INTERACT FORUM

More => Old Versions => Media Center 11 (Development Ended) => Topic started by: jimpmc on July 31, 2003, 09:42:24 am

Title: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: jimpmc on July 31, 2003, 09:42:24 am

Hi,

I've been creating various custom view schemes in 9.1 (currently using latest build 225) for use on TiVo since they were re-enabled.   I'm slightly confused about the sorting on the TiVo of individual tracks, as it doesn't always correspond to the sorting saved with the scheme.

For example, I have a view scheme Genre/Album, when I look at it in MediaCenter and select a particular album, the columns are sorted (by default) to track #, artist, album, and name.  However, when I traverse to it on the TiVo, they seem to be sorted by Artist first instead of track #.  This works fine for single artist albums, but for soundtracks, the order is by artist (which changes).   I can explicitly add a modifier to sort by track # which seems to work, but then it isn't as useful in MediaCenter since multiple selections sorts by track # first.  I suppose I can always create a whole new grouping specifically for TiVo, but then I have to recreate each view scheme, since I can't figure out how to copy them.

Is this expected behavior on the TiVo?  Any suggestions?

Thanks,
-J

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: John Gateley on July 31, 2003, 12:06:45 pm

Hi Jim,

This is neither the expected behavior for the TiVo nor is it correct. I checked and found out sorting is not implemented, so you are getting the default sort order.

I'll fix this, but it may not be soon, and it may not be the fix you want since the TiVo tells the server how to sort. Feel free to bump this message if you don't see anything in a week.

j

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: jimpmc on July 31, 2003, 06:20:01 pm

Thanks for the reply...I'm not sure I understand how this would end up working -- in any event, the ability to "manually" set the the sorting in the view scheme should hopefully remain.   At least with that working (the way it is now), I can create separate view schemes designated for the TiVo which force the sorting by track # if the last level is album, or by title if looking at tracks from multiple albums (i.e. all tracks for a given artist).

-J

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: jimpmc on August 28, 2003, 08:27:15 pm

Any update?  I'm still having difficulty with multiple artist albums.  Perhaps sorting by Album Artist (auto)/Track # instead of Artist/Track # would be better.

-J

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: John Gateley on August 29, 2003, 07:58:17 am

Hi Jim,

I haven't looked at this yet, but I'm very close to it. I'm fixing a couple of other problems with Media Server (non-TiVo) and then I'll get to this.

j

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: jimpmc on September 03, 2003, 05:27:31 pm

Just wanted to place a gentle reminder about this, as it appears that 9.1 is being wrapped up.

-Jim

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: ventilatedslacks on September 14, 2003, 08:01:02 am

This issue has also been frustrating me. Jim, you mentioned creating custom view schemes that force the sort order by track number. Maybe I'm getting brain freeze, but can you explain to me how you did that?

Thanks!

-Chris

Title: Re: 9.1 and TiVo HMO Sorting
Post by: jimpmc on September 14, 2003, 07:10:46 pm

Under edit view scheme, add the sorting in the files section by adding a modifier.  Separate multiple fields by commas, i.e. [Album Artist (auto)],[Album],[Track #].

The biggest drawback of this is that it slows down the TiVo refreshes considerably.  You can just add a sort order of [Track #], which helps for single multiple artist albums, but if you play any higher level groupings than the album from TiVo (genre, etc.), then you will end up with all the track 1s first, etc.

What I've been wishing would happen is that the TiVo order would mimic the Media Center default order, which when viewing a single album is by track #, instead of returning it Artist/Track # order.  For multiple artist albums, this isn't desirable.

-J