Multiple Libraries?

[Lowlander]

And you currently have 3 options:

- Filters in MediaMonkey 3 which should take care of those people who want to seperate different content.

- Using various Windows accounts for those who want to seperate different people using MediaMonkey.

- Onkel_Enno's script to serve either needs (only multiple DB support, not multiple ini support).

This means that MediaMonkey does allow the use of multiple DB's at this moment. Of course it isn't the best implementation, but the developers need to decide where their priorities are. As this feature probable will be for a small group (and yes I use multiple libraries myself) it probably is less of a priority at the moment.

[drichm]

- MM 3.0:

keep in mind that it's a Beta build and still has some unknown bugs.

so I have not had a look as yet.

- Using various Windows accounts is only option an if multiple users are involved. Setting up multiple accounts just for me just to have X databases in MM is excessive overhead.

- Onkel_Enno's script could be an option, and I guess is the main reason the developers do not respond to this thread. However, I would much rather that multiple databases were native to MM - the problems with addons are many, for example: you are never sure they will work with the next version; you are never sure what side-effects might occur over time.

There is a 4th Option:
Use MM to rip to your main database, move out the files you want to separate into another application such as Windows Media Player 11.
The Bad: 2 programmes, 2 incompatible databases
The Good: Get to try the features of the new program
The Limitation: Can only have as many databases as media player programmes you can find, unless you find one that supports multiple databases.


Dave

[Lowlander]

Onkel_Enno's script is time tested, so no worries about it failing. But you correct about new version compatibility, as I'm pretty sure that it won't work with MediaMonkey 3.

The developers have implemented a solution that helps many with this issue, which is the filters that stick. They might not have solved it in a sufficient way (try it when MediaMonkey 3 is released) for you, but many people will find it helpful.

[onkel_enno]

as I'm pretty sure that it won't work with MediaMonkey 3.

Why are you so sure?
The DBName-Handling of the ini-File is still the same, so it should work fine!

[Lowlander]

Yeah, I think I might have been mistaken with that statement. I viewed it from the wrong angle, sorry.

[Seeker]

What is intriguing to me is that this is not a 'hard' thing to really do, and would please a LOT of people (like me), but people are so tied to "filters" in MM3.0 that they don't seem to want to have it happen.

[redelephant]

I have been using MM for a few months now, and I like it a lot. I previously used the database software that came with my sound card (Audigy) and MM is much better in every respect - except the multiple libraries issue.

I agree with some previous contributors that a simple, native multiple database feature would be a big plus. I know from reading some of the other posts on this issue that there are workarounds, but most users, I suspect, dont want to get into this. I certaintly don't. I would just like the option of dividing my music collection into 2 or more libraries, without any hassle.

[Ian How]

I have been using MM for a few months now, and I like it a lot. I previously used the database software that came with my sound card (Audigy) and MM is much better in every respect - except the multiple libraries issue.

I agree with some previous contributors that a simple, native multiple database feature would be a big plus. I know from reading some of the other posts on this issue that there are workarounds, but most users, I suspect, dont want to get into this. I certaintly don't. I would just like the option of dividing my music collection into 2 or more libraries, without any hassle.

I would certainly like to second this.
Ian

[Seeker]

Third this - though I think my vote is already in.

[Peke]

I forth that, but I must clear something. MM3 has new database which we need to stabilize to ensure quality users know they get from MediaMonkey and after that we can proceed with solving To-Do around Multiple Libraries.
I personally would like to see that option available as that way I could separate Library of tracks that I own and library that rest of my family members own (I have 600+ CDs, My mother have 100+, I don't even count CDs I have added to library when I sorted CDs for Radio Stations and so on), but certainly do not want to solve issue with some uncompleted bloated solution that slows down MM or break basic MM functionality.

[bbuchi]

@onkel enno
work the script with the new version of MM 3?
I think the folder of the ini file is now E:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\Bernd\Lokale Einstellungen\Anwendungsdaten\MediaMonkey and the extension is move from mdb to db.

[onkel_enno]

You are right, but MM3 has Filters which makes Multiple Libraries needless, not?

[drichm]

Filters are half way there.

Some things missing:

1. In my case I need to set Path/Filename 'contains' on the filter, which means moving files to separate path locations. Or least encode in the path which 'library' it is and hope the encoded text never appears in a future album, artist or title (items I use in my file paths).
2. Cannot find a way to start MM with a Filter as default (i.e. not 'None')
3. Device sync - offers a 'Filter' option, but this is not defaulted to the current Filter.


Possible Solutions:

1. 'location' as filter field, 2nd choice: 'starts with' as a search option
2. "Manage Filters" allows any filter to move to top, top is default filter.
3. No real solution. MM needs current behaviour to prevent you wiping out the target devices contents by accident. However, in some cases you might want to. Add a 'current filter' option?

For me 1. is the main pain and makes filters unreliable for a multiple library replacement.

Finally, my 'gut' tells me filters are a work around for this, and work arounds have a tendancy to bite you at sometime in the future. A physical separation (multiple libraries) will always be preferable.

Dave

[Teknojnky]

I don't have a particular need for multiple databases at this point in time, but I really can't see the difficulty in having a way to change active databases during runtime.

I suspect the ability to change active databases, rather than having multiple simultanious databases, would resolve alot folks desires.

should be as simple as:

File > Select Active Database

[acenubian]

Let me throw my hat into the ring. I agree with most that a multiple library feature should be added. Also, multiple libraries is NOT the same as the filter function. Two issues that I come up against when trying to manage my collection:

1. If you set a filter and try to do the native "duplicate title" function or even the Bex "duplicate" patch, the filter will still identify all songs in your entire library. For instance. I have two primary folders, 1 for songs that I want to add to my iPod, and 1 for additional music that I don't want to add.
If I filter to just the "iPod" folder, it will list only songs that are in the iPod folder. However, it will NOT list only those songs that are duplicates WITHIN the iPod folder. It lists those songs in the iPod folder that have duplicates in my 2nd folder as well - these show up as a single item with no dupicate. This defeats the purpose of the whole duplicate function.

2. Because of the size of my collection, I have to shrink the size of my files for transfer to my iPod. Because of multiple crashes and the length of time it takes to perform the transfer, I have created a 3rd folder. This 3rd folder houses only the lower bitrate versions of the music that I transfer to my iPod. The 3rd folder is the one that I use to sync to my iPod.
Here is where not having multiple libraries is a problem. In order to sync to my iPod, I have to add the music in the 3rd folder to my library. Now, I have at least 2 versions of the same song in my library that I want to keep - one at a higher bitrate, one at a lower bitrate. This makes the "duplicate title" function all but obsolete.

If there is a solution that helps simplify the two tasks listed above in lieu of multiple library functionality, please advise.

Take care.