>i think SC does FAR TOO MANY automations and assumptions. > It doesn't - there's hardly any.
>for instance, having an album artist tag to SC means it CAN'T be a >comp. > Untrue. Set a compilation tag, and it is always a compilation. It's not complicated. >having any mismatch of artists, even on only one track, means it is a >comp, (unless other tags like comp=0 or album artist are present) > Correct behaviour. If it didn't, and you had an album with 20 songs by different artists, you would end up with 20 albums containing 1 song. >greatest hits logic, and other such logics. > What other logics? >sure, the scanner is somewhat configurable, but not totally. The scanner doesn't have many configurable settings. I think all scan-time settings should be in its own settings page, to make that clearer. >issue is that SC tries to build one master list, and it builds it based >on your tags, folder locations, and its own logics. It doesn't build a master list. There's a set of tables that describe your music collection, and that is queried on demand to build display lists. Settings change the way the queries bring back lists. >it is imo, a very limited and bizarrely complex approach, which afaict, >is totally unnecessary. It is a lot less limited than most other applications. Many people do not need to tweak anything, it just works. _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/ripping
