Many of my iTunes lost their Track numbers and Genre for some reason when I switched hard drives. MPFreaker has found many of the track numbers, but random tracks did not get identified.
When I try to run these tracks again in MPFreaker, the items get "scanned" in less than a second each--in other words, they're getting skipped. What causes a song to get skipped by MPFreaker, and how can I cause the program to spend time really looking for those songs' info?
How to force re-lookup?
MPFreaker "skipping" tracks
There are two situations in which MPFreaker will "skip" a track whilst scanning:
• All information that MPFreaker is allowed to add to a track (defined in Advanced drawer) already exists in that track.
• You have recently scanned the track, and the results are still cached on your hard disk, so MPFreaker is dealing with it almost instantaneously.
I'm sure the latter is what's happening to you. Most cached information "expires" within a day, but you can force MPFreaker to not use its cache by quitting it and deleting the MPFreaker folder found within your home folder / Library / Caches folder before launching again. You shouldn't ever need to do this, however -- if you've manually edited a previously scanned song such that MPFreaker now has more information to go on, the previous scanning results are irrelevant and the cache wouldn't be used anyway.
Leon
• All information that MPFreaker is allowed to add to a track (defined in Advanced drawer) already exists in that track.
• You have recently scanned the track, and the results are still cached on your hard disk, so MPFreaker is dealing with it almost instantaneously.
I'm sure the latter is what's happening to you. Most cached information "expires" within a day, but you can force MPFreaker to not use its cache by quitting it and deleting the MPFreaker folder found within your home folder / Library / Caches folder before launching again. You shouldn't ever need to do this, however -- if you've manually edited a previously scanned song such that MPFreaker now has more information to go on, the previous scanning results are irrelevant and the cache wouldn't be used anyway.
Leon