Clip Sport Songs Order & Album Mix-ups

Thanks but I have already returned my Clip Sport and gotten a Sony. 

So I have this problem too which is an absolute no-go for me (I am from the old generation that still listen to albums and not randomized playlists like young people tend to do these days).

And I am not going to edit thousands of tags so that titles will be improperly displayed with track numbers inside on all my devices either (and as I use FLAC, which takes space, I’m not going to duplicate everything).

I have legally (in France)  three days left to return my player to the vendor. But if I could rest assured that this bug is actually going to be fixed in a firmware that I will be able to use (works for FLAC, update of the device can be done from a PC with Linux), I am willing to wait a little, the device being OK on other aspects.

Could a SanDisk official come here tell us if it is 100% sure that a fix is coming or if it is not yet so certain? Either way, it would be good to know.

Agreed as to making changes for only 1 player.

 

But it’s fairly standard to have music file names (not tags) include the track no. (e.g. 01-I Wanna Hold Your Hand), so as to have ordered play when playing files via folder (not tag) navigation.

It is definitely not standard for me as all my FLAC files are stored on a shared NAS in a single folder, and they are accessed by a dozen different players. Then it makes sense to build the file name with (in order) : artist name, disc name, track number, song name.

Example:

  • Green Day - American Idiot - 01 - American Dev Idiot
  • Green Day - American Idiot - 02 - Jesus of Suburbia
  • Green Day - American Idiot - 03 - Holiday
  • Green Day - American Idiot - 04 - Player of Broken Dreams
  • et caetera …

Simple and efficient. By the way I encoded myself all the files from the CD I bought,  and I do not intend to create hundred of useless folders, and to rename thousands of files … because of a flaw in the design of this player.

Ciao,

LoneCat

@Miikerman

Thanks for the hint about playing by folder, it will be good enough for me until a fix is available.

@LoneCat

Something I don’t understand is that you say that it is not standard for you to have track numbers in your file names whereas you show examples of file names that actually have track numbers. Even if there have artists and albums in front of the number, your files are still sorted by track number inside an album.

As for me, a typical file name in my music collection will be artist--year-of-album--title-of-album--track-number--track-title.flac, so not too far in spirit from yours, and the folder view will do the trick (at least for some time).

It’s still a bit awkward to have to scroll done quite a bit in a long list of files, but once I have spotted the file of the first track of the album I want to listen to, the subsquent tracks will follow as intended and the behavior of the previous and next buttons are OK too.

Not ideal, but already usable for me.

Yes it’s because each time an example is given the file name does not merely include the track number: it actually begins with the track number, which is not very convenient. And why is that ? Because the player truncates the file names  … apparently it considers only the 24 first letlers (Green Day - American Idi).

The track numbers is therefore not considered with our file names (yours and mine). And for a strange reason the first file appearing in Folder mode is the track number 07 then 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 and then 01 to 06. All appearing as Green Day - American Idi …

Further I understood that “folder play” implies creating a folder for each album, which is not very convenient either. If you put all the files in a single folder, yes it should work … if the track number is in the first 24 letters of the file name.

Anyway … let you see if your files are in the correct order and please give me your feedback (MP en français ce sera plus simple pour tout le monde).

Ciao,

LoneCat

In folder mode, even if only the first few charaters of the file names are displayed, they seem to still be sorted on the whole file names.

I have tested on a few albums I know well and the tracks are played in the proprer order, even if the part of the name that is displayed on the screen won’t be long enough to include the track number.

With my naming system, all the files corresponding to tracks of the same artist for albums published in the same decade are shown the same. Still, they played in the proper order.

I also put all the files in only one directory. So – even more with my naming system than yours – it’s a bit akward to have to scroll down such a big list to spot the beginning of an album. But at least the list is circular (starts over again when the end is reached).

So while I still insist that it is very far from ideal and am still waiting for a proper fix, it is somewhat usable for me in the meantime.

Any offical word on when this track order mess is going to fixed?

_ Un _official word, being worked on. 

I have mine set up with folders by artist, strictly as a shuffle player now. Each folder I went through the artists’ albums and only chose the good songs, so now there are 613 songs (5.09GB) and I used it as a shuffle all player at work tonight and it was quite nice, I must say. 

Eagerly awaiting a fix for this problem. Can’t sort by track # and can’t update the device with the firmware updater. Pretty lame until this is fixed. :frowning:

Serious question because I don’t know how previous versions of Sansa players worked:  If you sorted on Track #, did you have a secondary sort order, or was track # order done AFTER album title order, or something?  Several people have suggested that sorting by track # is what is missing.  It seems to me that if you have several albums in a single folder, and you sort that folder by track # only. you would get all track 1, then all track 2, etc.  Surely, that can’t be much of an improvement over alphabetical order by song title.  So what am I missing?

So what am I missing?

The player builds (or should build, since the FLAC tags are not used) a database on the basis of the tags. Thanks to this database, you are able to select easily a specific Album of a specific Artist by using the Music Menu. Unfortunately the album is not played in the correct order.

Ciao,

LoneCat

Track numbers are included with my tunes eg 01 trackname. The older Sansa Clips I’ve owned such as the original and the Clip+ had no problem with this, ordering the tracks within the album correctly. But for whatever reason the Clip sport doesn’t see the track number unless it’s in a format like 01- trackname and so it defaults to alphabetical lists. This bug should be easy enough to fix given the older Clips didn’t have this problem.

I am seeing the same problem, how can a product make it to the market with such a glaring bug???

@temchik wrote:

I am seeing the same problem, how can a product make it to the market with such a glaring bug???

 

You are not the only one to wonder about this. :stuck_out_tongue:

@temchik wrote:

I am seeing the same problem, how can a product make it to the market with such a glaring bug???

 

Indeed…

@marvin_martian wrote:


@temchik wrote:

I am seeing the same problem, how can a product make it to the market with such a glaring bug???

 


Indeed…

 

Wow, Mr. Spock is looking a bit jaundiced in that picture. Or maybe it’s just his green blood boiling? :stuck_out_tongue:

I was thinking about buying the SanDisk Clip Zip Sport but after reading this thread and others (Internet can be great if used) I am going to wait, buy another or just don’t buy anything.

Please someone post here whenever this bug is fixed. The more people read (but don’t buy) the more pressure on Sansa.

@andy2014 wrote:

I was thinking about buying the SanDisk Clip Zip Sport but after reading this thread and others (Internet can be great if used) I am going to wait, buy another or just don’t buy anything.

 

Please someone post here whenever this bug is fixed. The more people read (but don’t buy) the more pressure on Sansa.

I’ve owned both the clip and clip+ in the past.  Other than a slightly more aesthetic design, the Sport is practically the same.  

I have no problem returning my Sport for one of the other 2.  It’s just an inconvience.  

Wish I had known about this before I bought one.  

Guess it depends on what your needs are.  

For me the double battery power is a huge attraction as I often go for multiple day hikes. I don’t know the weight of the Sport but I guess it’s more than the previous models. Maybe someone can check it?