|
FWIW, I've used this one but it doesn't 'listen' to the content.
Mp3tag[^]
It connects to some online services (I've forgotten what they are) and fetches album information and album art, which it uses to tag the files with.
I'm also not sure it is suitable for tens of thousands of MP3s.
|
|
|
|
|
Indivara wrote: FWIW, I've used this one but it doesn't 'listen' to the content.
Mp3tag[^]
And that, right there, is the blocker. Assume all files are completely untagged and have names you can't rely on. If it doesn't look at the content, then it's a non-starter.
I've used Mp3tag and it's absolutely fantastic at what it does - but it's not what's needed here.
I'm looking for personal experiences and opinions, but meanwhile, this looks promising: MusicBrainz Picard[^]
|
|
|
|
|
How about Mp3tag[^], ID3 Hunter[^] (open source) or WinAmp[^] to auto tag using GraceNote FreeDB?
Edit: ID3 Hunter fails to build because the string resources and settings files aren't present in the source. 
/ravi
modified 21-Aug-16 12:16pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I never realized Winamp could do auto-tagging. Is that built-in, or with some extra plugin?
|
|
|
|
|
It's a hidden built-in feature. Click the link in my reply to view a brief YTube video that shows how to enable and use the feature.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Neat. Based on the video, I thought you had to let Winamp play songs before it would auto-tag them, but later on, it does mention you can make a list and then use Send To / Autotag. I'll definitely have to try it out.
OTOH, it doesn't look like it provides any way to accept/reject suggested changes; it'll just apply them. But, it still seems like a great option if you have a big pile of completely unidentified material.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it's a good start. I (strongly) recommend MP3Tag once you've gone through the first phase with WinAmp. It's an awesome tag editor + file renamer.
You can also use my humble 13-year old app MP3 Pal[^]. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Ravi Bhavnani wrote: I (strongly) recommend MP3Tag once you've gone through the first phase with WinAmp
No need to sell me on it - I've been using MP3Tag for years.
And since you've written your own MP3 tag app - you're probably a good candidate to ask: Years ago I let some program update tags in a bunch of MP3 files, and--I've never been sure whether that was just a coincidence of not--shortly thereafter a lot of files had audible glitches in them here and there. I initially attributed this to the tagging program corrupting the audio portion of the file, but could never really prove it. It was so long ago, I forget what program it was. Could even have been Windows Media Player for all I know...
Since you have experience looking at tags and rewriting MP3 files with updates - how likely (or plausible?) would it be, you think, for such a program to corrupt an MP3? Is the method foolproof, or is it easy to make basic mistakes that would introduce audio glitches?
|
|
|
|
|
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
hmm, not sure if its an option, but when I loaded music CD into the iTunes library, it did find the correct album, song title etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: when I loaded music CD
There are free apps that will do that. But I think the OP wants to tag individual songs automatically.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah...my neighbour's looking at tagging tens of thousands of files he's already got. He's not going to re-rip everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, this is where I got the link to MusicBrainz from I mentioned in one of my earlier replies. So far, so good, but I'll also have a look at Magic MP3 Tagger. No reason to limit myself to a single tool.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
I still use ID3 TagIt, even if its development has ceased long ago. It allows for retrieving tags easily from an online database. It also has many useful functionalities for manipulating tags, on one signle file or one several at the same time.
You always obtain more by being rather polite and armed than polite only.
|
|
|
|
|
Overheard today (kids talking in the back seat)
Elder: What number is the lowest floor in the building? (referring to place we just left)
Younger: Zeroth floor
Elder: No it is the first floor!
Younger: No, zeroth floor!
(this goes on for some time)
Younger is 5. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have this problem in the US where they seem to think the ground floor is the first floor and the first floor is the second floor, etc. Weird. It doesn't seem to matter how many times I try to correct them, they still keep getting it wrong!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
It's probably the imperial system - it rots the brain you know! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Come on Griff, there is nothing wrong with the Imperial system of measurement.
12 inches in a foot
3 feet in a yard
1760 yards in a mile
Makes perfect sense to me.
|
|
|
|
|
IF we had 12 toes and 12 Fingers... THEN this Imperial System would make sense!
Worse, 11 and 12 should be NAMED: One-Teen, and Two-Teen, but NO, the TEENS did not start until 13.
It is NO WONDER we are dead last in math
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk 10389821 wrote: IF we had 12 toes and 12 Fingers... THEN this Imperial System would make sense!
It is NO WONDER we are dead last in math
IF we had 12 toes and 12 Fingers... Math would be easy.
10 can be divided by 2 and 5 only.
12 can be divided by 2,3,4 and 6.
Truth,
James
|
|
|
|
|
James,
And that, my friend, is why they CHOSE 12 as the base. (and why 13 is the first TEEN)
It was literally a base 12 approach. It was a lot easier to divide whole things up.
But their foresightedness ended there abruptly. The system does not scale well.
Much like Roman Numerals. They work. They are obvious enough, but they get worse and worse.
What was that last Superbowl Number? (In Roman Numerals). Try doing division in Roman Numerals.
Without converting back and forth. Pure fun.
On the other hand. 10 is not more natural than any other number.
I challenge people to define time in terms of a metric system that works!
(So that 1 day = 10 hrs. 1 hr = 10 minutes, and 1 minute = 10 seconds. 1 month = 10 days, and 1 year = 10 months). Boy that would be fabulous. Of course, we would have to stop using the SUN as a clock, LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
Roman numerals were awful.
There's nothing particularly special about 10 as a base, though. It is most likely because we have 10 fingers.
The problem with Roman Numerals is that it is an inconsistent implementation.
You could easily have a base 12. You just need 12 numerals.
|
|
|
|
|
I've thought this through before, but only within a Day's context (because a day is based on the rotation of the earth and a year is based on the revolution of the earth around the sun, you CAN'T have anything other than 365.25 (approximately) days in a year).
But for a day, if you have 100 units in the day, each would be very close to 15 minutes of our current measurement (14 minutes, 24 seconds). Since there are 100 in a day, they would be centidays. Since that term sounds horrible there would probably need to be something else to call them - maybe "hours" would just be redefined? If you divide each of those centidays/hours into 1000 smaller units, those would be fairly close to 1 second each (0.864 seconds) and could be called millihours (or maybe still "seconds" for each of use). Having units of time similar in duration to what we're comfortable with would make it easier to get buy-in.
All of that is moot, though, because almost all computer software would have to be rewritten. If someone had come up with this BEFORE computers I think it would have stood a better chance.
|
|
|
|
|
but we own the programming language community. LOL
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
