Irrespective of ANY other bug fix required, the ability to turn this process off must surely be at the forefront?
80.000 files took me approx. 24-32 hrs. Strangely enough it took the faster iMac longer than my slower MacMini
Just curious
For those who endured the lengthy library migrations…do you see any benefits? Anything different?
I don’t understand why you are still running these migrations and these analysis.
You know that AS adds an armful tag. Why don’t you stop everything, trash the library of AS, and then restart with a new library to which you will add only a few albums?
2 Likes
Nothing armful… you may not like it, but is no where armful, my 40000 songs were done, yes i have to correct like 100 cd that have two artists instead of one like i tagged them but that is it, it is done, finish.
Having a choice was the thing to be done first, but…
Why armful?
It depends on what music you have. If you had classical music, your library would be already in a state of an awful mess. And not only in AS and A3.5, but also in the libraries of other players if you’ll have to use them one day.
1 Like
What do you call done?
What did you tag?
I remove the second artist added to make some albums split. I think i upload you somewhere or here the way how to see which albums were affected…
always writing same answer on different threads…
my 40000 songs took around 2 and a half days to be analyse… this was with Damien’s beta testing…
i didn’t know at the time why some albums split for me… they were perfectly tagged in v3.5
so , while my database was still be analyze, i found the way to see which albums were affected (posted that for you if i remember, pictures and recipy how to find them… Studio feedback?)
maybe that was empty tag field that were fill with new analyzing thing, don’t know…
it is done, i arranged all those, was not that long… but yes unnessacery…
i don’t listen much Classical, and i can see it can be a mess for some.
This was my reply five days ago…
Dear RunHomeSlow,
Now I understand what you were trying to say to me about your problem with Dave Brubeck…
Actually, you were trying to tell me, that AS ads tags to the tracks, when I posted the screenshot of having 9 Adele in my library. Actually, you were warning me hours before we discovered by ourselves that AS was modifying our files.
I did not understand then what you were trying to tell me, because Damien said the contrary, he said that AS does not write to the files, but only to its library. I could not imagine then that you were right and Damien was wrong!
I thought that the false metadata that was displayed on the screen was written to the library of AS, and I thought you were confused and did not understand what Damien said.
The fact that English is not our mothers’ tongue did not facilitate the communication.
Now you say that these tags are not harmful, but you also say that you strangle with this issue since your beta testing period, and that you still did not resolve it completely, though you have only 40K tracks in your library. But there are people here with hundreds of thousands of tracks in their library!
In all honesty, how many hours/days have you wasted with this issue with your 40K tracks since this problem appeared during the beta testing period?
EDIT
I loaded to SA only 11K tracks and wasted already at least 2 full days. And I’m not finished yet. I completely lost the metadata of 600 DSF tracks during my attempt to get rid of this satanic MusicBranz ID tag that AS added to my tracks.
Hello, whatever you like or not the way the library topic has been managed with the metadata topic, the libray analysis information could be much improved seen from my side. The visual of the analysis is really not a success as you can never know where you stand in the synchronization and analysis in terms of number of tracks synchronized/analyzed. Indicating the total number of track and the track under process should be enough instead of this bar that bring no information and use a lot of space that can be used for something else.
My 2cts…
1 Like
You have a valid point.
Damien should have a look at how Roon displays this information and get inspired.
I’ve about half this number and its still analysing. i have had exemption messages = mini dump twice and object reference not set to an insatnce of an object twice. My trial will have expired by the time all this is done…
Yes this is easy to do and bring more value to the customer. No need also to be in the front page…
It should not surprise you, because the power of the CPU is only one factor. The other factor is the quality of the internet connection between the servers of Audirvana and MusicBrainz. SA depends on MusicBrainz for the analysis of your tracks, and the speed of this internet connection may vary.
1 Like
I think he means his HD or computer (or phone, house, car etc.) is his property. Altering personal files on one’s HD or computer without asking for permission, and (in this case) not even informing the user, is a big no no. This is borderline an invasion of privacy. It is like someone walking into your home and rearrange your furniture without you knowing or your permission. Also in this case it has consequences for backup programs, cloud backups etc (in my case again backing up 3 TB of files that AS changed) . I use also Roon and Foobar. It has also consequences for the ‘recently added’ lists in Roon and Foobar, and it also alters how Roon and Foobar display album information. I am the boss of my own private files (and what to do with them) and spend years on perfecting the metadata in my 5 TB library. I certainly do not want anyone else change (literally) one bit in those files without my permission.
In short ‘innocently’ adding a tag to the music files without permission, starts a whole cascade of unwanted events on someone’s property (computer, HDD). I already have seen posts of people who had to spend hours/days to correct this problem. I also had to spend almost a day analyzing which files where affected, editing tags, restoring backups, and informing myself on this forum. At this moment I can not even start AS, because then it immediately starts ‘analyzing’ and altering files again without the possibility to turn off this unwanted behaviour.
I have even seen posts of people who want to be compensated (for instance in the form of a discount on the subscription) for the amount of work they spent to correct their files. How Audirvana will respond to this is anybody’s guess but I certainly symphathize with that sentiment.
I don’t doubt the good intentions of @Antoine, but I am still not convinced that he fully comprehends the consequences of his actions (at least not in his reaction). Until now he only stated (losely quoted) that he will provide a fix (to manage this behaviour in the settings) in a future update. Also he seemed surprised that there where so many reactions on this subject.
2 Likes
It’s worse than that. It was misleading the user!
RunHomeSlow, who participated in the beta testing, tried to explain to me that AS is adding tags, hours before we discovered that AS is writing to the files. I did not believe RunHomeSlow. I believed Damien. As RunHomeSlow’s English is not great, I thought he misunderstood what Damien said.
2 Likes
Please guys, let’s not start using ‘big words’, I am totally convinced Damien and his team have done this in good faith just to enhance the quality of the product. And yes, I do not like to verify the tags of 4000 albums and 80.000 tracks either but hey it something you have to do only once and yes 1.0 versions of software contain some bugs.
But in the end let’s be happy with the incredibly good sound quality Audirvāna Studio offers. Yesterday evening we had the chance to listen to the new version and we are very impressed by the further improvement of the already very good SQ,
A big thank you to Damien and his team for all their hard work
P.S. And compliments for the beautiful new design
1 Like