Very rarely i notice that foobar does not properly sort new files that are not tagged by foobar. For instance using upNorth's format string, I get this when sorting by album number or other custom strings:



Obvious question, why does the formatting string see track numbers but the sort string does not?

Thanks.

Sorry I should add that I'm using .8 Beta 10.

Looks like it's sorting by title (if it's not already obvious). What's the exact sort string you are using? The default (%_PATH%|$num(%_SUBSONG%,9)) works fine here, if your filenames start w/ tracknumber. I tried with a leading "$num(%TRACKNUMBER%,2)" in the sort string and that works too (same with files not tagged by foobar). Using 0.8 beta 10 as well. btw, what's album number? Sorry if I misinterpreted the question :p

Also, though I haven't used upNorth's string in awhile (switched to foo_ui_columns), it might be that the formatting string has automatic tracknumber guessing? [Edit: just looked at the dynamic string; yeah, it does] Check if the files actually have a tracknumber field. g/l

I'm not using a string. Just foobar's "sort by track number" option. However all sort strings also fail to properly sort this album (but not the 6000 other songs in my playlists).

Interestingly loading up the info tag says that no tracknumbers are present on the file, yet upNorth's formatting string clearly has them. Are formatting strings able to get info about files that the database is not?



What do you mean dynamic? The formatting string's numbers are the actual tracknumbers for the album, so I don't think it randomly generated them if thats what you mean.

I guess you can say that. If you look at the code of upNorth's string, you'll see that the guessing comes from looking at the filename (upNorth: nice ;]).


I just meant the name of upNorth's formatting string, 'dynamic'. Sorry for the confusion :p

Thanks

Ah! Thanks, I didn't realize his string was so smart. Too bad foobar can't do the same thing.