Author | Message |
Importing Lotusflow3r to iTunes Just curious.
When I import any of the 3 discs from Lotusflow3r into my iTunes to put onto my iPod, none of the titles or track info shows up. Anyone else have this problem? I find it weird that a CD released in 2009 wouldn't be fully set-up for modern technology. My 1999 CD did the same thing, but no one was even thinking about iPods back in 1983. (Or 1988, whenever the CD was pressed...) | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
berniejobs said: Just curious.
When I import any of the 3 discs from Lotusflow3r into my iTunes to put onto my iPod, none of the titles or track info shows up. Anyone else have this problem? I find it weird that a CD released in 2009 wouldn't be fully set-up for modern technology. My 1999 CD did the same thing, but no one was even thinking about iPods back in 1983. (Or 1988, whenever the CD was pressed...) My 1999 imported with no problems, got full tracklist and artwork, not tried Lotus yet. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MikeyB71 said: My 1999 imported with no problems, got full tracklist and artwork, not tried Lotus yet. Yeah, I bought 1999 on CD a long time ago, so I assume newer pressings probably work fine. Did you try to import Lotusflow3r yet? What happened? I'm not really bitching, but one frustrating thing about iTunes sometimes is that when you import a CD like that and you manually go through and rename the tracks, sometimes the sequence qets mixed up. I can never tell if I should just name the Artist or Album Artist. Also, I never know if I should click "Part of a Compilation"... Because all the songs on the album are a part of a compilation technically. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I imported all three CD's with no issues. "Love is like peeing in your pants, everyone sees it but only you feel its warmth" | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
berniejobs said: I find it weird that a CD released in 2009 wouldn't be fully set-up for modern technology.
My 1999 CD did the same thing, but no one was even thinking about iPods back in 1983. (Or 1988, whenever the CD was pressed...) It has nothing to do with the specification of CD. Mechanism can be explained roughly: 1) iTunes reads particular data on CD to identify it. (In many cases it's unique to each title, but it's sometimes dupulicated between different titles and it causes mis-labeling) 2) iTunes sends query to the online database server to get information about the given disc. (That information was registered by the first person who input the data manually with his local PC and uploaded, then it can be modified later.) 3) iTunes embeds that data into files upon ripping according to the above-mentioned information gotten from the server. I think your PC had a kind of problem with Internet connection when you ripped tha data. (e.g. lost of connection, blocked by personal firewall) | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deepwater said: berniejobs said: I find it weird that a CD released in 2009 wouldn't be fully set-up for modern technology.
My 1999 CD did the same thing, but no one was even thinking about iPods back in 1983. (Or 1988, whenever the CD was pressed...) It has nothing to do with the specification of CD. Mechanism can be explained roughly: 1) iTunes reads particular data on CD to identify it. (In many cases it's unique to each title, but it's sometimes dupulicated between different titles and it causes mis-labeling) 2) iTunes sends query to the online database server to get information about the given disc. (That information was registered by the first person who input the data manually with his local PC and uploaded, then it can be modified later.) 3) iTunes embeds that data into files upon ripping according to the above-mentioned information gotten from the server. I think your PC had a kind of problem with Internet connection when you ripped tha data. (e.g. lost of connection, blocked by personal firewall) iTunes reads the amount of tracks and the individual track lengths and compares that numerical data against Gracenote's library -- then it assigns the names to the CD. That is why you can sometimes - but rarely - get a false result when another CD has the exact same times/number of tracks. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
berniejobs said: Also, I never know if I should click "Part of a Compilation"... Because all the songs on the album are a part of a compilation technically.
You may want to click "Part of a Compilation" when you rip a CD like Graffiti Bridge. a) when you click "Part of a Compilation" All files will be placed in one folder named Graffiti Brige. There will be only one Graffiti Brige folder and it's in the folder named Compilation. b) when you don't click "Part of a Compilation" You will find five Graffiti Brige folders under folder named Prince, The Time, Tevin Campbell, George Clinton and Mavis Staples. Then, files will be placed there respectively. Sorry if my explanation does not make sense appropriately | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Yup, just imported Lotus and mplsound, no probs. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deepwater said: berniejobs said: Also, I never know if I should click "Part of a Compilation"... Because all the songs on the album are a part of a compilation technically.
You may want to click "Part of a Compilation" when you rip a CD like Graffiti Bridge. a) when you click "Part of a Compilation" All files will be placed in one folder named Graffiti Brige. There will be only one Graffiti Brige folder and it's in the folder named Compilation. b) when you don't click "Part of a Compilation" You will find five Graffiti Brige folders under folder named Prince, The Time, Tevin Campbell, George Clinton and Mavis Staples. Then, files will be placed there respectively. Sorry if my explanation does not make sense appropriately Aah... that's been driving me crazy for ages, I've always just replaced their names with the main one... I knew I was doing something wrong. thanks! blah blah blah | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Se7en said: That is why you can sometimes - but rarely - get a false result when another CD has the exact same times/number of tracks.
I didn't know the keys were length of song and the number of tracks. Can they be exactly the same between different titles? I think iTunes is reading time in the format of minutes, sesonds and frames. Do you mean total length and not all each length for every single track? | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
erik319 said: Aah... that's been driving me crazy for ages, I've always just replaced their names with the main one... I knew I was doing something wrong. thanks!
Glad to know my explanation makes sense | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deepwater said: Se7en said: That is why you can sometimes - but rarely - get a false result when another CD has the exact same times/number of tracks.
I didn't know the keys were length of song and the number of tracks. Can they be exactly the same between different titles? I think iTunes is reading time in the format of minutes, sesonds and frames. Do you mean total length and not all each length for every single track? It reads total length, number of tracks, AND length of individual tracks when retrieving Gracenote (CDDB) tag information. Those numerical markers can sometimes be identical, but it's rare. I think I've had 2 in my whole collection . . . something random came up like The Eagles Greatest Hits or something like that. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
^^ Thanks Se7en, I understand.
I have encountered many times but did not investigate the issue. Why many times for me ... | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
berniejobs said: Anyone else have this problem? I find it weird that a CD released in 2009 wouldn't be fully set-up for modern technology.
The CD shows up fine. Check your internet connection, and make sure iTunes has access the CD database for the names and titles. or you can just type it in. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deepwater said: berniejobs said: Also, I never know if I should click "Part of a Compilation"... Because all the songs on the album are a part of a compilation technically.
You may want to click "Part of a Compilation" when you rip a CD like Graffiti Bridge. a) when you click "Part of a Compilation" All files will be placed in one folder named Graffiti Brige. There will be only one Graffiti Brige folder and it's in the folder named Compilation. b) when you don't click "Part of a Compilation" You will find five Graffiti Brige folders under folder named Prince, The Time, Tevin Campbell, George Clinton and Mavis Staples. Then, files will be placed there respectively. Sorry if my explanation does not make sense appropriately but if you already have a "Prince" or "The Time" or "Mavis Staples" or whatever, the individual tracks will also appear under those artist's folders, as the album. if you click "part of a compilation". if you don't have an artist in your library already, that particular track will only show up under the "Compilations" folder. | |
- E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |