IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Unwanted tags and track without total tracks
b0nk
post Jul 24 2013, 03:59
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 24-July 13
From: Portugal
Member No.: 109239



These are the arguments I'm using for lame 3.99.5 in fb2k for a V0 mp3

CODE
--ta "%artist%" --tt "%title%" --tl "%album%" --tn "%tracknumber%" --tg "%genre%" --ty "%date%" -h --id3v2-only --noreplaygain -V 0 - %d

fb2k console output:
CODE
Command line: "D:\path\to\lame\lame.exe" --ta "Simbiose" --tt "Buried Alive" --tl "Economical Terrorism" --tn "2" --tg "Crust Punk" --ty "2012" -h --id3v2-only --noreplaygain -V 0 - "Simbiose-02-Buried Alive.mp3"


How do I avoid these tags to show up? ENCODERSETTINGS and LENGTH



I also couldn't find how to only add the track without the total tracks.

Thank you for the help.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 24 2013, 10:14
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



You probably should not add tagging switches to LAME because foobar2000 will do the tagging for you anyway. I bet LAME is writing some tags, and then foobar2000 is rewriting most of them

QUOTE (b0nk @ Jul 24 2013, 03:59) *
How do I avoid these tags to show up? ENCODERSETTINGS and LENGTH
Well, guess what! LAME writes those itself if you have instructed it to write any other ID3 tags, so if you leave the tagging to foobar2000, they should not be added.

QUOTE
I also couldn't find how to only add the track without the total tracks.
http://hydrogenaudio.org/forums/?showtopic=101861
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
b0nk
post Jul 24 2013, 13:03
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 24-July 13
From: Portugal
Member No.: 109239



Fortunately lame is open source and I can avoid it adding those 2 tags by commenting some methods in the code and compile my own.

As for track/tracktotal I thought it was an optional thing in fb2k. It's a good thing it is that way.
Thanks again!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 24 2013, 20:39
Post #4





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



Of course, and I thought of suggesting that, but then I assumed it would be simpler to have foobar2000 do the tagging. Is there any particular reason that you prefer to have LAME handle it?

Anyway, glad you’re happy with the available options.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
b0nk
post Jul 26 2013, 18:58
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 24-July 13
From: Portugal
Member No.: 109239



Yes it is simpler to have foobar2000 do the tagging and it's how I usually do. I just like to mess around with tools and see what I can do with them even if it's something small. Like you said I am happy with the options I'm given and I try most of them for fun and knowledge.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Jul 26 2013, 19:27
Post #6





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



QUOTE (b0nk @ Jul 26 2013, 18:58) *
I just like to mess around with tools and see what I can do with them even if it's something small. Like you said I am happy with the options I'm given and I try most of them for fun and knowledge.
I like this attitude…and wish it were more common. biggrin.gif I’m similar. I often find it fun to research and/or work out things for myself, so I’m not sure why this approach is so rare comparatively.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st October 2014 - 01:44