UI: How to make MusicBrainz dialog shine, or noob needs help.

[Rick W. Chen]

On 27 Oct 2010 22:41 +0400, Sergey Ivanov:
> > I already discussed this on IRC, but probably not many People did follow
> > that Discussion.
> > In my Opinion, MusicDNS search is far superior then MusicBrainz Search
> > and I can't really think of many Cases where MusicBrainz Search would be
> > superior of MusicDNS search.
> >
> > Use Case of a standard User:
> > "Ohh Amarok now has Tag Guessing via MusicBrainz, cool, I want to try
> > this. Here I have a Song called Artist - Song1 ... I always wanted to
> > know what the correct Tags would be. Let's try it"
> > So he tries it and first MusicBrainz Search starts. And it doesn't give
> > the right Results. He has no Idea that MusicDNS Search, which he
> > afterwards could start manuallly would give him better Results. So he
> > tries it with another Song. Same thing, no good Result.
> >
> > The in my opinion, most important Use Case of MusicBrainz directly in
> > Amarok is to get the Tags of incorrectly tagged Songs. And I must admit,
> > I also found (via some Songs that had correct filenames but incorrect
> > tags) MusicBrainz to be shitty because it could not often deliver me
> > correct Results. Maybe I would like the Feature more if it would have
> > automatically, as first Option searched via MusicDNS.
> >
> > Long Mail, short Point: Throw out "Tag based search" and just do
> > Fingerprint Search. Users won't often click on "Start search via
> > MusicDNS" ... or it is one click too much. Give them the better Option
> > right away :)
> No one identification can be always right, every one makes mistakes,
> that's why better to have both (MusicBrainz and MusicDNS). How many
> files in your collection has "Unknown Artist - Track 1" name? And how
> many of them contains at least track name and artist name?
> Below examples of search results. 2 of them by MusicDNS after and
> before recoding (easiest way to remove all metadata from files :) )
> and 1 by MusicBrainz. MusicDNS: 3 misses before recoding and 5 correct
> results after. MusicBrainz 100%. I know that file name contains a lot
> of info, and they could be just tagged with regular  tag guesser (atm
> It can work only with 1 file).
> But when you add new tracks to collection mostly It contains some Info
> (in file name or inside the file as metadata) and It could be used to
> identify this track. MusicBrainz increase track chance to be
> identified by tagger ( if fingerprint based search gave nothing ). So
> I don't thing that removing of metadata based search Is a great idea.
> It used to be some way to inform user that he able to run MusicDNS
> search, and It could be useful if He's not agree with MusicBrainz. And
> now Amarok isn't hard depend on libofa ( and ffmpeg while Transcoding
> patch is on review).

I'd like to have both options as well. In Picard these are called
"lookup" and "scan". Lookup is generally much faster than scan,
especially when done on a "cluster" (tracks grouped by album); it
just looks at the album/artist names, how many tracks there are and find
the closest results musicbrainz gives. Having a treeview instead of list
helps with this clustering process.

With a treeview that groups by album, it can list all the tracks that
belong to that album, and not just the ones that you have. It makes it
easier to see whether that album is the right one. Showing more metadata
supplied by musicbrainz also helps.

> 
> > * Use some sort of pagination (Load next). Imagine if user clicks on
> > "Various artists" node and sends 1k+ tracks o be retagged? Its not rational
> > to search for them all at once. Dividing them by groups of 20/40/100 should
> > be enough
> >
> I like It. :)
> 
> > * Might be it is worth separating Close/ Distant/ Not found/ No change
> > results. I don't know if tabs (one tab per category) is the best solutions
> > (or is it better to use some drop down with check boxes + different
> > backgrounds?)
> >
> I like It, but I don't know how usable is It. Does'n It make UI too
> complex for user?
> And "Add column" is useless due to MusicBrainz provided data
> limitation. Almost all data (except "Year", but this field is absent
> some times) already shown. MB doesn't support genres at all. :(
> 
> > * Search at the same time on all services. Matching results should be
> > displayed in one line (badges MB and MD symbolyzes, what services suggested
> > this data), Otherwise one service/result per row.
> >
> It's possible to run both searches simultaneously, but needs to be
> able to select all MB or MD results by one touch.
> 
> > p.s.
> > > 'cos It also update/add MB Track ID to file. User may accept or
> > does it means, if MB Track ID is set, next time user runs search on the same
> > track, it is skipped from search (auto added to no-change)?
> MB finder just requests data for saved Track ID and shows It in Suggested Tags.
> 
> Thank you very much Lukas. =)


-- 
    Rick