There's no requirement for a defined order in which to do things, but you're right that some changes can have downstream consequences.

For example, changing the album name of an album will then change the lookup query to get more information about the album. This might make previous fixes invalid.

If you want some guidance on this, I would start with correcting and completing album, artist and track names and numbers. Also, adding discnumbers.

You can then go onto the more subjective cover art, genres etc.

Finally, you can do file renaming, but remember that's a very intrusive operation.

On the top left side of the main page there is a 'scanning database' running activity icon visible, almost running all the time.....
Please provide next to that an additional visual 'Fixing' activity, maybe with a time scale bar or even better the actual fixes solved to indicate if the program is almost finished or needs another hour.

Where can I find clarity about following a logical, basic sequence when applying manual rule fixing in a large database: In case the user has selected many rules to apply, after a long scanning period the user gets the option to fix just any rule at will.... Where Bliss starts using data from the internet to verify the data and result.
Is there a 'preferred sequence' in rule fixing that improves the speed and accuracy of the final result?
I.e. First fix album and artist, then track names and the the right numbers and finally art or so?
I can imagine when a user just manually selects to fix number ruling first, that outcome may cause trouble for the next rules to be fixed, and maybe causes a less accurate or mixed database result....

Good point about not having enough time - hadn't thought of that...

I would like to be able to set "apply" the rules and "run" them later especially when I am pressed for time and want to shut the computer down. Otherwise you have to remember to set a staging filter as mentioned by Dan, which I did figure out to do... after the fact. In other words I second what Ami said on November 14th.

Nothing on this in many years but I was recently given the same shock when trying out Bliss. I believe the default, certainly for trial versions with 100 fixes, should be to touch NOTHING unless given explicit permission. I might not choose to "spend" fixes the same way, and while I would likely end up going unlimited, for those would buy fixes, which ones to expend should be their choice.

You can certainly change the folder that bliss monitors. That's a workaround I've heard from a few people: a 'staging' folder that people copy files into and out of that bliss monitors.

Could you copy say 10, or 100 songs into a different directory and run Bliss on that; then compare to your original files?

Ideally bliss would give you the ability to approve individual fixes. I realize this would no longer be fully automatic but there is still tremendous value in automatically finding uncompliant music and offering a one-click fix.

I like the idea of having the ability to check what changes would be applied to my music files before actually approving them. I took me ages to digitize my 500+ CD collection and I certainly wouldn't want to corrupt my work.

Fair enough Jeff. Actually, this is where I see the new activity stream work going (see http://www.flickr.com/photos/dan-gravell/5915273252/in/photostream ). I'm thinking the first time someone uses bliss, all the upcoming work is shown here for confirmation. Then, there's a 'latch' to automate all the actions, if that's what you want.

Obviously bliss's history is as a fully automatic tool - that's not something I would want to lose.