Recently, while adjusting some song genres in eJukebox something occured to me.

Often the song genre field is used as kind of a keyword to describe the type or mood of the song. Some of us get creative with ID3v2 tags and sort of invent our own super-descriptive genres, and others stick strictly to established genres like "Rock" or "R&B" or "Classical".

Even when we DO settle on a genre, often songs cross borders and more than one applies. So again, either we invent some kind of new cross polinated genre, or we settle.

I like the way Allmusic.com handles this problem, and I think it can be adapted to eJ. IN their music listings, they have two seperate fields for each artist and/or album. One for Genre (they allow mutiple, even though ID3 tags don't) and one for what they call "tones" (Brooding, Cerebral, Literate, Sugary, Energetic, Sexy, Fun, Intense, etc., are examples).

Because ID3v2 really only still allows ONE genre, I suggest that eJ create a second field, tucked away in some supplemental place, that stores whatever selection of keywords we want to apply to a song. The keywords can be a free-form field where as many extra genre descriptions OR "Tone" mood descriptions as you want can be added. Then either the search engine or the Custom Mode can be used to group songs in more complex, and yet more relevant ways. You can arbitrarily declare a song to be "Happy" and "Sexy" both and arrange to play only the "Happy" ones or the "Sexy" ones--or both--with very little effort.

Reactions? If this is technically feasible I can't see a downside. I mean people can always choose NOT to use it. It shouldn't inflate the MP3 file that much--especially if some limits are placed on it (a character legnth or a maximum number of keywords).

I like your idea jhlurie... i also would like the genres be more "customisable". Personnaly often i use several words to describe my albums but i tend to create new ones too often even though i would like to regroup my similar albums. Unwanted effect...

The only downside i can see in your idea is that will not be standard, if a specific field is used for that. I would prefer my genres and "tones" stay usable with any other mp3 software...

But i think nothing prevent you to already use the standard id3v2 genre field to put your personal "tones": Whether the genre and tone(s) be in one or several fields, it's eJukebox - or any other software - which should be able to exploit intelligently the words it finds in the genre field.
Moreover, we can already do that in the CUSTOM play mode, and do what you request:

Ah ah! That's a very interesting challenge for us Audiosoft...
I haved already posted here a few ideas i haved seen in other jukebox which have already treated this aspect... I mean in the form of a table where you can check the genres and years you want to display... That could be a good start!

But Audiosoft, you say us you may use the comment field for the extended genre descriptions: the only problem with this is i already use this field to put some comments! I mean a biography of the artist or a description of the album content, even if unfortunately they are not displayed in eJukebox... I don't think the comment field should be used exclusively to put a few keywords, unless it exist in the id3 norm another field where i could move my comments... but i don't think so?
I don't understand where is the problem if you use the existing standard id3v2 genre field to put these additional keywords since the version 2 of id3 tags allow that! Why don't you want to use it??

Otherwise, thank you very much for your plan concerning a such feature i expected since a long time!
I will try to help you to build the new web page, at least by suggesting a few content ideas...

Here is my first suggestion of a filter for eJukebox: http://www.audiosoft.net/forums/viewthread.php?tid=339
I think it could be easily turned into a web page! and also be optimized a bit...

And now my web page!

And a screenshot...

Very cool Pirk!!

Does it make sense to add to the blue selection box (where you have Year, Rating etc.):

- Last Played (less than x weeks ago, more than x weeks ago)

- Playcount (number of times played)

?

Thanks Demnos!
I'm happy you appreciate my work...

And finally my last creation

I've forgotten the html version...

A better version...

And its html file...

Another one... The best of course!

Html...

Any more thought on this? At the very least, even without the extra bells and whistles suggested by Pirk, the basic idea seems easy enough to implement--supposing, in fact, it can be done without stepping on whatever current description the user has.

I wish for this as well; Pirk's example suits my needs quite well.

What I'm still hoping for is for a standardized rating field. Something I can port ratings to and from different programs with. I've been trying to pull the ratings from ejukebox with winamp, mediamonkey and tag/rename but I just can't do it for some reason.

I belive audiosoft has "hacked" the tagfields quite a lot. Concerning ratings and the compilations marks. And sure hopes that they will continue doing so...

Ej had ratings way before winamp had it.. Nullsoft introduced it in winamp 5.0...I laught about reading the Nullsoft newsletter, introducing this as a new feature.. Why? Because I had this feature one year before Nullsoft introduced it. Because I was introduced to ejukebox.

Who then should be responsible for compatiblity of ratings?I would say: Maybe this is Nullsoft's responsiblity, since they stole the concept anyhow?

Why should Winamp be set as the standard, even when they introduce things way after others have? That kind of thinking is the reason why we use Microsoft systems and a lot of terrible standards today.. Being the most well know program and the biggest in industry shouldn't really be equivalient of being the one that should set standards all the time.
At least I don't think so..


I sure hope that Audiosoft will keep up their innovative ways of doing things. Even if tiny companies like Nullsoft, Apple and Musicmatch can't follow, before later on



However, there are extreamly interesting things which can be extracted from ID3 information .... Comments, label etc... Would love to see ej use this information in interesting ways and in addition use the current implemented information in an completly non fuzzy manner...

The stuff that Pirk is introducing in this thread is indeed interesting and is a concept which deserves implementation?


(sorry for this long post got really carried away...)

Quote:

Originally posted by Fishy I belive audiosoft has "hacked" the tagfields quite a lot. Concerning ratings and the compilations marks. And sure hopes that they will continue doing so... Ej had ratings way before winamp had it.. Nullsoft introduced it in winamp 5.0...I laught about reading the Nullsoft newsletter, introducing this as a new feature.. Why? Because I had this feature one year before Nullsoft introduced it. Because I was introduced to ejukebox. Who then should be responsible for compatiblity of ratings?I would say: Maybe this is Nullsoft's responsiblity, since they stole the concept anyhow? Why should Winamp be set as the standard, even when they introduce things way after others have? That kind of thinking is the reason why we use Microsoft systems and a lot of terrible standards today.. Being the most well know program and the biggest in industry shouldn't really be equivalient of being the one that should set standards all the time. At least I don't think so.. I sure hope that Audiosoft will keep up their innovative ways of doing things. Even if tiny companies like Nullsoft, Apple and Musicmatch can't follow, before later on However, there are extreamly interesting things which can be extracted from ID3 information .... Comments, label etc... Would love to see ej use this information in interesting ways and in addition use the current implemented information in an completly non fuzzy manner... The stuff that Pirk is introducing in this thread is indeed interesting and is a concept which deserves implementation? (sorry for this long post got really carried away...)

What format is the winamp ratings in? I mean, if it is a ten-point scale, such as with EJ (due to the half stars), there ought to be a way to make them compatible. EJ would also feature from this, since people who go from using the new Winamp to EJ would still have their ratings intact.

And also, if winamp's tagging becomes a widespread standard, it would mean that the tags we set in EJ would also be readable on the future's portable mp3 players, mobile phone/PDA's etc. Most of us will be carrying one of these babies in the future, one way or another.

Winamp doesn't actually write ratings to the tags(my one [Censored] with winamps ratings system) and the format is 1-5. I never use half stars and the like so I'd just be happy with a way to view ejukebox ratings as just another tag field. Could easily rate that way.

The EJ star ratings are stored as 0-100 value in a User Defined (TXXX) ID3v2 tag field labeled "asnrating".

10 = 1/2 star
100 = 5 Stars

BTW the Custom List Generator is in the works for v4.0. The HTML forms from Pirk is great but much works still needs to be done including modifying it to use a CSS stylesheet for skinning.

A bit off topic:
Right now we are working on updating the eJukebox editor...which will probably make it in before v4.0. So far we have managed to separate it from eJukebox's window so you can drag the editor anywhere on screen...and leave it open all the time if you want. Fixed a bug where the changes were sometimes not saved to the database when the Track# was empty. Improved the editors speed ALLOT. Added a way to toggle/expand the Lyrics View. Drop Lyrics text in the editor. Added a button that allows you to preview ID3 encoded cover images full size. Plus updated the look and effects to make it easier to understand. We also updated the look of the Rename input boxes and the "No Cover Found" dialog...which now autocloses after 5 seconds and gives a tip on using the "Info" button to manually find the Cover Image on the web and Drag and Drop it in the editor.

We are thinking about possibly using the Lyrics area for "ID3 comments" as well by adding a tab to switch between lyrics and comments. Plus hopefully add a spot to input multiple genres/tones. Here is a screenshot of what we have to far. The editor on the right was added to the screenshot with Photoshop to show the expanded lyrics view.

Ahh... Great news!

I wait for the Custom List Generator impatiently!

That is excellent if you have improved the editors speed! And you have separated it too!

The new editor looks great, audiosoft! Really smells like sweet fruit.. French and american ones.. Too bad for tag&rename

Really like the idea of making the comments/reviews of albums available... As well as a zoom mode for the albumimages...

Would it be possible to include a 'label' field as well. Not just for the editor but in the songlist and autoplaymodes as well, or would that be a lot of hazzle?

I have made allot of progress on the Custom List Generator this week. It works but it is not done yet .... so far it can output the custom list to the albumlist, songlist or a playlist file. I am still working on implementing its use for Custom AutoPlay Mode and Copy Files and I still need to implement saving and loading of Custom List profiles. I may just release this as an entry on the Tools menu in v3.99 for use "as is" until I finish the rest up for v4.0. Also, I plan to add a "Styles/Tones" section for v4.0.

P.S. If anyone thinks of a better title for it than "Custom List Generator" let me know.

Thanks for the HTML inspiration Pirk ... it ended up being much easier to do it in code rather than HTML. Plus I realized it would not be possible to add allot of genres, tones and artists (it would require a ton of checkboxes) if it was in HTML - so I came up with this...

Can I just say that I'm so happy to see Audiosoft back on the job! The changes look great!

I adore the way you have improved my outline. Everything is there! And even more... (I completly forgot Artists exclusion!)
Your add/remove lists for genres and Artists is an excellent idea! That will be very handy.

Your interface looks very good even if it is not in HTML. I think that, for this kind of tools, the best functionality possible is the more important for the moment...
I'm still longing to start to play with it!

Keep up your great work.

Maybe "Music selection..." would be better?

Ahm that sure looks like a multifunctional thing in a small box

I have been longing for an easy way to display different genres and such in the songlist in an fast and easy way. This as well as a more advanced autoplay modi, with possibilities to generate your own presets and save these to disk. This is the answer to those dreams, and I do really enjoy that answer!

One Idea: It would be really cool if this one could also save the results to a html file (maybe with cover images and everything?). It would be great if the user wants to show parts, or even the complete, albumcollection on a website.

I hope it will be totally non fuzzy and true to information in tags. Maybe a hybrid between audiosoft and Pirk terminology would do for this cutie? "Music selection generator" or simular?

This one may make the "year" and "genre" buttons at the very top of the program kindof redundant? Since this generator can do those things for the user, it might be an idea to remove those buttons for future versions? Just a thought..

I would have used the genre and years button if they generated non-fuzzy results and I didn't have to reload my albumlist afterwards (which takes a long time due to caching at the end). If the generator is non fuzzy (or at the very least optional non-fuzzy) and can use the songlist to display results, I sure will be using that feature a lot

I totally agree! I also would like the Music selections be non fuzzy, of course...
Otherwise where would be the interest we go to the trouble of carefully selectioning some songs if we get dilettanti results?

But don't get me wrong: Fuzzy songlists can be amazing too! Sometimes I like to search for songs with some particular words in their titles. That often provides eccentric and psychic lists. But for a Music SELECTION, we absolutely want the results be based on strict ID tags.

Free search should of course be fuzzy. Maybe even fuzzier than it is in ej at the moment. It would for instance be great if one could do a free search on both album and artist at the same time i.e "Led Zeppelin Song Remains". As it is now you have to choose between "led zeppelin" or "song remains" to get useful results from free search. Nested artist - album search could be very practial.

But everywhere else I prefer things to be non-fuzzy. Even if this demands that the user should have the tags set alright. Bandnames and such doesn't give a good indication on i.e genre anyway. Don't come and tell me that Jon Spencer Blues Explosion is playing the blues. And the swedish band Soundtrack of our lives has yet to make a soundtrack

Quote:

Message original : Fishy Don't come and tell me that Jon Spencer Blues Explosion is playing the blues. And the swedish band Soundtrack of our lives has yet to make a soundtrack

Quote:

Message original : Fishy I would have used the genre and years button if they generated non-fuzzy results and I didn't have to reload my albumlist afterwards (which takes a long time due to caching at the end). If the generator is non fuzzy (or at the very least optional non-fuzzy) and can use the songlist to display results, I sure will be using that feature a lot

Don't worry...I built the new Custom List Generator to be totally non-fuzzy.

How about I call it the "AutoList Builder"? That way we can refer to an individual profile as an "AutoList" and I can add an "AutoLists" sub menu on the tools menu with all the profiles...once I have the saving and loading of profiles done.

Ahh.. good! Fishy will be relieved, and me too...

"AutoList Builder"? No objection, that will be perfect for me!

Thanks.

How about "SuperSearch" ?

eJukebox SuperSearch

Possible profiles:
- French Rock SuperSearch
- Electronic SuperSearch
- Party SuperSearch ...