|
Printable Version of Topic
-Brading Software Message Board +--Forum: Mp3/Tag Studio Support and Bug Reports +---Topic: Copying tag info started by stanman Posted by: stanman on Sep. 16 2004,20:18 I've just started to use MP3/Tag studio and have some questions. I'm replacing some tagged mp3 files with some new untagged ones and I want to copy the tags from the old files to the new. The only difference is that the new songs are a few secs. shorter in duration. When I do a copy and paste of the v2 tag it seems to also copy the old time which I don't want. How do copy only certain tag info and exclude the time? Another problem I'm having is matching the old files to the new. The new files have no tag info and are named Artist_Album_Track# so they are sorted by track number, but the old files are sorted by alpha track name. How can match these up so that the old track 1 tag get copied to the new track 1 and so on? Posted by: Magnus Brading on Sep. 17 2004,01:18 If you are talking about the ID3v2 length tag field, you can remove it from all the files with the mass clean tool before doing the copy/paste (copy/paste from the menus always copies the entire tag). About matching the files, you could simply build a suitable list with the list creator tool first, and then import it with the "Tag/rename from list" tool. Posted by: stanman on Sep. 17 2004,15:30 Doing the mass cleanup on the v2 length seems to work. When you right click on a file and select properties there is a field at the bottom called 'Duration'. When I copied the tag from the old longer song to the new shorter song the old duration would show up. When I did a clean up and removed the v2 length from the old tag and copied the tag to the new file, it also deleted the new v2 length. So the duration for the new file stayed the same, which is the accurate value, but now the v2 length for the new file is gone and I'm not sure if this would cause a problem somewhere else. I guess I was looking for a way to update the tag without changing the length. As far as the second thing I was asking about, the problem still remains the sort order. I created a custom list of tag info for files that are in alpha order and the files they are going to update are in track number order, so if I could find a way to sort the custom list by track number it should work. Any ideas on how I can do the sort? Also some of the fields I need on the custom list file are in the advanced ID3v2 info section. I'm not sure how to get at those fields in the create custom list section. Would I have to use advanced mode and use a string building template? Posted by: Magnus Brading on Sep. 17 2004,17:17 The length field of the ID3v2 tag is mostly annoying, and there should normally not be any problems whatsoever removing it, yes. Sorting list output can be done easily from the "Extended settings" of the list creator tool, accessible from the global settings under the file menu. You could also build the target filenames from the tag info itself, and then not have to worry about the order of the list at all. And yes, you can include special ID3v2 frames in the lists by using advanced mode and <v2_XXXX> type fields in the template, where XXXX is the special four letter codes that you can see for the each ID3v2 frame e.g. in the mass clean tool. Posted by: stanman on Sep. 17 2004,18:20 OK I'm 95% of the way there. I think the fields I need are User defined text information. These are comment fields from Musicmatch and the content descriptions are MusicMatch_Preference, MusicMatch_Mood etc. So I guess I would reference these by <V2_TXXX> but how do I find out what to put in for XXX? Posted by: Magnus Brading on Sep. 17 2004,21:26 Only normal text type ID3v2 fields are currently supported for the list tool, which means that the "User defined text information" fields are not supported in this context, sorry about that. Posted by: stanman on Sep. 18 2004,14:05 Thanks very much for your help, I can now update most of the tag info that I need and also do the rename. This should save me much in the way of time and tedium. Would supporting the v2 user defined info be a candidate for future enhancements? Posted by: Magnus Brading on Sep. 18 2004,14:47 I'm glad you succeeded with your task. And yes, those fields might be supported in a future version. end |