Bug: %rating mm% appears to be display MM ratings for MP3s and not for FLACs.
When I right click an MP3 and then click Extended-Tags I see a field called RATING MM and it as a single digit value. However, when I right click a FLAC and then click Extended-Tags in that same filed Called RATING MM there IS a value, but it does NOT display in the %rating mm% column.
Interestingly the value displayed in the Extended-Tags windows for FLAC files seems to be 20 times the number of stars (for example a song with 3.5 stars displays as "70"), but even the 70 does NOT display in the %rating mm%.
I saw a post about some rating info being stored in the %popularimeter% field. Hoping that this may be some sort of alias I could use I added that as a column, but no joy.
Is there some column I could add that would allow me to BOTH display AND make bulk changes to the filed where MM stores its rating information for BOTH MP3 and FLAC files. If so, you have yourself a donator.
Thanks
Even though MP3tag has extra fields for dedicated players, it all boils down to the original field POPM in mp3 files. This field could have different formats as players developed their own format.
The original format is
This description is for only ID3v2 tags. The playcounter is an optional value.
Syntax: Email|Rating|Playcounter
Example: Mp3tag|255|5
Note: The Rating is an integer between 1 (worst) and 255 (best).
What a player makes of this field and whether it supports it for all file formats ...
It would be interesting to see a file that you tagged with a rating in MM where that is displayed for flacs in MP3tag. It could still be that MM does not save this in the tags but only in its database.
Ohrenkino, Not being a tag expert, I was not able to completely understand your reply as I have no idea where FLAC ratings "should" be kept, ID3 or other, or if ID3 whether v1, or 2 or 3, etc, and something appears to be missing after "The original format is"
What I can say so far is this:
- MM DOES store the rating in the FLAC file itself. I say this because when you right click a MM FLAC in MP3Tag, and then click on "Extended Tags", MP3Tag show a Metadata Field called "RATING" and for a MM FLAC file with 1* it shows 20, and for a FLAC file with 2*s it shows 40, etc.
- Also, the FC command in windows 10 shows location 000008BA being a 32 for rating 1, 34, for rating 2, etc.
Given the above, I "assumed" that since MP3Tag has a column called "Rating MM", and since that column does display ratings for MP3s, AND since MP3Tag DOES display a value in the right-click "Extended Tags" windows for MM FLAC files (meaning that Mp3Tag IS seeing the rating field (again no idea which field that actually is), that is was simply that MP3tag was not displaying the number it found in the RATING filed (again no idea which field that actually is) in the column called Rating MM as it does with MP3 files.
Maybe it is that MM is storing their FLAC rating in an improper/non-standard way, which , if you could let me know, then I will submit a ticket to them. However, if their FLAC ratings do follow a standard, and you can translate and display the rating that is in the FLAC as you do with MP3s I would certainly appreciate it.
If you should ever have the time to research this, here is a link to a single FLAC song with a range of 1 to 5 stars on them. I will leave this file out there for you for a couple of weeks.
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aul9LJsDWXwLihH3w-r6bOQNJlkt?e=s568Es
(I have never sent a 1-dirve link before. I hope it works for you)
Thanks
Right after my last post I came across the following while trying to dig into the mapping issue a little more:
This Wikipedia article on FLAC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAC
says that " For tagging, FLAC uses the same system as [Vorbis comments]"
And the Wikipedia article on Vorbis comments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorbis_comment
says: " The specification gives several example tag names such as TITLE and TRACKNUMBER . Most applications also support common de facto standards, such as DISCNUMBER , RATING , and tags for [ReplayGain] information. Ratings are usually mapped as 1-5 stars with 20,40,60,80,100 as the actual string values."
Now, not a tag expert and I have never heard of Vorbis before, but as it says that "RATING" is a "de facto" standard, and that they are usually mapped as 20,40,60 . . , I suspect that MediaMonkey is using this Vorbis de facto standard for rating their FLACs.
- AND-
MP3Tag does seem to see this RATING field in the Extended Tag window,
Of course I realize that the name of your product is not FLACTag, but rather MP3Tag, but if the above is correct, and as your software can edit other FLAC metadata quite nicely, I would appreciate your considering mapping de facto FLAC Vorbis fields (at least the RATING one) in your product.
You simply have to add a mapping in File>Options>Tags>Mapping
which maps POPULARIMETER to RATING.
Simply adding that single mapping did not make the FLAC ratings show up for me.
I suspect that this is because there may be some additional configuration changes (custom columns?) that I need to make to get the functionality I need, that you would normally expect to be common knowledge of your user base. However, you need not provide additional guidance, as I trust that after I have figured out the other details, it will indeed work.
Other than my struggle with the rating data, your software is quite easy to use, and is superior to anything else I have tried. Especially for the price.
Donation made. Please close out my ticket.
Thanks
If you create a rating in MM for a flac-file you get an equivalent number in the rating-tagfield in MP3Tag and the other way round.
If you define a column in Mp3Tag with the value and field %rating% it will show up there too. You don't need any mapping.
Mp3s and flacs have different tagging-system. For mp3s nowadays ID3v2-tags are mostly used, for flac the standard is VorbisComment.
If a flac-file has a VorbisComment-tag you can see that in Mp3Tag in the extended tagview:
Flac (Flac)
There's something weird with flac tagging, I also think it has to do with %rating mm% or such, and it affects the rating display in foobar2000 and when using dbPowerAmp to process rating info. You can see in the following image that I have 1 file selected (FLAC one)
You can check the settings for the different fields in the next posts
I assigned all the rating fields to the FLAC File: WMP, WINAMP, MM, POPM, and RATING, using a script. (You can see in the previous image, on the left of the window (tag panel) that POPM rating does not match the value on the right (rating POPM), for the POPM rating, that's because FLAC files use RATING field instead of POPM).
However, when I display the rating in the "Extended tags" dialog, I can see all the tags "correctly", that's inside MP3Tag:
...
...
When I display these ratings in foobar2000, i get this:
POPM tag is displayed DUPLICATED!!
It's also duplicated in TAG.EXE command line:
.....
And as stated, dbPowerAmp also detects sth wrong with the tags and is unable to get a correct value for the tags.
This has been working wrong for ages, and does not happen with MP3 files.
@gautxori_yuyu you have revived a post that has been dormant for 3 years, but haven’t really been on the same topic that was started by the OP.
When it comes to the ratings tag, you really have to consider the player you are using. The next consideration is the file types, and making sure that both comply with what is needed.
The best way is to use your player to set a rating for at least one file type of each (mp3 and FLAC in your examples). You can then open these files in mp3tag and find out exactly where these ratings have been stored. From there you can establish which tags you should expect to use going both ways moving forward between your player and mp3tag.
No mystery.
It should be POPULARIMETER that is mapped to something else. POPM is the name of the tag field in native ID3V2 tags.
If you want to address any kind of rating in MP3tag, use POPULARIMETER and also set on Ctrl-O the options >Tags>Enhanced to always show the raw values in POPULARIMETER.
You set the mapping in Ctrl-O the options >Tags>Mapping
Thank you ohrenkino, I removed the mapping, everything works better now
