Batch Ripper not handling [IFMULTI] correctly?

[channel27]

I'm trying to configure Batch Ripper to create separate Disc N subfolders for multi-disc releases, while leaving single-disc albums without the extra folder.

My naming string is:

[MAXLENGTH]80,[album][][IFMULTI]\Disc [disc][]\[MAXLENGTH]80,[track] - [artist] - [title][]

The Dynamic Naming preview correctly produces, for example:

Album Title\Disc 2\05 - Artist - Title

The problem occurs when actually using Batch Ripper.

I've tested this with a four-CD compilation. With Batch Ripper, the tracks are being placed incorrectly - effectively all ending up under Disc 1.

I've eliminated Multi-Encoder as a possible cause by testing with WAV only, with the same result.

What makes this particularly interesting is that I then tested the exact same release using CD Ripper manually.

I tried both:

• two CD Ripper instances attached to different drives; and
• one CD Ripper instance, switching between drives.

In both cases, discs 1, 2 and 4 were correctly written to:

Album Title
|-Disc 1
|-Disc 2
|-Disc 4

with the correct tracks in each folder.

So the naming expression itself appears to work correctly in CD Ripper, but not when the same operation is performed by Batch Ripper.

I've also noticed that Batch Ripper spends considerably longer at Retrieving Metadata than CD Ripper does -€” roughly a minute versus essentially immediate retrieval in CD Ripper -€” although I don't know whether that is related.

Is there a difference in how Batch Ripper supplies/evaluates the disc/disc-total metadata for Dynamic Naming, or could this be a Batch Ripper issue?

I'm happy to provide the exact release/metadata details or any other diagnostic information needed.

[Spoon]

It will be metadata differences, you would need to subscribe to GD3 lookups to have the same metadata from all programs in batch ripper.

[channel27]

Thanks Spoon. I think we've now established that there is indeed a metadata difference between the providers, but there seems to be a further difference between CD Ripper and Batch Ripper that I'm not quite understanding.

I've tested the same four-disc release extensively in Batch Ripper and CD Ripper, using the same naming string. Batch Ripper consistently put Disc 3 into a Disc 1 folder when Discogs was enabled. WAV-only made no difference, so this wasn't related to Multi-Encoder or encoding.

I then used Manual Input and Review to compare the metadata providers. For the physical Disc 3:

• Discogs returned Disc 1/1, with the Disc 1 track listing and a different album title/year.
• GD3 returned Disc 3/3, with the correct Disc 3 track listing.
• MusicBrainz returned Disc 3/4, also with the correct Disc 3 track listing.

With Discogs enabled, Batch Ripper selected the incorrect Discogs metadata. With Discogs disabled and GD3 + MusicBrainz enabled, both were queried and GD3 was selected, producing the correct Disc 3 folder and track listing.

However, CD Ripper handles the same discs correctly with Discogs enabled and without requiring GD3 to get the correct disc numbering. I've tested this both with multiple CD Ripper instances and by switching drives in a single instance.

So my question is: does CD Ripper use a different metadata-selection/PerfectMeta process from Batch Ripper? If so, is there a reason Batch Ripper can't use the same process? At the moment it looks as though Batch Ripper is accepting the Discogs result without resolving the obvious conflict with the other providers.

I've also confirmed that CD Ripper maintains a CDRipperCache.bin containing provider-specific cached data, whereas Batch Ripper doesn't appear to have a comparable cache.

I'm now able to work around the problem by disabling Discogs and using GD3/MusicBrainz, but I'd be interested to understand why the two dBpoweramp applications behave differently here.

[Spoon]

There will be differences, they are different code bases, with different overall goals, where most commercial houses would only lookup GD3 without matches from others.

[channel27]

Also, regarding the attached, are we missing something? Like a complete sentence?