Print

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

[nsxelent]

Hello all.

Is there a way to sort all of the various or multiple artist titles to the end of a view or playlist?  I've recently converted my library from iTunes and left the Album Artist field blank and used the "part of a compilation" option to help itunes identify the multi artist titles.  It would then list all of the compilations at the end of each view when sorting alphabetically.  I thought about changing the album artist to "various artists" but don't really want all of my compilations showing up somewhere between Van Halen and The Velvet Underground.

So the sort would be: A - Z, 1 - 99999999, (Multiple Artists by Album)

Anyway to do that?

Thanks for any help 

[stumpygremlin]

I think someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but if you leave the "Album Artist" field blank, and have that as your first sort level, then blank Album Artists go to the bottom anyway.

[6233638]

It's a bit of a hack, so if anyone has a better suggestion I'd use that, but…
 
1.  Tools → Options  → Library & Folders → Manage Library Fields
2.  Add a new field, call it Album Artist (sort)
3.  Set it to "Calculated data" right-click in the entry field and open the expression editor. Paste the following code:
 

Code: [Select]

If(IsRange(Left(Clean([Album Artist (auto)], 2), 1), a-z), Delimit([Album Artist (auto)],,A),
If(IsRange(Left(Clean([Album Artist (auto)], 2), 1), 0-9), Delimit([Album Artist (auto)],,B),
If(!IsEqual([Album Artist (auto)], /(Multiple Artists/), 0), Delimit([Album Artist (auto)],,C),
Delimit([Album Artist (auto)],,D))))
Now you should be able to select Sort by: Album Artist (sort) and it will display in the order that you want:

A:  A-Z
B:  0-9
C:  Other Characters
D:  (Multiple Artists)

[nsxelent]

I think someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but if you leave the "Album Artist" field blank, and have that as your first sort level, then blank Album Artists go to the bottom anyway.

Thanks for the reply.

I actually sort by Album Artist (auto), which is a brilliant feature btw, since about 20% of my 400k song library is missing the Album Artist field.  You're right, if I sort by "Album Artists" then all of those blank Album Artist files sort to the bottom of the view (which I don't want) - along with the Multi Artist albums (which I do want).

Any way to auto populate the "Album Artist" tag with the results of the "Album Artist (auto)" info?

[nsxelent]

It's a bit of a hack, so if anyone has a better suggestion I'd use that, but…
 

Thanks 6233638 for the great idea!

I gave it a try and while the albums mostly sorted in the order I was looking for, (I think of it as 'Record Store Order"), the "A", "B", "C", and "D" characters now displayed in front of the Album Artist (auto) title.  For example "Led Zeppelin" now reads "ALed Zeppelin" in the Album Artist view.  I say it mostly sorted correct because it impacted the "ignore Articles" feature - "The Beatles" now showed as "AThe Beatles" and sorted with the T's rather than the B's.

Thoughts?

(thanks again for responding!)

[glynor]

You missed part of it.

You create the Album Artist (Sort) field that 6233638 suggested.  You set your view to Sort on it (via a rule added to the Files to Show search for the view), but you do not use it to display information.  In other words, you sort on it, but you don't need to see this field in your view anywhere, in the view, you just display the "real" Album Artist (Auto) field.  Sorting does not have to be connected to the columns that are visible in the view.

Also, I think you might have messed up the expression a bit (or 6233638 did when writing it).  It should output only A, B, C, and D.  I'd actually use 1, 2, 3, and 4 instead to avoid the Article ignoring issue.  So, it would kind of break them up into four rough "categories", where you can sort these categories in the order you prefer.

When creating your Sort order in the Files to Show search for the view, you first sort on this field, and then sort on your real [Artist Album (Auto)] field.

You may also want to look at my [Artist Letters] custom field example.  I use this for writing folders to disk, and you can use it as a sorting or display field too.

[glynor]

It's a bit of a hack, so if anyone has a better suggestion I'd use that, but…

You're a clever boy there.  That's a good idea.  I didn't test your expression so I don't know if it is quite right, and I would use 1,2,3, and 4 instead (because article sorting), but overall it looks like a great way to get the ascii-numeric sorting to work out in whatever order you prefer.

You might also need to search for articles and stuff like I do in [Artist Letters].

[glynor]

Ahh, I see what you're doing.  You're doing the full sort in one field (prefixing the existing Album Artist, instead of making a separate "sort category" type of field).  I wouldn't.  I'd do the expression closer to [Artist Letters] so that it outputs only 1, 2, 3, and 4 (or however many "sort groupings" you need).

Then, in the ~sort part of the Files to Show search, you can use that as a separate "tier" of sorting, and still choose lower groupings individually (or maybe sort one A-Z and the other Z-A), and use the regular [Album Artist (Auto)] field as a second "level" of sort.

Either one would work, if you always want them to match and be used together, which I suppose in this instance you likely always would want to do it that way.  So... Whatever.  My instinct would just be to write the expression "the other way" and layer the sorting.

[glynor]

Ahh, yes.  I always forget we have the article removing Clean() mode now, so that would work, you don't need a complex RegEx to do that anymore.  I can probably make my [Artist Letters] field simpler.  But it works, so... Meh.

Yep.  Either of those two methods should work pretty much perfect.  You just don't display your fancy resort categorization field.

For me, I prefer numbers to be at the beginning, and never want to see "(Multiple Artists)" anywhere, so I like it the way it is now.  But, this should work if you want it some other way.

As I said, very clever.

[Arindelle]

ok can't resist  you use album artist (auto) right ?

ok so select all your various or multiple artists files thus generated, and in the album artist field just type zVarious Artists (or zzVarious Artists if you have lots of Z artists, or call 'em zzCompilations whatever) and sort on Album Artist and not Album Artist (auto) 

I know, I know not clever or geeky (could be automated if you are really lazy and not too OCD), they'll go down to the bottom of the view without any expressions

I'm leaving the thread now, back to my Macallan 30 before my sons ask for some 

[glynor]

Ha ha!  Like an animal. 

[nsxelent]

You missed part of it.

You create the Album Artist (Sort) field that 6233638 suggested.  You set your view to Sort on it (via a rule added to the Files to Show search for the view), but you do not use it to display information.  In other words, you sort on it, but you don't need to see this field in your view anywhere, in the view, you just display the "real" Album Artist (Auto) field.  Sorting does not have to be connected to the columns that are visible in the view.

Ah-ha, you're right I did miss that part.  I'm still getting used to how the "Show Categories In This Order" works when setting up a Custom View versus the "Sort By" option once you've selected the Custom View.  That worked to remove the new Album Artist (sort) tag from the view.  Thanks!!

I'm still having a problem though with the articles impacting the sort - for example The Beatles are sorted in the T's.  I tried adding an "A" before the articles (like "AThe") and that just moved all of the artists with "The" to the very end of the view (not sure why).  I also looked at your Artist Letter expression and couldn't quite figure out how to incorporate it.

Thanks again for your responses!!

[dtc]

You can ignore articles in sorting in

Tools - Options - Tree and View - Sorting