This would also be useful for that: https://www.blisshq.com/music-library-management-blog/2017/10/03/derived-tags/

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.

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.

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!

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.

Are you saying you want the subtitles in the album name, or just that bliss is matching to the incorrect release?

One thing that might be useful is the ability to choose a subset of the Linked Releases to use.

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.

Ignore non-compliance for certain rules, especially the caps, non caps values

Yes, good example.

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.

Just wanted to make a note to myself...

Rather than specific "ignore" functionality this should work by implementing "selectors". Create a new selector for this specific album, with a slightly-changed ruleset.

This would be preferable, because selectors are a more powerful, less specific implementation and it should mean less code overall.

Yes, although the way I look at it is having a "selector" to which rules can be applied, e.g.

select all albums where genre = "christmas" => [specific rules]

I just have a natural aversion to conditional statements :D

The rules could perhaps even be conditional, and bliss stop after first matched rule.

Example:

IF <pattern match 1> THEN <custom rule 1>
IF <pattern match 2> THEN <custom rule 2>
<standard rules>

Nice idea! Might need to add that as a separate idea, though... I'll close this once "ignore" is implemented.

Rather than "ignoring" I would like to have the option to set a custom rule for a specific album. That way it will still be compliant and you can rescan your whole collection again.

Yes, Dan. I want to add "ignore" to Bliss for any aspect of "non-compliance" found. In my case, It may be cvr art or any tagging. I want my music to display the way I want it to. I like the global rules aspect of bliss, but it is insufficiently robust enough in its present form to allow for the type of "personalization" we're looking for here.
But...this might work for those who use presently use just one or two music players. You're right when you say that these personalizations may not work well when one moves their music collection to a future player, so I suggest a way of toggling and tagging the albums that have user- "modified" adjustments so that a sort of these can be obtained later, and these adjustments seen in a reduced, filtered set. This would facilitate adapting the collection to a new player.

Barry