Disc# / Track# metadata issues

[andrewilley]

While testing all this wonderful new text-only layout loveliness in 878, I noticed a minor bug in the List Options sort ordering (not sure how long it's been there for).

There doesn't seem to be any difference between setting the sort order to By Track# against By Disc and Track# - the result is the same either way, songs get sorted by disc number first and then by track number.

While I personally think that using Disc first and then Track is really the only sensible way to do it, given that there are two options provided I think By Track# ought to do what it says on the tin and start with all the first tracks, then all the second tracks, etc. Or maybe just merge the two options into one? I do wonder if there is actually a real-world scenario where someone has a need to sort only by track numbers while ignoring any disc numbers.

Andre

Edited October 29, 2020 by andrewilley
Content extracted from original 'Releases' thread as it is a general issue

[maxmp]

@andrewilley That change (track number and separate disc numbers in the db) required full rescan to rebuild tags, if not, it may give the same sorting results. I agree that sorting just by track has little sense (mostly it have sense for disc and non-disc tagged albums, which should be rare).

[andrewilley]

59 minutes ago, maxmp said:

That change (track number and separate disc numbers in the db) required full rescan to rebuild tags...

I do Full Rescans fairly often for testing, so my database should be fully up to date. I still don't see any difference between setting Track# and Disc# & Track# sorting though. This screenshot is ordered by only Track# for example, so it ought to show the sequence as 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, etc. rather than 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.

It's not a major issue, but I guess there may be someone out there who actually wants a track-number only sequence, and if the option is going to remain then it'd be nice for it to work as expected.

Andre

[maxmp]

@andrewilley also there is a difference in the disc + track sorting vs just track number for tracks without disc or track # at all - for the former such tracks are at the bottom. There is a chance some users got used to the specific sorting so probably removing it now is not wise.

[andrewilley]

@maxmp  I just created a few test tracks to understand what is happening, the songs have embedded tags as follows:

As you indicated that any empty tags should be listed at the bottom of the list (after any valid values) I would have expected plain Track# order to give:
B, D, F (i.e. the three Tracks tagged as #01) then C, E, G (the three Tracks tagged as #02) then A (no track tag).

However they actually show as follows in Track# sorting (still apparently observing Disc# tags):

 

Similarly, Disc# & Track# ordering should be:
D, E (Disc #1, Tracks #01 and #02) then F, G (Disc #2, Tracks #01 and #02) then B, C (empty disc tag, Tracks #01 and #02) then A (no tags at all).

However using Disc# & Track# sorting, they actually show this way:

 

The handling of empty disc tags is a bit inconsistent. Sometimes (when there is no Track# tag either) an empty disc tag correctly interprets as null, but other times it shows as Disc #1. See other thread on the subject

Andre