Can you describe or show what you did exactly in Picard?
I just selected the albums which showed the gold cd icon and clicked save.
If Picard (or Python) decided to go for copy+delete as rename strategy (as it normally would do only if old and new name are not on the same file system), and for some reason the create (copy) works but the delete does not, you might get that result. Seems unlikely that that would not also cause picard to report an error though.
Yea that is whats happening. What I can do is use my duplicate file finder to go through and delete each one. What is the best way to go through my library and upgrade the 192 bitrate files to 320? Also, what do you do when you get folders where some of the files match the fingerprints and some do not? And last, what do you set your ratio in percentage of how much of a song has to match the fingerprint. Any helps would be great. I have been collecting albums since 2001.
You mean the best way to identify the 192 kbps files, so you can re-rip them? Just want to make sure you realize the only way to upgrade them is to re-rip them (or otherwise obtain higher-bitrate files).
I meant is there a program like iTunes Match or whatever is it called that can upgrade my library. I get all my stuff through P2P
Just wanted to point you to this entry, where I talked a bit about the memory usage:
Here on the MB forums we don’t really discuss piracy.
As you can imagine, it would make life much more complicated for everyone if we went down that rabbit hole, rather than focusing on what we do best (having a great database and tagger). There’s other forums and communities where you can ask about that kind of thing
MB/Picard never downloads files for you, and doesn’t store actual audio. Even our images are stored via the Internet Archive.[quote=“thedeadinme, post:14, topic:58898”]
what do you do when you get folders where some of the files match the fingerprints and some do not
I rarely use ‘scan’, I always use cluster > lookup if I have entire albums.
Then the whole album gets matched, and you can right click the album in the right panel to find the right edition/version etc. (lookup uses existing tags, while scan uses the fingerprint/actual audio information, and is much more likely to split and drop your files into compilations etc, for the obvious reason of the fingerprint being ‘correct’ for potentially hundreds of albums with that song on it)
Ok… So do I have this right. Clusters on the left are albums where the whole album didn’t match as far as fingerprints goes. But on the right, that album’s icon will be in silver.gray then the ones with the gold/yellow icons are albums with 100% accurate and wont be on the left? Also, I wish someone could come up with a plugin so it will sort albums on the right by icon color. that way I can click the first file (hold shift) then select the last gold icon and right click and save.
I don’t really understand your question, so you’ve probably missed something. Probably a good idea to have a look at some docs/guides like outsidecontext recommended, to save me typing it all out here.
- Cluster has nothing to do with the colour of albums on the right hand side, it simply groups your files based on the ‘album’ tag, and makes it more likely for ‘lookup’ to find a whole album at once.
- Forget about fingerprints… Drag everything from the right side back to the left hand side, and use ‘cluster’ > ‘lookup’ like I said, and if anything fails, you can try use ‘scan’. You should hopefully get more gold icons this way.
Ok this is what I was looking for. ie, the easiest way to tag my entire albums at once. Also, do I need to go through the songs that were not recognized manually?
I would try use ‘scan’ on the remaining files on the left, and see if that matches a few more - but you’ll probably have to do more manual matching on these, as ‘scan’ will ignore existing tags and just use the audio fingerprint (meaning songs will get matched to compilations etc much more often).
‘cluster’ > ‘lookup’ > ‘scan’ (on remaining files) > ‘lookup in browser’ (manually matching the very last files)
should hopefully catch most of your songs!
Anything left over you might have to add to the database yourself
I know I’ve already mentioned this, but I wouldn’t save over your original files without at least double checking what Picard is doing (the gold CD icon is not foolproof!)
Thanks for the reply again. Yes, I am learning fast with the program and know it isn’t foolproof. This is going to take ages to finish this project. I am hoping one day my son who is only 7 right now can take over this project when I die meaning collecting and tagging. But I am sure physical (anything) will be extremely obsolete.
You should just buy some CD, it will be less time consuming, just play. And I’m pretty sure it will still remain easier for years.
Sorry to pop in in such an inelegant manner but I really wanted to say that this topic title made me laugh without mean intentions when I saw it created.
I wondered if it was a joke or a provocation because it really looked like a parody of the worse Picard topics we saw recently.
You seriously can’t blindly trust any program to do anything good for you on a batch of millions of totally random files, there is no such hope.
Also Picard is a 32bit program and any 32bit program will get unstable around the 2GB mark no matter how much memory you have in your machine.
Well, it’s a Python program—so it’ll be 64-bit if run under a 64-bit Python. Probably it’s 32-bit on Windows, but at least on Debian Linux, it’s 64-bit.
So if you are hitting the 32-bit 2GiB limit, you could try again under Linux. (But seriously, fewer tracks at once…)
Further to @aerozol’s point I’ve just introduced the following thread to the forum, which may help you:
Review/research “best” workflow Review/research "best" workflow
Hope this is useful
Its crazy how much I have learned since I made this initial post. It would be suicide to do such n add. I like adding 30-50 albums at once. Well per session.