Frustrated with WAV download meets album only matching result

Managing 5 discs and 50 tracks of mix of artists is so painful especially your hit is almost empty information, how can I import the file name into meaningful information that ROON can understand?

PTC5186791 ; Catalog Number
01 : Disc Number
01 : Track Number
Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques I Pour invoquer Pan.wav : Title

PTC5186791_01_01_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques I Pour invoquer Pan.wav
PTC5186791_01_02_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques II Pour un tombeau.wav
PTC5186791_01_03_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques III Pour que la nuit.wav
PTC5186791_01_04_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques IV Pour la danseuse.wav
PTC5186791_01_05_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques V Pour l Egyptienne.wav
PTC5186791_01_06_Debussy Six Epigraphes antiques VI Pour remercier.wav
PTC5186791_01_07_Ravel Sheherazade I Asie.wav
PTC5186791_01_08_Ravel Sheherazade II La flute enchantee.wav
PTC5186791_01_09_Ravel Sheherazade III L indifferent.wav
PTC5186791_01_10_Lalo Le Roi d Ys overture.wav
PTC5186791_01_11_Dukas Polyeucte overture.wav
PTC5186791_01_12_Ravel Daphnis et Chloe suite no 2 Lever du jour.wav
PTC5186791_01_13_Ravel Daphnis et Chloe suite no 2 Pantomime.wav
PTC5186791_01_14_ Ravel Daphnis et Chloe suite no 2 Danse generale.wav
PTC5186791_02_01_Blacher Paganini Variations for Orchestra.wav
PTC5186791_02_02_Wagner Tannhaeuser Overture and Bacchanal.wav
PTC5186791_02_03_Strauss Salome Dance of the Seven Veils.wav
PTC5186791_02_04_Schumann Manfred Overture op 115.wav
PTC5186791_02_05_Strauss Don Juan symphonic poem op 20.wav
PTC5186791_03_01_Ligeti Melodien fuer Orchester.wav
PTC5186791_03_02_Zimmermann Photoptosis.wav
PTC5186791_03_03_Bartok Violin Concerto no 2 1939 Andante sostenuto.wav
PTC5186791_03_04_Bartok Violin Concerto no 2 1939 Allegro giocoso.wav
PTC5186791_03_05_Holliger Five Trakl Songs I Ein Winterabend.wav
PTC5186791_03_06_Holliger Five Trakl Songs II Nachtlied.wav
PTC5186791_03_07_Holliger Five Trakl Songs III Rondel.wav
PTC5186791_03_08_Heinz Holliger Five Trakl Songs IV Untergang.wav
PTC5186791_03_09_Holliger Five Trakl Songs V Trompeten.wav
PTC5186791_03_10_Berg Passacaglia.wav
PTC5186791_04_01_Stravinsky Les Noces tableau 1 At the Bride.wav
PTC5186791_04_02_Stravinsky Les Noces tableau 2 At the Bridegroom.wav
PTC5186791_04_03_Stravinsky Les Noces tableau 3 Departure of the Bride.wav
PTC5186791_04_04_Stravinsky Les Noces tableau 4 The Wedding Meal.wav
PTC5186791_04_05_Rachmaninov The Isle of the Dead symphonic poem.wav
PTC5186791_04_06_Stravinsky Le Sacre Introduction.wav
PTC5186791_04_07_Stravinsky Le Sacre Les Augures printaniers.wav
PTC5186791_04_08_Stravinsky Le Sacre Jeu du rapt.wav
PTC5186791_04_09_Stravinsky Le Sacre Rondes printanieres.wav
PTC5186791_04_10_Stravinsky Le Sacre Jeu des cites rivales.wav
PTC5186791_04_11_Stravinsky Le Sacre Cortege du sage.wav
PTC5186791_04_12_Stravinsky Le Sacre Adoration de la terre.wav
PTC5186791_04_13_Stravinsky Le Sacre Introduction seconde partie.wav
PTC5186791_04_14_Stravinsky Le Sacre Cercles mysterieux.wav
PTC5186791_04_15_Stravinsky Le Sacre Glorification de l elue.wav
PTC5186791_04_16_Stravinsky Le Sacre Evocation des ancetres.wav
PTC5186791_04_17_Stravinsky Le Sacre Action rituelle des ancetres.wav
PTC5186791_04_18_Stravinsky Le Sacre Danse sacrale.wav
PTC5186791_05_01_Doret Les Armaillis Act I.wav
PTC5186791_05_02_Doret Les Armaillis Act II.wav
PTC5186791_05_03_Doret Les Armaillis Act III.wav

Well, a couple of things: first, WAV file tagging is notoriously bad, second, your files don’t appear to have been tagged, third, the filenames are a bit cryptic as well! Your downloaded files are going to need a bit of work before presenting to Roon. I‘m unfortunately no classical expert, but I thing you’re going to need an external program to fix the tags, there are some tips here: File Tag Best Practice.

1 Like

The wav file have no tagging inside at all, I input disc number and track number, cover image, and album name myself, in order the Roon can get matching result but the frustration is the matching from ROON itself have no track titles information to fill in the remaining gap, if I input 50 titles myself manually so getting Roon for what?

Yes, it can be a tiresome task, but your beef is with Pentatonemusic (or their supplier), who didn’t bother tagging the files in the first place. Roons job is to take those tags and “enhance” them, but as the saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. Not Roons fault.

Have a look at SongKong, which is an automatic tagging program, it may be able to help.

i tried MusicBrainz as well, no hit, and all music guide gives empty entry as well, so I’m going to tag 50 files one by one…

Look nicer after 30 mins edit in one disc…

I have the same challenge … WAV files are audio focused (more information than FLAC etc) so the reward is in the right system with the right recordings they sound better - The down side is they aren’t even remotely metadata friendly - I have a few thousand WAV files and ROON is challenged but to be fair most systems are challenged with WAV files - I keystroke in any missing info and uploiad missing image files … it is a cumbersome task but if you do it while playing your tracks eventually it will workout

If you want a more friendly WAV file system Auralic does the best job … the lightning app is a great interface, sound quality and performance are flawless and built like a tank … also more than double the price of a Nucleus

That’s wrong. FLAC compressed WAV files, after being decompressed during reproduction, are exactly identical to the original WAV file.

And that’s a myth, perpetuated by those who allow themselves be convinced that the small computing effort of decompressing FLAC files will in any way impact sound reproduction.

It’s true, though, that WAV files pose challenging limitations with regard to tagging and should therefore be avoided.


Don’t want to hijack the thread but compressing a file removes information and once it is removed you can’t put it back - The plus side of FLAC is the files have less information than the original source so they are smaller and take up less space … the down side is that they have less information - The plus side of WAV files are they are not compressed so all the original information is there … the down side is they are 30% larger than a file ripped in FLAC

The debate is does that missing 30% make a difference and that will depend on your playback system and the recording quality of the original file - In say a stock car stereo or a pair of ear buds most likely no difference but in the right system with the right files it is an audible difference … especially using quality headphones ( Sennheiser HD )

That said with the advent of 24 bit files (which because of their huge size are mostly FLAC) and DSD we will soon be able to play in a whole new realm … some day they will just insert a chip directly into our brains

You are spreading misinformation. Stop it. You have a poor understanding of information theory and lossless compression. FLAC is lossless. That is the L in FLAC. A WAV file and a FLAC file from the same source contain the same information. This is no different from a TXT file and a ZIP file from the same source.



That is totally wrong! FLAC is lossless!


I recommend using Wikipedia or just your preferred search engine before posting…

1 Like

Nor sure if you are trolling or just foolish. Either way posting on a forum with experts on it, when you spout gibberish, probably isn’t the wisest decision.

I was trying to send a positive word to the original OP and looks like I hit a sensitive nerve but trying to pass confidence for knowledge doesn’t help anyone

For anyone who loves music more than internet opinions try a simple test for yourself:

1 - Rip the file of your choice into both WAV and FLAC -The WAV file will be much larger … more available information to process - A measurable fact
2 - Play the FLAC file back - If it is going to “unzip” it should get larger but it won’t … playback will only reproduce the information available - It’s the laws of physics
3 - Then try both files in your system to see which one your ears prefers … WAV and FLAC are both fine and all that matters is what works best in your world

Both points above are anti factual.

You needlessly reopened a three year old thread of little interest. You posted and continue to post misinformation. That should not be tolerated.



You are responding to a thread that had been inactive for 3 years. Whatever question the OP had has long been sorted out. Please have a purpose before resurrecting such an old thread.

Secondly, the OP makes no mention of FLAC vs WAV, so your comment and the following posts are off topic. As such, I am closing this thread.

1 Like