Tweet
Re: Asset UPnP R5
Hi there,
here are some findings in the actual beta:
1. After update to release 5 BETA the data sent to a control point (I use primarily Naims n-stream, both version 3.6.7479 and 4.0, and Asset Control) do not reflect the actual browse tree of Asset UPnP, instead of which the default browse tree is used.
By chance I found in [COLOR="*4B0082"][COLOR="*4B0082"]%appdata%\dBpoweramp\uMediaLibrary[/COLOR][/COLOR] two files named AssetUPnPDefinedBrowseTreev4 and ...v5 respectively. It seems to me that the Asset V5 installs the ...v5 file, but within the programm updates changes still to the ...v4 file, the contents of which are also sent to the control point. Since the structure of the file is nearly self-explanatory, I meanwhile corrected the ...v5 file manually and now things are as they should be. I don't know whether this workaround is already explained somewhere else in the forum. Please correct.
2."Compilation albums corrected to not show as Various Artists" is changed, but not generally:
(as per Mr. Spoon's suggestions, I use in this example FLAC files with empty album artist and the Compilation tag set to '1')
= View of [All Albums] shows a "random" artist (of 9th title in following hardcopies) - maybe the first artist of this album (in alphabetical) order is selected. This is definitively not correct, either blanks or "Various artists" should be displayed here. Asset UPnP 4.3 does this correctly.
= View of Albums beginning with the same letter show same result.
= View of [Artist / Album] now correct: Asset 4.3 (Registered) wrongly showed on a selected artist still "Various artists", 5 Beta shows the real artist's name.
= View of [Album Artist / Album]: Unable to test at this stage (see above browse tree problem). The following would be correct:
If "Various artists" is displayed under [All Albums], an enry "Various artists" in Album Artists would be consistent,
if blanks are displayed under [All Albums], there should be no entry under Album Artists.
= Detailed view of selected album shows the following contents in album artist field:5
"Various artists" (n-stream) artist of 1st title (Accet Control: wrong, correct would be blanks or "Various artists").
= Artist with each title contains now (5 Beta) the respective arist in both n-stream and Asset Control (correct).
Under 4.3 (Registered) Artist is blank in n-stream, but correctly displayed in Asset Control. Plug Player and Kinski do not show changes between Asset 4.3. and 5 Beta and both do not show artist together with the titles. Hardcopies regarding this point:
And here is what Asset 4.3 registered does:
Are there different data sent to or received at the different control points (since for Asset Control I found some "Settings Overrides" in Asset UPnP, but none for Naim Unity) ?
3.Different results of sort order, if a single letter or all ...(... Albums / ... Album Artists [in Asset UPnP 4.3 only] / ... Artists) is selected:
If a single letter is selected, the contents of Album Artist Sort, Artist Sort, and Album Sort are considered in displayed order respectively.
If all (Albums / Artists) is selected, the respective contents of the ... sort fields are neglected. Since upto now I am unable to test if this happens also with Album Artist in 5 Beta, I tried this also with Asset UPnP 4.3 (Registered; both Win and Mac) with same result.
This appears only in Naim's n-stream (and e.g. in foobar 2000), Asset Control (and Plug Player as well as Kinski on Mac) displays the data as expected.
Naim's Uniti 2 shows, if tracks are selected manually or by use of remote control, the correct sort order in both cases, but it does not handle Unicode characters correctly and shows a "?" for each character.
(here I wanted to include 6 hardcopies, which I can't attach actually - I will mail them to the usual mail address separately)
Any idea what I could do to ensure equal behaviour of the above mentioned control points or is Asset sending excactly the same contents to any control point (would mean that it is up to the supplier of the control point software to correct this !?!) ?
4.I had no duplicate problems with the first version of V5 beta, but experienced for whatever reason after some time an empty database. I managed to solve this problem by installing the older version of V5 beta.
To avoid similar troubles I changed the audio library path from my NAS to a locally USB 2.0 attached disc. Meanwhile I re-installed the actual V5 Beta and it still points to a local USB drive.
Could the empty database occur if during a "refresh all" the connection to my NAS, to which Asset pointed before, is temporarily lost ?
5."New database design, faster at indexing, browsing albums" - no change experienced during "refresh all" upto now, although numbers of albums, titles nearly the same and PC, network and NAS exactly the same as before.
Or should only the final release show remarkable faster reactions ?
As some of these points may affect also Mobile Foobar2000 ("My input is ..." in September 2014 blog) I thought some of them might avoid, if clarified now, possible additional efforts later on.
Best regards,
Niko
Hi there,
here are some findings in the actual beta:
1. After update to release 5 BETA the data sent to a control point (I use primarily Naims n-stream, both version 3.6.7479 and 4.0, and Asset Control) do not reflect the actual browse tree of Asset UPnP, instead of which the default browse tree is used.
By chance I found in [COLOR="*4B0082"][COLOR="*4B0082"]%appdata%\dBpoweramp\uMediaLibrary[/COLOR][/COLOR] two files named AssetUPnPDefinedBrowseTreev4 and ...v5 respectively. It seems to me that the Asset V5 installs the ...v5 file, but within the programm updates changes still to the ...v4 file, the contents of which are also sent to the control point. Since the structure of the file is nearly self-explanatory, I meanwhile corrected the ...v5 file manually and now things are as they should be. I don't know whether this workaround is already explained somewhere else in the forum. Please correct.
2."Compilation albums corrected to not show as Various Artists" is changed, but not generally:
(as per Mr. Spoon's suggestions, I use in this example FLAC files with empty album artist and the Compilation tag set to '1')
= View of [All Albums] shows a "random" artist (of 9th title in following hardcopies) - maybe the first artist of this album (in alphabetical) order is selected. This is definitively not correct, either blanks or "Various artists" should be displayed here. Asset UPnP 4.3 does this correctly.
= View of Albums beginning with the same letter show same result.
= View of [Artist / Album] now correct: Asset 4.3 (Registered) wrongly showed on a selected artist still "Various artists", 5 Beta shows the real artist's name.
= View of [Album Artist / Album]: Unable to test at this stage (see above browse tree problem). The following would be correct:
If "Various artists" is displayed under [All Albums], an enry "Various artists" in Album Artists would be consistent,
if blanks are displayed under [All Albums], there should be no entry under Album Artists.
= Detailed view of selected album shows the following contents in album artist field:5
"Various artists" (n-stream) artist of 1st title (Accet Control: wrong, correct would be blanks or "Various artists").
= Artist with each title contains now (5 Beta) the respective arist in both n-stream and Asset Control (correct).
Under 4.3 (Registered) Artist is blank in n-stream, but correctly displayed in Asset Control. Plug Player and Kinski do not show changes between Asset 4.3. and 5 Beta and both do not show artist together with the titles. Hardcopies regarding this point:
And here is what Asset 4.3 registered does:
Are there different data sent to or received at the different control points (since for Asset Control I found some "Settings Overrides" in Asset UPnP, but none for Naim Unity) ?
3.Different results of sort order, if a single letter or all ...(... Albums / ... Album Artists [in Asset UPnP 4.3 only] / ... Artists) is selected:
If a single letter is selected, the contents of Album Artist Sort, Artist Sort, and Album Sort are considered in displayed order respectively.
If all (Albums / Artists) is selected, the respective contents of the ... sort fields are neglected. Since upto now I am unable to test if this happens also with Album Artist in 5 Beta, I tried this also with Asset UPnP 4.3 (Registered; both Win and Mac) with same result.
This appears only in Naim's n-stream (and e.g. in foobar 2000), Asset Control (and Plug Player as well as Kinski on Mac) displays the data as expected.
Naim's Uniti 2 shows, if tracks are selected manually or by use of remote control, the correct sort order in both cases, but it does not handle Unicode characters correctly and shows a "?" for each character.
(here I wanted to include 6 hardcopies, which I can't attach actually - I will mail them to the usual mail address separately)
Any idea what I could do to ensure equal behaviour of the above mentioned control points or is Asset sending excactly the same contents to any control point (would mean that it is up to the supplier of the control point software to correct this !?!) ?
4.I had no duplicate problems with the first version of V5 beta, but experienced for whatever reason after some time an empty database. I managed to solve this problem by installing the older version of V5 beta.
To avoid similar troubles I changed the audio library path from my NAS to a locally USB 2.0 attached disc. Meanwhile I re-installed the actual V5 Beta and it still points to a local USB drive.
Could the empty database occur if during a "refresh all" the connection to my NAS, to which Asset pointed before, is temporarily lost ?
5."New database design, faster at indexing, browsing albums" - no change experienced during "refresh all" upto now, although numbers of albums, titles nearly the same and PC, network and NAS exactly the same as before.
Or should only the final release show remarkable faster reactions ?
As some of these points may affect also Mobile Foobar2000 ("My input is ..." in September 2014 blog) I thought some of them might avoid, if clarified now, possible additional efforts later on.
Best regards,
Niko
Comment