Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Duplicate Artists #415

Open
jgdye opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 7 comments
Open

Duplicate Artists #415

jgdye opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 7 comments

Comments

@jgdye
Copy link

jgdye commented Feb 7, 2024

I'm getting a handful of duplicate artists, where one or two albums are listed under a generic id, and the rest are listed under the MBID. All the files have the correct MBID. I've attached eyeD3 outputs from two files.
This one shows up under the proper MBID.
This one shows up under a generic id.
The difference that I've been able to tell is that the ones with generic ids have both the all caps MUSICBRAINZ_* and "TXX:MusicBrainz *" tags. The problem seems to go away if I delete the MUSICBRAINZ style tags.

@epoupon
Copy link
Owner

epoupon commented Feb 7, 2024

Hello! Thanks for reporting
What lms version do you use?

@epoupon
Copy link
Owner

epoupon commented Feb 7, 2024

And could you please paste the full result of lms-metadata on each file?

@jgdye
Copy link
Author

jgdye commented Feb 8, 2024

Working MBID
Non-working MBID
I was on v3.43.0, but I just compiled v3.49.0 with unchanged results, and that's the version the lms-metadata outputs are from.

@epoupon
Copy link
Owner

epoupon commented Feb 8, 2024

According to what you sent, it looks like TagLib concatenates the values found in both "MUSICBRAINZ_ARTISTID" and "MusicBrainz Artist Id" tags:
Here is what Taglib reports (note the SEP added by lms-metadata to show multiple values):
[MUSICBRAINZ_ARTISTID] = e69db8ef-ffd1-4916-a85f-df428f223cce*SEP*e69db8ef-ffd1-4916-a85f-df428f223cce
LMS tries to perfectly match the artist name and the artist MBID. Here we have a single name for two mbids => no MBID match is even attempted.
For this particular case we could work around this by removing duplicated values.

@epoupon
Copy link
Owner

epoupon commented Feb 8, 2024

Would you mind sending your offending file @ [email protected] ?

@jgdye
Copy link
Author

jgdye commented Feb 8, 2024 via email

@epoupon
Copy link
Owner

epoupon commented Mar 2, 2024

Ok, I think I may have a workaround for this issue. But I am not that confident.
Will have to test more

@epoupon epoupon added this to the v3.51.0 milestone Mar 2, 2024
@epoupon epoupon modified the milestones: v3.51.0, v3.52.0 Mar 15, 2024
@epoupon epoupon modified the milestones: v3.52.0, v3.53.0 Apr 20, 2024
@epoupon epoupon modified the milestones: v3.53.0, v3.54.0 May 1, 2024
@epoupon epoupon removed this from the v3.54.0 milestone Jun 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants