R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

[psbte]

Hi,
I have just started using R16.2 with Windows 7 and I have discovered that it seems to have inherited the same or similar problem that R15 initially had with the Rating metadata field. If I create or edit the field after saving it does not show the correct number of stars in the Explorer listing and/or in the ID-Tag page. If I enter a value of 1 after saving there is no rating field entry and Explorer shows 0 stars, if I enter 2 rating field shows 2 but Explorer only 1 star, if I enter 3 rating field shows 3 but Explorer only 2 stars, if I enter 4 rating field shows 4 but Explorer only 2 stars, and if I enter 5 rating field shows 5 but Explorer only 3 stars. I have only tested this with WAV files as I use these the most. I do rely on the rating field to grade my collection and am frustrated that this error has occurred again. Please can you let me know how soon this can be corrected in an update ASAP because if it is going to take weeks or more I will need to go back to R15.
Thanks.

[Spoon]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Our rating scale is not 0-5 it is 0 to 10. How are you rating, with right click >> Edit ID Tag ?

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Our rating scale is not 0-5 it is 0 to 10. How are you rating, with right click >> Edit ID Tag ?

Yes I am using right click >> Edit Id Tag, but how can the scale be 0 to 10 when the Windows Explorer view column can only show up to 5 stars? I had the same problem with R15, I contacted you and you corrected it before.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Our rating scale is not 0-5 it is 0 to 10. How are you rating, with right click >> Edit ID Tag ?

Also, if the system should allow me to enter a rating of 1 how come when I do that and save it, when I go back there is not only a value of 1 missing but also the rating field is missing despite me just adding it! Clearly there is a problem here.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Also, if the system should allow me to enter a rating of 1 how come when I do that and save it, when I go back there is not only a value of 1 missing but also the rating field is missing despite me just adding it! Clearly there is a problem here.

Please could you confirm that you are looking into this? Thanks.

[Spoon]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Wave files cannot have rating tags in a wave list chunk, we also can store an id3 chunk which will hold the rating but nothing from Microsoft will read id3 chunks in wave files.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Wave files cannot have rating tags in a wave list chunk, we also can store an id3 chunk which will hold the rating but nothing from Microsoft will read id3 chunks in wave files.

I don't really understand what you are saying, please could you explain it more? Also, can you explain what has changed between R15 and R16 that means the correct rating stars are no longer displayed correctly in Windows Explorer? It did work before. Sorry to be persistent but all my ratings for a very large collection of wave files were changed by installing R16, which I had to pay you to upgrade to, so I really do need to understand what is happening here and if I can get R16 to do what I need. If not, I may need to ask you for a refund for the upgrade cost. Many thanks.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

I don't really understand what you are saying, please could you explain it more? Also, can you explain what has changed between R15 and R16 that means the correct rating stars are no longer displayed correctly in Windows Explorer? It did work before. Sorry to be persistent but all my ratings for a very large collection of wave files were changed by installing R16, which I had to pay you to upgrade to, so I really do need to understand what is happening here and if I can get R16 to do what I need. If not, I may need to ask you for a refund for the upgrade cost. Many thanks.

It seems that Spoon is unwilling to explain things to me, which is disappointing. Is anyone else out there able to help me? I would appreciate it. Thanks.

[mville]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

It seems that Spoon is unwilling to explain things to me, which is disappointing. Is anyone else out there able to help me? I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying the Rating tag is not supported in wav files.

The wav format is notoriously poor at handling metadata and is one reason why flac is the preferred audio library file format for many users.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is saying the Rating tag is not supported in wav files.

The wav format is notoriously poor at handling metadata and is one reason why flac is the preferred audio library file format for many users.

While I appreciate the reply, the wav format may not have been designed for metadata but I have been using wav files with metadata including the rating tag for many years so it is supported. My main point was that R15 handled the wav rating tag correctly so why does R16 not? I still haven't had a satisfactory answer to this. I suspect this can only be answered by Spoon but having taken my money for the upgrade he now seems unwilling to communicate with me. Shame on him.

[mville]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

While I appreciate the reply, the wav format may not have been designed for metadata but I have been using wav files with metadata including the rating tag for many years so it is supported. My main point was that R15 handled the wav rating tag correctly so why does R16 not? I still haven't had a satisfactory answer to this. I suspect this can only be answered by Spoon but having taken my money for the upgrade he now seems unwilling to communicate with me. Shame on him.

I see. I don't use the rating tag or wav, so I'm not sure then, sorry.

[Spoon]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Please upload a wave file you created with R15 and R16 to dropbox and provide the links.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

I see. I don't use the rating tag or wav, so I'm not sure then, sorry.

Thanks anyway. I appreciate you taking the time to try and help.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Please upload a wave file you created with R15 and R16 to dropbox and provide the links.

I think this question shows that you don't understand my problem. Let me try again and I will try to be clearer.

When I was using R15 I rated my WAV files using the Rating tag with values of 0 to 5. Looking at the Edit ID page it would show values of 0 to 5 and in the Rating column of Windows Explorer matching 0 to 5 stars would be indicated. After installing R16 over R15 all my WAV files had their Rating tags automatically changed. In the Edit ID page all of the values have doubled, so 1 becomes 2, 2 becomes 4, etc. However, in comparison with the number value in the Edit ID page the Rating column in Explorer shows 0=0, 1=0, 2=1, 3=2, 4=2, 5=3, 6=3, 7=4, 8=4, 9=5, 10=5. You suggested that I could use the rating values of 0-10 but obviously then the stars in Explorer won't match correctly. Also, as I said before, if I input a value of 1 after saving it the rating tag disappears altogether. All of this seems to imply that at the moment the only way for the stars in Explorer to work with R16 would be to only use values of 0 for 0, 2 for 1, 4 for 2, 6 for 3, 8 for 4 and 10 for 5 in the rating tag, but I go back to the fact that in R15 the correct number of stars would show in Explorer, so I would like to know why this has changed in R16. There could be a legitimate reason for this deliberately being changed or an overlooked error. I just want to know which it is and if it can be fixed so I can move forward. If you can't fix it you can't fix it, I just need to know.

BTW, I cannot send you R15 and R16 files for comparison because files created with R15 have been changed by R16 as explained earlier.

Thanks for your help.

[psbte]

Re: R16.2 Metadata Rating Problem

Does anyone else understand what I am on about? While I know that most people use MP3 and FLAC, I have particular reasons why I use WAV files and that is why it is important to me. Thanks.