For years now, I am using my own naming system that deals with such issues
I use >>+<< to indicate separated songs. Songs, not tracks. So let's say some track originally titled
Folk Medley
would become for example a file named
Folk Song A + Folk Song B + Traditional Tune X
and / or three separates files named
Folk Song A
Folk Song B
Traditional Tune X
depending if there could be separated in a way that would not destroy my [subjective] listening experience
And if that means renumbering tracks- then I do it. If that "Folk Medley" was a track number 1, then "Traditional Tune X" would become the new track number 3, and the original track 2 would become track 4 after the adjustments
[Although If I were to do all my files again, I would rethink that method, as to if "Traditional Tune X" would be better of labeled as track "1.3"; so that it would both indicate the original numbering and what I consider a proper one. Or to choose o system with two separate tag fields; the original one and the second with what I consider to be a proper numbering]
I also use >>/<< to indicate what I truly call a medley. In [around] the provided example, if it was something more like a
Folk Song A + Folk Song B + Traditional Tune X + Folk Song A + Folk Song B + Folk Song A + Traditional Tune X + Folk Song A
then I would not indulge myself in counting and repeating titles, bu just consider this as a one new song, entitled
Folk Song A / Folk Song B / Traditional Tune X
assuming that this was the order in which the were used
As you already have such detailed information, this such not be a problem. The problem is when you know the song "Folk Song A" and "Traditional Tune X" and also clearly hear that there is something else that you are not able to recall by title ["Folk Song B"] or you suspect that there is something more that you simply do not know
I also use >vs.<< to indicate ingredients [particular songs] of mashups, which are something different than remixes and which are different from medleys [because they do not have new instruments, performers, arrangements etc.]
And on top of that I keep in COMMENTS further and / or more detailed information about each song [given that there is such a need and info available], that tell me if it samples some other song [or a movie], if it is based on some other song [or poem], if it incorporates some other song in a verbatim form. And these entries are also separated, if needed, by >>+<< and / or >>/<< signs, so that there will correspond with titles. It gets the job done, although when putting a lot of info in a file containing multiple songs, the info becomes blurry
[Of course this is not the all there is to this system of mine, but these were the basics to which in time I added some more indicators / rules]
A] Invest in widescreen monitor, with aspect ratio of 21:9. I simply cannot count, how much clicks and time have I saved since switching from a 16:9
B] Find a font that has less space between letters / words. Compare Arial Narrow with Arial for a start
C] Adjust system settings for spaces between elements, the thickness of sliders and so on. Those few pixels my seem not much, but they can result in the ability of adding some thin column, for example with track number, without the need of scrolling horizontally to see it
No
I would also benefit from it, as I ~95% of the time use my main configuration [for music], 4% a completely different [for learning foreign language] and the remaining 1% the main configuration with adjustments made on the fly
And the request has been already made by me [/t/17941/1]
My proposition suggested extended modification to the Utils; there shouldn't be a need for a re-launch of Mp3tag