Asset UPnP R2024 beta.

[vilsen]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

I respect your decision, but may I ask why this has changed? Until recently the windows version was the prioritized one with betas coming first.

[Spoon]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

We were getting zero feedback on Windows betas for Asset.

[vilsen]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Hm, strange if that's the reason. There's been feedback when Asset betas for windows has been released, see e.g. here.

And the betas are actually useful for us too, with features coming sooner.

Anyway, how far off is the final version for us windows users - are we talking days, weeks or months?

[Spoon]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

The source between Windows and Linux/NAS/Mac is separate, so it would be either or, and backported before release, that is the reason, we get more feedback for the other releases combined.

Once the update is tested and feature rich, we release.

[Arnold]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Hi Peter,

Thanks for the improvements in Asset (for Synology).

- The Option menu layout has improved with the subheadings and combining similar options.
- I also see that the tracknumbering of multi disc albums has changed. Now starting with 101 and thus more consequent discnumber+tracknumber combination. Very nice.
- And the album art also displaying in high res when browsing the collection.

Wil do some more testing to experience the improved speed and better detection of changed folder.jpg.

[vilsen]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

The source between Windows and Linux/NAS/Mac is separate, so it would be either or, and backported before release, that is the reason, we get more feedback for the other releases combined.

Ok, that makes sense. Actually, my impression is that the linux versions need a little more care than the windows version.

[simes_pep]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Installed on RPi2 (32-bit ARM), rescanning of entire library was certainly faster with r8 structure.
Noticed some new settings, namely &*8220;Fill missing Album Artist tags&*8221;.
Will advise, as library changes and changes are picked up.
Thanks, Simon

All rebuilt, picking up new items nicely but not seeing any performance improvement, but the RPi2 platform is s 10 year old device, with limited CPU power & RAM - but once the library is built is does what it needs to & works well.

[Arnold]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Hi Peter,

Under Display Settings there is the option "Multi-Disc Albums show as '[Disc] [Track] [Title]'".
I don't see any difference in ticking or unticking this option.
With this new Asset release tracks of multi-disc albums (with disc number also set) are always presented as 101, 102, ..., 201, 202, ...

Under Indexing Settings is the option "Multi-Disc Album".
When I make a change in this setting, Asset restarts and does a "clear database and rescan all folders".
This takes almost 10 minutes for my collection (fast Synology DS and 30k+ tracks).

What does "Leave Album Tag Untouched" mean with "Multi-Disc Album"?
When selecting this option, all of my multi disc albums are displayed as seperate albums for each disc (with each disc in a seperate subfolder and regardless of whether disc number is set or not).

[Spoon]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

It would be the album name which has that added.

Check your ID tags have disc 2/2, etc and the track numbers are not 101, 102

[vilsen]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

What does "Leave Album Tag Untouched" mean with "Multi-Disc Album"?
When selecting this option, all of my multi disc albums are displayed as seperate albums for each disc (with each disc in a seperate subfolder and regardless of whether disc number is set or not).

Presuming (and hoping) that "Leave album tag untouched" still means the same as in the previous (windows) version, it means that the ALBUM and TRACK tags are indexed as is (=no change) and DISCNUMBER is ignored.

So if your multi-disc albums are split, perhaps their ALBUM tags aren't identical for all sub-discs or you have "Album defined by folder" ticked?

There was a discussion about the "Multi-disc album" setting here - much of it irrelevant now but you might pick up some hints.

[Arnold]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

So if your multi-disc albums are split, perhaps their ALBUM tags aren't identical for all sub-discs or you have "Album defined by folder" ticked?

Hi,

Yes, I use the "album defined by folder" with the option "auto ...".
Because I have several classical albums with same work, same conductor, but different recording dates. When I don't tick this option, all these are scrambled together as one album. Not good.

Asset does not work good with multi-disc albums.
I have previously send a PM to Peter with my findings.

"Multi-disc album"
With single disc albums I don't use the disc tag.
With my multi-disc albums I use the disc tag and I make sure that the album title is identical for all discs in the multi-disc album. For each disc, the tracknumber starts with 01, 02, ...

When I choose "Leave album tag untouched", the Multi-Disc album is split into separated albums for each disc with each album an identical album-title.

When I choose "Combine Multi-Disc as one Album", then combining indeed is the case. But only if the subfolder name for each disc is named "Disc x" or "CD x" or similar. If the subfolder name is free format text, then combine does not work and each disc is a separate album.
With this "combine" option the tracknumbers for disc 2 and further are always changed to 101,102...201,202.. etc.
So, it's strange that the subfolder naming has influence here.

"Multi-disc albums show as"
This does not work. Whatever option I choose, prepending disc number to each track title is not done.

I guess this is all not yet fixed in this version.
Which is a pity but no big deal. I'll be patient.

[ghosthost]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Moved to the new Beta; very successful with one caveat: I have a series of albums in separate folders with identical titles save for Vol. 1, Vol. 2 and so on. These are now only recognized as a single album by Asset regardless of the "Albums Defined by Folder" setting -- I have tried all three. The albums WERE recognized as separate entities previously with "Defined by Folder" set to NO. The Multi-Disc album option is set to Combine Multi-Disc Albums as One (which is the desired behavior for my use case unless I'm VERY much mistaken). Any thoughts? Would this resolve if I switched that to Leave Album Tags Untouched?

Thanks for lending an ear

[Spoon]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

You would have to do a full rescan (refresh all) to detect the option change.

[ghosthost]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Right; and have done just that three times with no discernable result. Same question...

[PeterP]

Re: Asset UPnP R2024 beta

Problem acknowledged.
This is a clash of the two options, albums defined by folder and combine multi disc albums, where as you have noticed, one overrides behavior of the other.
There's a special workaround in place, detecting multiple folders that look like multiple discs of the same set.
I'm investigating how to simplify these options, this has gotten way too confusing.

Note that manual rescan should not be needed - toggling these options already triggers a rescan.