Persistent title misidentification for some tracks

[Mark_Sealey]

After correctly tagging (in Yate) this nine-CD box set of Gulda playing Beethoven, and importing twice with server restart etc in between, I cannot get the grouping-according-to-CD for some - but by no means all - tracks to display correctly in Roon 2.47 (build 1510) on macOS 15.3.2:

The only way to do so is to set EDIT ALBUM > MULTI-PART COMPOSITION GROUPING to Disable… in the Album editor. Then everything is as it should be; except that Roon displays no ‘parent CD’:

I’ve tried every combination (I think!) of EDIT ALBUM > PRODUCT CODE and CATALOG NUMBER, again in the Album editor. No success.

Is there somewhere else I should be looking to correct this, please?

[DDPS]

I know you love Yate, and I love it too, but what happens if you look at these in Tag Editor for Mac, showing the WORK and PART tags?

[Mark_Sealey]

Thanks, @Menzies,

@Menzies

…your disc numbering isn’t correct…

I suspected that as well. Was caught out several times by inconsistencies when I first started using Roon.

But to me the naming/numbering looks correct; am I missing something:

[DDPS]

In my experience, Tag Editor makes this much easier to see than Yate does…here’s an example of how I use WORK and PART tags:

[Mark_Sealey]

Thanks, @DDPS,

@DDPS

…the WORK and PART tags…

I thought I might have missed something there as well. This set took me about an hour to tag because of the absence of a consistent colon to separate WORK and PART.

I may still be missing something, but this is what I get (still inYate):

[Mark_Sealey]

@DDPS

…an example of how I use WORK and PART tags…

I’d have said that was (nearly?) identical to how I do it in Yate. Or am I missing some small detail?

[DDPS]

OK that looks right. One other thing is to use the WorkID tag, which is easily accessible in Yate. I don’t always have to use it, but sometimes I do. You just use a different number in that field, one for each Work on said disc.

[Mark_Sealey]

I’ve never used the WorkID tag. Can’t immediately see how to do so…

Do I just put in a numerical sequence: so ‘1’ for all movements of the first Work, ‘2’ for all of the second and so on?

I think I can see the logic of that, @DDPS; except that what isn’t clear from my screen grabs is that the works/tracks on only three or four CDs are misbehaving. The rest (which look identically ‘correct’ to me) are perfect!

That’s why I started changing parameters here:

which has worked in the past - presumably by grouping to a more accurate actual object in Roon’s database?

[DDPS]

Also:

[Mark_Sealey]

@Menzies,

@Menzies

…This is a boxset issue Roon has I believe…

Yes; can be. Over the years I think I’ve become pretty adept at preparing box sets for import this way. This kind of thing is rare.

…is this boxset of yours identified in Roon?…

Yes.

[Mark_Sealey]

Thanks for the screen grabs, @DDPS. Have added WorkID to my Roon Custom Preset.

I suppose the next step would be to manually add grouping IDs (if I’ve understood what’s needed properly) to only those half dozen (out of 50) works which are failing; and re-import?

[DDPS]

Yes, but simply re-scan; no need to re-import.

[Mark_Sealey]

@DDPS

…re-scan…

If I ‘apply’ Yate to my files in my live Roon Library; which I tend not to do.

But I’ve just done it anyway. Odd: I added ‘1’, ‘2’, ‘3’ to only those first three sonatas, Force Rescanned; and it fixed all the rest!

To some folk the words "never’ and “gift-horse” might come to mind. But I’d really like to know what happened and what’s necessary going forward.

Would you say that I should apply WorkIDs invariably to all such groups? It’s a way of forcing, isn’t it?

And should it always be ‘1’, ‘2’, ‘3’ etc?

[DDPS]

You can. I don’t always find it necessary, because it’s a little more tedious. I think it’s needed when you are trying to have an album identified and the identified album has such details behind the scenes (which is a minoritiy).

But there is no harm. And yes, 1,2,3, etc.