwrite files that have the same name
I understand this to mean "new files that the ripper gives the same name as existing files", which has some value. But after tagging, my files always get renamed and moved. Any desire to re-rip or replace happens much later (days/years). That's why the request for a way to update a database record with any arbitrary new file.
-
bump... Any more votes/thumbs up?
-
<aol>Me too</aol>
;D
-
<aol>Me too</aol>
;D
Me three...