Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
<track> = xx/yy vs <totaltracks>?, (Same for disc numbering)
post May 26 2012, 23:04
Post #1

Group: Members
Posts: 2402
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207

My preferences lean towards track = xx and totaltracks = yy (both padded to two-figures), but I discovered that by a careless choice of options, I have quite a few with the track field being 01/12, 02/12 etc.

Before I start trying to convert: Is there any good argument for the latter?

Maybe I should have asked about more general recommendations than Vorbis comments, but FLAC is my ripping format of choice, so ... to this forum it goes.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Remedial Sound
post May 27 2012, 01:25
Post #2

Group: Members
Posts: 517
Joined: 5-January 06
From: Dublin
Member No.: 26898

I now go with what you're leaning towards, i.e., separate fields for tracknumber and total tracks, mainly because I'm a foobar user and this is the way foobar writes them.

I used to have my rips tagged xx/yy (which was at the time - and perhaps still is - the default mp3tag convention for flacs). Unfortunately foo_verifier won't verify an album with AccurateRip unless the total tracks field is present.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post May 27 2012, 05:56
Post #3

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3406
Joined: 26-July 02
From: To:
Member No.: 2796

The number of tracks in an album is a separate datum and belongs in a unique field, IMO.

1. Attack the argument, not the arguer.
2. Assume good faith.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post May 27 2012, 09:23
Post #4

Group: Members
Posts: 908
Joined: 9-February 02
From: Cheshire, UK
Member No.: 1296

Quite inefficient to repeat a value. Put it in it's own field. smile.gif

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: 28th November 2015 - 00:28