# \[WS\] MusicBrainz expanded **URL:** \ **Category:** Web Sources Scripts\ **Created:** [January 15, 2022, 2:31pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909 "2022-01-15T14:31:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2024, 1:43pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/21 "2024-05-10T13:43:14Z")
During my tests with the newly added cover thumbnail preview, I learned that it can be advantageous to search more specific for an ALBUM and/or an ARTIST. This can be reached by using double quotes (aka quotation marks). **More detailed Explanation:** If you are looking for an ALBUM like `Eye in the Sky` from an ARTIST like `Alan Parsons` and you don't want to see any other results from albums with `Eye` or `Sky` in the ALBUM name or `Alan` or `Parsons` in the ARTIST name, you can enclose your entered or prefilled search text with double quotes: `"Eye in the Sky"` and / or `"Alan Parsons"` ![Search by text enclosed with doublequotes](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/f/f/ffd8df497a6e376c2eee3fb606bebadda0e8b387.png) This works for the band name "The Alan Parsons Project" too, because `Alan Parsons` is completely included and part of the band's name. This way you can reduce the amount of search results not fitting your own existing tracks. ---
**Author:** ![Florian](https://community.mp3tag.de/user_avatar/community.mp3tag.de/florian/32/5759_2.png) [@Florian](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/Florian)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2024, 2:37pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/22 "2024-05-14T14:37:33Z")
12 posts were split to a new topic: [Columns for Tag Sources with Cover Preview are offset by one on first use](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/columns-for-tag-sources-with-cover-preview-are-offset-by-one-on-first-use/64678) ---
**Author:** ![ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ongewis)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2024, 8:13pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/23 "2024-05-20T20:13:09Z")
```auto 626 # Only Discnumbers greater then 1 will be written 627 # Prevents "useless" Discnumber 1/1 ``` I want to unprevent this but can't quite figure it out 🙃 I'd appreciate some help, thanks! @LyricsLover ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 5:36am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/24 "2024-05-21T05:36:25Z")
Could you please tell me where the DISCNUMBER content "1/1" would be useful? In the meantime, I will check if this value always will be delivered from MusicBrainz or if you would have to set it manually to 1/1. ---
**Author:** ![ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ongewis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:05am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/25 "2024-05-21T09:05:54Z")
It's more of a consistancy thing. If it's a physical medium I want to have discnumber/disctotal even if it's 1/1. Don't want or need you to change your script here, just want to make this change locally. I can make it work with a custom action but changing this at the source saves me an extra step and a coupla clicks. thanks! ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:07am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/26 "2024-05-21T09:07:51Z")
The following instructions to change the script code are no more necessary since the script v2.00. You can set it now easily in the script settings: ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/4/0/4087f4b9aa6304d36884ca4eb397d1a436bcb1c5.png) ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/b/4/b456e4bb0cc460192a9a1563f8f848f01e2568a0.png) * * * If you really want to fill the DISCNUMBER with `1/1`, then the easiest way is to adjust the script Line 545 and add `"1"` like this: **Current** L544-545: ![2024.05.21 - Original L544-L545](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/2/f/2f20e07a44724e9e53ededb2a9d80184ac60bafd.png) **New adjusted** L544-545: ![2024.05.21 - New L544-L545 with TEMP_DiscnumberIsOne filled with ''1''](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/1/9/193dce84c0aa09aa775e85ffa3548580d9b6d80d.png) The script Lines 626-627 remains unchanged, but you should adjust the remarks to something like this to describe the new logic: ```auto L626 IfOutput "TEMP_DiscnumberIsOne" # Discnumbers will always be written, also for 1/1 L627 outputto "Discnumber" # Deleted Remark (old: Prevents "useless" Discnumber 1/1) ``` ---
**Author:** ![AreDigg](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/bbe5ce/32.png) [@AreDigg](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/AreDigg)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:10am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/27 "2024-05-21T09:10:18Z")
> [@LyricsLover](#): > > Could you please tell me where the DISCNUMBER content "1/1" would be useful? I guess consistency is major factor. If you use 1/2 and 2/2, then 1/1 makes it clear that we are talking about one disc only. ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:15am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/28 "2024-05-21T09:15:05Z")
> [@ongewis](#): > > It's more of a consistancy thing and > [@AreDigg](#): > > I guess consistency is major factor. I could argue that redundancy is unwanted. 😉 An album with only 1 disc does not need to be filled with a DISCNUMBER 1/1 - it is just obvious - especially if all albums with more then 1 disc get the appropriate disc-number and total discnumber. The nice thing about WSS: Everyone can adjust it to his/her needs. ---
**Author:** ![ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ongewis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:24am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/29 "2024-05-21T09:24:33Z")
> [@LyricsLover](#): > > adjust the script Line 545 and add `"1"` Brilliant - works like a charm - thanks! ---
**Author:** ![ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ongewis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:31am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/30 "2024-05-21T09:31:51Z")
Here's another question (issue/bug/feature?) The query for this release ([https://musicbrainz.org/release/636beb3e-b819-4364-ac64-a4c2d7b43bf7](https://musicbrainz.org/release/636beb3e-b819-4364-ac64-a4c2d7b43bf7)) yields 14 tracks, while it has 15 (intro is omitted). Is this intended behaviour? ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:36am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/31 "2024-05-21T09:36:18Z")
I have to check that one. At first sight it seems to be related to the track number `0` (Zero) for the intro: ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/0/e/0eace4b3a4a368bdb0d7232de2b7878de31a8a2e.png) ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:49am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/32 "2024-05-21T09:49:43Z")
The returned JSON data from MusicBrainz seems not to include the track with the track number zero. 🤯 As you can see in the returned data, the track object with index 0 includes the track number "1" and is called "Guns Blazing...". There is no object with a track number "0" and the title "Intro". ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/7/6/7629f0406a3c7a20a24e8b0940e4fb499e1bccaf.png) Unfortunately, I have no idea how I could fix that if I don't get this information from the source (MusicBrainz.) For your own comparison, please check the json-output for this case with: [https://musicbrainz.org/ws/2/release/636beb3e-b819-4364-ac64-a4c2d7b43bf7?inc=recordings+recording-level-rels&fmt=json](https://musicbrainz.org/ws/2/release/636beb3e-b819-4364-ac64-a4c2d7b43bf7?inc=recordings+recording-level-rels&fmt=json) Comparing them in more detail I can see that the track zero is listed as PREGAP (not as track as the other 14 titles). Maybe I can check this special case this way... ---
**Author:** ![AreDigg](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/bbe5ce/32.png) [@AreDigg](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/AreDigg)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 9:50am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/33 "2024-05-21T09:50:57Z")
> [@LyricsLover](#): > > I could argue that redundancy is unwanted. 😉 Yes, but it is only redundant if that’s guaranteed that 1 means 1 of 1. If suddenly you have a single 2, it is not redundant information anymore, but missing information. In this case it’s only music albums, so hardly critical. But if you ever get into critical documentation, you would fail in an audit if you don’t make it clear that a single page is 1 out of 1. It is the same with "this page intentionally left blank", it may seem redundant, but if suddenly a completely blank page shows up, you can’t really tell if something is missing or not. ---
**Author:** ![ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@ongewis](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ongewis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 10:02am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/34 "2024-05-21T10:02:28Z")
On the physical disc, the first track (0. intro) is a hidden track one audio (htoa). If you expand the pregap object (just below [13]: [Object]) you'll find the 0 track there.(\*I see you've found it) This seriously impairs the script function... lol no it's not a big deal but would be extra sweet if tracks like that could be incorporated 👍 I'm not sure how consistent the MBDB is in denoting these special tracks though. ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2024, 10:04am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/35 "2024-05-21T10:04:43Z")
> [@ongewis](#): > > If you expand the pregap object (just below [13]: [Object]) you'll find the 0 track there.(\*I see you've found it) Yes this track zero is a special hidden track categorized as "pregap". ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/d/c/dcfeda1aa4582b6ff6f00e1225a2cbe4c8693b5a.png) I check how I can include this special case in my script. ---
**Author:** ![codmax0](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@codmax0](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/codmax0)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2024, 1:38pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/36 "2024-06-10T13:38:20Z")
Please somebody tell me. How to modify to be able to search by Artist + Title? For me it is much more casual problem to find out some information from an unknown track and then to see where it came from... Also I would add a time matching. Or explain to me where exactly to input a request > [@LyricsLover](#): > > Most important are the track titles and track lengths. How to use that opportunity of searching? ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2024, 1:43pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/37 "2024-06-10T13:43:42Z")
> [@codmax0](#): > > How to modify to be able to search by Artist + Title? ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/6/d/6d9491cc6c30adea1127777ba647b1f9cd76adeb.png) If you don't have already filled the ALBUM and ARTIST name in your track, then you need to enter this two values manually: ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/1/3/13512886c12c14e2ffcd9ca5548126c0e7451a1e.png) And please remember: "MusicBrainz expanded" works best, if you search for an entire album, not for a single track. ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2024, 1:49pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/38 "2024-06-10T13:49:39Z")
> [@codmax0](#): > > For me it is much more casual problem to find out some information from an unknown track and then to see where it came from... Also I would add a time matching. This is not the main use case of the Web Sources Scripts for Mp3tag. All these scripts assumes that you have some minimal information in your tracks, like ARTIST and ALBUM and TITLE. For "unknown tracks" with "unknown origin" I would suggest to use [MusicBrainz Picard](https://picard.musicbrainz.org/) with its Scan (with "AcoustID Fingerprint") option. ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/5/f/5f27a9e7209cb857f02d0d437738eb06ae411c40.png) ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2024, 6:37am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/39 "2024-06-19T06:37:23Z")
2024-06-19 - Update v2.0 Web Sources Script rewritten from scratch - NEW: pregap-track (aka "tracks hidden in the pregap") will now be listed too (thanks to @ongewis) - ADD: Some more release level metadata added like PRODUCER - NEW: Introducing [Script-Settings](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909#p-167653-why-the-version-jump-from-v130-to-v200-5) ![New Settings for MB expanded #1](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/a/4/a4a3fc90796983c70c800e6e0bb859033c16ea24.png) * * * IMPORTANT for users of the previous script versions: I have decided to focus on the release-level metadata in this Web Sources Script. Therefore I have removed the track-level metadata needed to fill the INVOLVEDPEOPLE tag: - DEL: Removed the Performing Orchestra with Begin- & End-Date - DEL: Removed the INVOLVEDPEOPLE tag The only remaining tag is currently PRODUCER and only if content is available at release-level. Please let me know if and why you would like to have the removed tags back. This would help me decide if I should invest more time in an additional WSS script like "MusicBrainz involved" (\<- working title) ---
**Author:** ![LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/c6cbf5/32.png) [@LyricsLover](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/LyricsLover)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2024, 7:33am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909/40 "2024-08-27T07:33:49Z")
2024-08-27 - Update v2.10 - ADD: Added a new possibility to "Search by Artist + Album **+ Tracks**" ([thanks](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/beter-scoring-for-musicbrainz-search/65695) to @zerothbase) ![MusicBrainz expanded with 6 entries and Settings](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/2/2/22b43ee7bf20052460ba09d9a74587c7db2f4f87.jpeg) This additional WSS provides a 3rd search field for the number of Tracks on the choosen album from the choosen artist. ![image](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/3X/e/a/ea6c1bd4eea2cbf8bbfaa68ad4ef45467e6aa626.png) The number of selected local files will be provided (and can be overwritten manually). This should also work for releases with more than 1 disc. For example, if you are looking for a release with 14 tracks on the first disc and 10 tracks on the second disc, the search with 24 tracks should return matching releases with 24 tracks. [Previous page](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909.md?page=1) [Next page](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/ws-musicbrainz-expanded/55909.md?page=3)