I suggest ...

Ignore compliance for certain albums

Some albums just cannot be fixed because, for instance, their album art cannot be found anywhere. For the sake of achieving 100% compliance I'd like to mark these albums as 'ignored'. I want to be able to do it for any aspect of bliss, for instance file organisation (saying 'actually, the existing location is ok') or genre etc.

Similar to http://bliss.uservoice.com/forums/21939-bliss/suggestions/404839-add-the-ability-to-ignore-albums-where-correct-art .

103 votes
Sign in
Password icon
Signed in as (Sign out)

We’ll send you updates on this idea

AdminDan Gravell (Founder and programmer, bliss) shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →


Sign in
Password icon
Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Andy commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Also another consideration regarding ignoring compliance - this could be accomplished at the overall album level (e.g. global) vs at the field level (e.g. genre or title). Obviously, the former would likely be easier to implement.

  • Andy commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Bliss is very useful and makes it far easier to organize my music collection than some of the other more complicated desktop tools. I am having an issue: I have added the rule "Check the following information is canonically correct for each album". The tool is suggesting that my "genre" choice is incorrect (likely because it does not match one of the online databases?) I don't want to remove the album from my Bliss collection, but I do want the to ignore the Bliss suggestion.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    There should be an option to approve or overlook "errors". Such as file paths and album names that are SUPPOSED to be written one way that would otherwise fit into a fix log. One should have the option to say "accept these as correct without changes".

  • Matt G commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Adding a vote for this. One example is "Remastered" albums. I have "Abbey Road" album as well as "Abbey Road - Remastered" album, and I'd like to keep both, but the "Remastered" gets caught on the Title Check. I don't want to have to unlink all linked releases every time I rescan my library. I'd rather mark the Remastered album as "Ignore" or "Exempt" or something (even if I have to re-ignore it again after rescanning...that's ok.) .

  • Joshua Braveman commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I would like to also be able to ignore suggestions when I've renamed the album title to include qualifying information like "remaster". Since I may have multiple versions of the ablum in my server. Also live unofficial recordings can't be validated by an external database.

  • Dirk commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I've shown 1502 albums to bliss and quite a number is "unknown". I'm using Sony's MEDIAGO software getting information from Gracenote. And, believe me, Gracenote is knowing every single album.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    It would be great if you could add a button to each album shown a IGNORE button, this should ignore the remaining non-compliance's. A list of ignored non-compliance should be retrievable. This could be used where a reported non-compliance is disagreed by the user yet the user wants to see a clean and compliant library.

  • Frank Köhntopp commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Very helpful - I have several versions of some albums ("SACD", "2011 Remaster") that MusicBrainz wants to correct to the original one, which is not helpful.

  • AdminDan Gravell (Founder and programmer, bliss) commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Great ideas. The main progress has been identifying a way of fixing these problems, although work has not begun on them yet.

    Ignoring certain compliance for certain albums can be seen as a special case of https://www.blisshq.com/music-library-management-blog/2017/08/01/ruleset-selecta/ - i.e. the "selector" selects this album in particular, and the ruleset assigned to that selector is the same as otherwise, except with the "ignored" rule removed.

  • Joe commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Has there been any motion on this request? I want to achieve full compliance on my library, but I want to be able to hit "Ignore" or add exceptions for certain things bliss can't recognize just yet.

    ex. 1 - I have many live recordings of shows, and the format is always Date - Location (ie 2018/05/10 Boston, MA). bliss wants to change this to 2018/05/10 Boston, Ma. Being able to ignore, or add some sort of exception for state abbreviations would be marvelous.

    ex. 2 - (feat.) tags. My preferred method is lowercase feat., but bliss wants to change this to (Feat.). Being able to add an exception/ignore these cases would make my library much cleaner / compliant.

    Thank you!

  • robin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    In some cases it may be linking to the wrong release (and yes, linking to a subset would definitely be useful - I have at least one case where I have 2 releases of the same album with different content which are bundled into one by Bliss and I'd like to separate them).

    But in other cases I think Bliss is linking to a correct release, but that the databases it gets the information from are inconsistent in their approach to what goes in subtitles and what should be part of the main title. A common example is where an album has a 'Deluxe Edition' with extra tracks and the databases are inconsistent in whether they include 'Deluxe Edition' in the title or not. So in those cases where I disagree with the division between title and subtitle, I'd like to have the option to ignore the rule.

  • robin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Another use case - where one wishes to check compliance for the titles, artists and year of albums, but there are some cases where the online sources just seem to be wrong, or are applying inconsistent rules. For example, sometimes album subtitles get included in the title, sometimes not. Where an album had multiple editions (e.g. a Deluxe edition with more tracks, and published in a different year) the online sources do not distinguish them.

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    agreed. My use case would be for Albums I've crated that are not real albums. Such as all the songs I've recorded for my kids from different bands they have made while taking music Lessons. I collect those songs, make an Album for that year and band name, and add my own art. But there is no real data for this kind of thing of course. So, we need to ignore it.

← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base