Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AoXoMoXoA]

I recently re-ripped a large portion of my collection, storing all the files on a seperate drive from my collection until I was satisfied that all was well and they were ready to be added to the general population.
To get these files into my music collection I chose to have MC10 rename the files from properties, including the drive and folder settings I wanted, thinking this would insure both proper diskdrive location as well as proper file names.  
Once started, MC found that I had existing files with the same names and asked me how I wanted it dealt with, wonderful  

Unfortunately I soon came to the realization that it was most likely going to continue to ask this question of all of the files involved (1062 of them). Since there was no option for "Yes To All" or "No To All" there I sat clicking YES on 1062 little dialog windows.    ?

I'd like to know if there would have been a better way to use MC's powers to go about this task so as to avoid the same lengthy session of honing my mousing left-click skills? Perhaps a choice can be added for "YES, to all" and "No, to all" in addition to the existing Yes or No choices?

BTW- the Incomplete albums and the Possible Duplicates found in the Smartlist -- Tasks section were very handy in this project.

Win2K
XP2100
1.o GB DDR
MC 10.0.92

[loraan]

While your question is valid, I think it is symptomatic of a more general deficiency in MC: the need for a more robust way of handling re-ripping or otherwise replacing files in the library. The challenge is not just that you need to replace the file (you could theoretically do this in windows by using a utility like RoboCopy to copy the new files over the old ones), but that you also need a way of moving the tags from the original files to the new ones.  "Copy Tags" only works for one tag at a time; "Rename File" in MC is too smart for its own good in this instance. I even tried "search and replace", replacing the old directory with the new directory, in hopes that I could replace the old filenames with the new and then use "write tags (from library)" to store the tags in the new files. But MC was too smart. When I did a search and replace on the filename, it moved and renamed the files! Granted, most of the time that would be exactly what I would want, just not this specific instance.

So, I take this opportunity to repeat my request for a "replace existing files" mode of some sort, so that those who decide to re-rip or for some other reason replace files in their library can do it with the same ease that MC enables them to do everything else.

OOH! I just thought of another feature request: when ripping, have MC determine if a duplicate song already exists in the library and warn you with an offer to not rip the file again, replace the file with the new one, or rip a second copy of the file. This situation comes up when, e.g. I'm ripping a "best of the 80's" album, and there's a song on there that I already have because I own the album it came off of.

[lee269]

For those of us in the UK, like me, who have been sad enough to buy various Sunday newspapers simply for the 'free' CDs they have been giving away recently (Sounds of the 80s, Disco Fever, etc etc) and picking up duplicates along the way, loraans final point would have been the icing on the cake. BTW I know Im not alone because if I wait long enough some kind soul has been adding these CDs to YADB - thanks .

As to the original question, there are ways of avoiding 1062 mouse clicks, but none that I can think of that dont involve a number of steps and that also maintain tag info as well as filename, as loraan suggests.

[AoXoMoXoA]

I am sure there is a way around this and that I am just missing it or using the wrong approach.

[lee269]

Sorry, I wasnt intentionally being mysterious. I dont think there is an easy way. Basically what I meant was that I think what you did was pretty much as good as any other way.

For instance:

1. import the new files from where they are, search on filename in MC to remove the old ones, and then rename the new ones using MC features (possible lost tag info)

2. (as per loraan) copy the new files on top of the old ones - you would retain library data but again maybe lose tags.

3. Do what you did (lots of clicking!). Tag data possibly lost from previous versions.

Im sure there are other ways, and variations on these. MC is VERY flexible. But as loraan said, I dont think it currently deals smoothly with your specific situation. Ive had this before, and it would be nice, but we are talking about a situation which Im sure lots of us encounter once in a while, but not a regular problem, surely. Perhaps one for the wish list.

[xen-uno]

Gotta luv the thread title ...

but I've got nothing constructive to add ...

but you just gotta love the thread title

[urlwolf]

OOH! I just thought of another feature request: when ripping, have MC determine if a duplicate song already exists in the library and warn you with an offer to not rip the file again, replace the file with the new one, or rip a second copy of the file. This situation comes up when, e.g. I'm ripping a "best of the 80's" album, and there's a song on there that I already have because I own the album it came off of.

That would be really great, I've done that by hand and it was a pain. Still not finished. The problem is when you have two versions (e.g., live) and you want to keep both, there is no easy way to automatize that...

[paulr]

I think MC would really benefit from a "File Manager" function.  Currently it is fairly difficult and non-intuitive to work with files/names/directories.

[AoXoMoXoA]

The problem is when you have two versions (e.g., live) and you want to keep both, there is no easy way to automatize that...

I have found that this situation rarely exists since the live version is usually on a live album or noted in the track name as (live), thus the filenames should be different and they should both be kept.