# tracks scanned vs. # in library

Get answers about using the current release of MediaMonkey for Windows.

Moderator: Gurus

Guest

# tracks scanned vs. # in library

Post by Guest » Wed Jun 20, 2007 4:47 pm

When I do "add/rescan tracks to the library," the "Adding XXX of XXX" running total on the progress bar goes up to about 18000. But when I click on the Title node (or whatever, to show all tracks) it lists 10159 files in the library.

If anything I would expect the library to be bigger, since it has tracks from other folders that I don't include in the routine "add/rescan tracks" scan.

Why the difference?

emalvick
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 9:44 am

Post by emalvick » Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:07 pm

There are a couple of possibilities...

1. Some of the files being scanned are not MM compatible files so they don't get added. For instance, I believe it shows all the files as being scanned even if they are not MM files (e.g. PDFs, JPGs, etc.) as I have a couple of those in my music directories (album covers, lyrics, etc.).

2. While I haven't really paid attention to this in MM, for my uPNP device and software, the scan counted files scanned from playlists. However, since the playlists were referring to files that were being scanned individually by the database, it was essentially scanning duplicates and only referenced one of them... i.e. if I had an album of 10 songs and a playlist for that album, the scanner would scan 20 tracks but only add 10 (since the other 10 are the same).

I'm not sure this is your case or not. If you want to be sure you aren't missing anyfiles, you can use Windows Explorer to search the folders your indexing in MM for the types of files you expect it to find (e.g. mp3's, flac's, wma's, etc.). It should tell you how many total files it finds and whether it matches up to what MM finds. It won't tell you what's missing as it is purely a search, but it is a start in seeing if anything is wrong.

Erik

Guest

Post by Guest » Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:47 pm

emalvick wrote:There are a couple of possibilities...

1. Some of the files being scanned are not MM compatible files so they don't get added. For instance, I believe it shows all the files as being scanned even if they are not MM files (e.g. PDFs, JPGs, etc.) as I have a couple of those in my music directories (album covers, lyrics, etc.).

2. While I haven't really paid attention to this in MM, for my uPNP device and software, the scan counted files scanned from playlists. However, since the playlists were referring to files that were being scanned individually by the database, it was essentially scanning duplicates and only referenced one of them... i.e. if I had an album of 10 songs and a playlist for that album, the scanner would scan 20 tracks but only add 10 (since the other 10 are the same).

I'm not sure this is your case or not. If you want to be sure you aren't missing anyfiles, you can use Windows Explorer to search the folders your indexing in MM for the types of files you expect it to find (e.g. mp3's, flac's, wma's, etc.). It should tell you how many total files it finds and whether it matches up to what MM finds. It won't tell you what's missing as it is purely a search, but it is a start in seeing if anything is wrong.

Erik
1. Thought of that, but that seems like a LOT of covers and text files.
2. Don't use playlists at all

Running a search just lists the files found--it doesn't say how many it found. Let me know if there's a way to get that info (in XP).

Guest

Post by Guest » Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:58 pm

Well, I tried to have it scan just one folder, with 19 tracks and 5 images (actually it was a folder with one subfolder containing the above).

I had to do it a couple times to try to see because it goes so fast, but it looked like it said 32 or 35 on the progress bar. Odd, but at least based on that I know I can just ignore the numbers in the progress bar.

(BTW, apes aren't monkeys! It kills my soul a little bit every time I have to click on an ape as a "monkey" to verify a post)

pah68
Posts: 1496
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 5:26 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by pah68 » Wed Jun 20, 2007 6:54 pm

Anonymous wrote:BTW, apes aren't monkeys! It kills my soul a little bit every time I have to click on an ape as a "monkey" to verify a post)
So log in :roll:
Image
Image

Steegy
Posts: 3452
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 7:17 pm
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Post by Steegy » Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:00 pm

apes aren't monkeys!
Again....
For a big part (e.g. at least most non-native-English speakers) of the world, they are.
Wikipedia wrote:Because of their similarity to monkeys, apes such as chimpanzees and gibbons are often called monkeys in informal usage, though biologists don't consider them to be monkeys.
Wikipedia wrote:Name
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "monkey" may originate in a German version of the Big Virgina fable, published circa 1580. In this version of the fable, a character named Moneke is the son of Martin the Ape. The word Moneke may have been derived from the Italian monna, which means "a female ape". The name Moneke likely persisted over time due to the popularity of Reynard the Fox.
So it's actually only a subset of the world's population that began to see apes as different kind of animals than apes. Originally, "apes" were part of the "monkey" family.

Wikipedia wrote:However, it is not considered accurate by many biologists to think of apes in a biological sense without considering humans to be included.
Hmmm.... even humans can be considered to be apes. Confusing.
How would we describe the monkey-clicking thing then? "Please select all monkeys and apes, except for humans"? :wink:


On topic: I haven't seen a clear explanation for the X / X numbers either. But does it matter?
Extensions: ExternalTools, ExtractFields, SongPreviewer, LinkedTracks, CleanImport, and some other scripts (Need Help with Addons > List of All Scripts).

Post Reply