Renaming Zip Files

In the course of working with zipped MP3G files, when you find one that is named incorrectly, what is the best method to rename the files? If you merely rename the zip folder, that wont help you by renaming the files inside, and your search engine probably wont find the proper name.

For example, when ripping Pioneer disc one, which changed lineups (thanks Pioneer) and now half the songs are misnamed....

What is the best and most painless way to deal with this?

In the course of working with zipped MP3G files, when you find one that is named incorrectly, what is the best method to rename the files? If you merely rename the zip folder, that wont help you by renaming the files inside, and your search engine probably wont find the proper name.

For example, when ripping Pioneer disc one, which changed lineups (thanks Pioneer) and now half the songs are misnamed....

What is the best and most painless way to deal with this?

I believe MP3+G Toolz has the capability of renaming files as they are zipped up....

If you are using AutOKdj simply renaming the zip file actually will do the trick... since if using zips winamp reads the file name in the absence of ID3 Tags...

Or there are various renamers out there that will work in bulk.... if it's just a handfull of files unzip and rename manually also take the time to correct the ID3 tags.... just in case you decide to go back to unzipped files.... which is what I did.... because it just works better.

You can also look for a freeware app called "Zip Contents Renamer". You rename the zip file, then run ZCR and it will rename the mp3 and cdg files in the archive to match the name of the archive.

I believe MP3+G Toolz has the capability of renaming files as they are zipped up....



That may have been the genesis of some of the problem actually... I found that Pioneer 001 was mislabeled, so I converted the zip to bins, renamed the bins, then reconverted to zips.

When I converted to the zips, I allowed MP3gtools to go online, and it started renaming the corrected files BACK to the wrong names. After the third one, I stopped it...corrected them again, and then used MP3gtools again WITHOUT allowing it to go online. That worked, but was time consumptive.

That may have been the genesis of some of the problem actually... I found that Pioneer 001 was mislabeled, so I converted the zip to bins, renamed the bins, then reconverted to zips.

When I converted to the zips, I allowed MP3gtools to go online, and it started renaming the corrected files BACK to the wrong names. After the third one, I stopped it...corrected them again, and then used MP3gtools again WITHOUT allowing it to go online. That worked, but was time consumptive.

Yeah, your probably right cause it uses the same FreeCDDB that almost all rippers use to look up CD information on... and if it's wrong there it's going to be wrong in your files too.

I'd look for a renamer that renames based on the zip files name as was mentioned in an earlier post...

YouTube - AutoKDJ File Format Help
YouTube - Convert karaoke zip files to AutoKDJ format

Unzip the files and leave them unzipped. You computer will thank you. The best way to solve a problem is by not making it in the first place.

Unzip the files and leave them unzipped. You computer will thank you. The best way to solve a problem is by not making it in the first place.

My first reaction to this was to scoff, but then I thought about it... The reason we zipped files in the past is so we could fit more songs on our piddly 100 or 120 GB hard drives. Zipping nearly cut the size of the song (actually just the CDG file, not the MP3) in half. What was 10-15 MB before became 6-8 MB after zipping. That meant going from ~10,000 songs to ~16,000 songs. But now with terabyte drives being affordable, zipping means going from ~100,000 songs to ~160,000 songs...except that I don't even have 100 thousand songs in the first place! (are there even 100k songs available??) So why should I waste my time zipping them and then devoting CPU cycles to unzipping them every time I play them?

Hey Tim,

I can think of one good reason. Call it a "in the future" of karaoke.

I think in a few years, a lot of the stuff i'm doing now is going to be more plug n play (easier for the masses) Karaoke will be more than music and lyrics, maybe they'll be multitrack (vocoder synths) with midi tracks for controlling effects, bringing the karaoke experience closer to what the real rock stars use.

Zip is a decent container format. It might not be the best container format, but it's widely used, and since it's pretty much become a standard format for karaoke already, when we start seeing the stuff I mentioned in the preceding paragraph happening people won't be re-inventing the wheel for it. Most likely zip will continue to dominate karaoke as the standard container format.

Toq: Why would you need to contain a computer file? Anything that you do to a file you have to undo before you can use it. As Tim said, you don't gain a lot by compressing an MP3 file (about 8%). The CDG file ususally compresses 80-90% but that's because it's mostly garbage (filler bytes for timing purposes) in the first place. Now add to that the fact that the graphics data is 1 bit and you don't have a robust format in the first place, adding an unnecessary process such as zipping, any unnecessary process, is just plain stupid.

Toq: Why would you need to contain a computer file? Anything that you do to a file you have to undo before you can use it. As Tim said, you don't gain a lot by compressing an MP3 file (about 8%). The CDG file ususally compresses 80-90% but that's because it's mostly garbage (filler bytes for timing purposes) in the first place. Now add to that the fact that the graphics data is 1 bit and you don't have a robust format in the first place, adding an unnecessary process such as zipping, any unnecessary process, is just plain stupid.


I think Stupid is an awefully strong word to use.... for one thing with AutOKdj and many other Karaoke Host programs the data bases used for song search are either based on the actual file name or the ID3 Tags.... and since most KJ's don't take the time to make sure their Tags are correct it is much simpler to just Zip the files and allow the program used to determine the file informatioin from the file name.

I myself took the time and effort to tag my karaoke mp3's but most wont. So to say it stupid is really a bad choice of words.

Toqer is correct Zip is a good container... as karaoke hosters evolve you would be able to add other files pertaining to different functions within these new and wonderful programs... Just look at OtsAV this is exactly what they do... and it allows for better tagging then ID3 could ever offer.

Next time think before you post.... thanks.

Toq: Why would you need to contain a computer file?

AVI is a container format. So is .mov, so is mpeg, hell, even word .doc files are container formats when you embed stuff in them. Having a container format just makes it easier to manage all the files within the container.

So zip can be thought of as the poor mans container format for karaoke. It wasn't intentional, but it's not a horrible container format either. Right now the container is used to keep .mp3 and .cdg all nice and neat. When/If the day ever comes that .mp3/.cdg is paired up with more files, I.E. additional audio tracks or effects timing, I'm just saying I doubt anyone is going to re-invent that since it's already so widely used.

PS. You can get some speed gains by zipping without compression. Still keeps things nice and neat.

To quote the sage Forrest Gump "Stupid is as stupid does." I would and did call something which complicates a process to no advantage whatever, stupid. It's like keeping pencils up you nose. Take them out to inhale, put them back, take them out to exhale, replace, ad infinitum. The arguement in favor of this practice is that this is the way it has always been done and should you need to jot something down....

Bottom line is that there is no advantage to compressing or merging. It's a lot easier to open two disk files than it is to sort one file into two and then use the result, let alone decompressing them.

"if((infile=fopen(filename,"rb"))!=NULL)" That's all there is to opening a disk file in the C language. Now go google the source code for an unzipper.

Exweed... tread lighter my friend.. what you say makes sense however, what we are talking about is a standardized system... nobody says you have to use any compression at all. Sure there are other container formats available that would do the job better than zip but currently they are not supported by the vast majority of programs...

I too run unzipped but to say that folks using zipped are stupid is crossing the line.

Exweed... tread lighter my friend.. what you say makes sense however, what we are talking about is a standardized system... nobody says you have to use any compression at all. Sure there are other container formats available that would do the job better than zip but currently they are not supported by the vast majority of programs...

I too run unzipped but to say that folks using zipped are stupid is crossing the line.
I fear you are taking personal offense from a purely accademic discussion. As for stupidity in general I know where-of I speak for I have vast experience at being stupid and acting stupidly. Therefore, I know that the first step towards ending stupidity is to admit that what you are doing is stupid. It's only a word. Do not be afraid.

Well I guess apple, the mpeg group, whoever invented AVI and all the other container format people are stupid too. Sorry the point went over your head weed.

Yes Toqer, it is true. Completely over my head. The advantage of a container is what exactly??? The advantage of admitting you're stupid is that there is always room to learn from someone else. So then Prof. Toqer, if you please.

Oh man, we're pulling the gloves off aren't we weed. OK, let's tango then.

MP3 is limited to 2 channel stereo. So is wav, so are most other audio formats. If you want to do something with multichannel awesomeness automatically like let's say...
YouTube - Freestyle Don't stop the rock, Reaper Reavocode
THIS!

You'll need to step into the realm of multiple files, or even multiple file formats.

Now sure, you can store these files in subfolders, easy enough. Even from a programming perspective, it's much easier to not have to demux some container before sending **** out to your decoders BUT..

End users want:
awesomeness automatically

Automatic awesomeness will not happen if I have to tell my end user "Hey, you have to download this file here, and this file there, then assemble the files all together in this directory" Nah, they just want to deal with one file, and it it only takes another week or two to support a container format, then from a end user usability standpoint, it shouldn't matter what my technical opinion is. Not everyone is as smart as me, and I shouldn't expect them to be either.

Now let's get back into the mp3+g zipped realm of today,

In most media players, they use a flat file database with no relational tables. Winamp is an awesome example of this. This is fine if you're just going to cue up songs. On the other hand, if you want to truly expose the winamp UI and API system for something like uhhm, putting a persons name on the Winamp Playlist next to thier song, you have to play by Winamps rules.

So in a flat file database we have..

c:\music\america.mp3 bob
c:\music\amazing.mp3 grace
c:\music\anarchy.mp3 frank

What happens if frank decides to sing america as well? In a flat file, non relational database you get screwed, thats what.

On the other hand, if you had these files in a container format, then copied the mp3 from the container to a temp directory, the flat file database stays happy because you can do things like

c:\temp\frank\09td953\america.mp3 frank
c:\temp\grace\0gfd44s\america.mp3 grace
c:\temp\bob\gy435fdv\america.mp3 bob

I'm also going to point out that of all the Winamp based hosters, we were the only ones that took into account how to work with winamp, keep the winamp skin/look/feel. Sure, we could have taken the short route of making a hosting system with a non relational db outside of the winamp media library DB, but we felt that this was cheating the end user by telling them "You have to run 2 apps, winamp and my butt ugly frontend"

End users don't want to have to run a bunch of things to host karaoke. They don't want to have to worry about multiple file pairs. It's just easier. For us, there's not really a performance hit either. It's not a huge annoying thing to code it if it makes the end users happy. If you want to keep arguing it though thats cool, i'll be home all day watching my kid tomorrow so I got plenty of time to fire posts back and forth.

I hadn't thought about the "future proof" aspect of it. But honestly Toq, don't youo figure record execs/karaoke manufacturers/ "the Man" :D or who ever is going to come up with their own file format? You know, MTK (Multi-Track Karaoke) files? It just doesn't seem reasonable to expect anyone in the music industry to do something logical like sticking to existing defacto standards. ;)

It just doesn't seem reasonable to expect anyone in the music industry to do something logical like sticking to existing defacto standards. ;)

No, and why not? MP3 is pretty much the standard music format, period. Sure you have wav, mp4, flac, ogg, and many others.... but name more than 5 mainstream players that recognize all of them as a standard file format.... I can name none... they ALL recognize mp3 as the standard.

Flawed as it might be and as defacto as it might seem it is the standard.... zip is no different. Is it the best, no. But the majority of karaoke hosters out today recognize mp3+g zip files and will play them.

Toqer is right some sort of container format will be used be it zip or something else as it stands the chances of it being something else and then being adobted by everyone is next to nil. And that's the point.

Ah Professor, you're over my head again. You seem to be talking about the need to bundle file formats which don't yet exist. Now wait a minute, they did exist in the quadraphonic wonder of the 70's that no one liked.

End user don't deal with files. They press play.

I believe you are confusing containers such as AVI with bundlers such as Zip. There was a reason for AVI having audio and video in the same file. Microsoft engineers didn't just get together and say "Let's make this more complicated than we have to." There was a reason for bundlers like ZIP particularly when hard drives were 10MB ande cost two grand. But now? Okay, it still makes sense over a network but we're talking about a stand alone computer here.

These days we don't need the extra disk space afforded by zipping. An MP3 file is already in a container (for those of you who just tuned in a container contains data bytes and formatting information which may or may not be related to a single function) and CDG is ALL data and garbage bytes.

So, when you rip you take the extra time to zip the files and when you play you take the extra time to unzip and increase the chance of error as any extra process does (with all due respect to Drs. Reed and Solomon) and all to gain exactly what?

That's the question Prof. The disadvantage to zipping karaoke files is time, extra processing and attendent complications. The advantage is the saving of disk space which we don't currently need and WHAT???

who the heck said we use zip to compress.... that's not the use for it in this case... you gain very little as you have mentioned and disc space is cheap.

This is all about containing multiple files used in a karaoke hoster to simplify a file system.... the time taken to unzip for play back is in the milliseconds at worst. If you are still running a pc that this is an issue for, my friend it is time for an upgrade.... come into the 90s at least.

Now sir if you'd kindly stop stirring the pot we would be ever so greatful... your point is dually noted and dismissed.

who the heck said we use zip to compress.... that's not the use for it in this case... you gain very little as you have mentioned and disc space is cheap.

This is all about containing multiple files used in a karaoke hoster to simplify a file system.... the time taken to unzip for play back is in the milliseconds at worst. If you are still running a pc that this is an issue for, my friend it is time for an upgrade.... come into the 90s at least.

Now sir if you'd kindly stop stirring the pot we would be ever so greatful... your point is dually noted and dismissed.

Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.

Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.

I will not even dignafy your comment with an answer... you my friend obviously think to highly of yourself... go program something and show us how it's done.

I will not even dignafy your comment with an answer... you my friend obviously think to highly of yourself... go program something and show us how it's done.
Gladly, what would you like? It was my profession for many years.

Gladly, what would you like? It was my profession for many years.

You say that all the time.... but I have yet to see any sort of product.... so here it is create an all around KJ/DJ package that incorporates all of the best features of AutOKdj, RoxBox, Compuhost, MTU Hoster, OtsAV, VDJ, Rockit make it easy to use and cheap.....

You say that all the time.... but I have yet to see any sort of product.... so here it is create an all around KJ/DJ package that incorporates all of the best features of AutOKdj, RoxBox, Compuhost, MTU Hoster, OtsAV, VDJ, Rockit make it easy to use and cheap.....

And what would these "Best features" be? Exactly? Opinions vary. Here's some karaoke freeware I whipped up for a friend http://www.winsite.com/bin/Info?30500000036644. Aside from that Sacks-O-Nuts ShowHoster had video bits, kiosks, rotation, autoplay, built-in song books maker, file renamer, song recording, on and on before most of those folks you named got into karaoke at all. And, you could still use it when you were drunk. I know, I did. Often. I gave up on karaoke software because of AutOkdj. It really isn't a bad hoster and you can't beat the price. Compuhost and MTU seem to still be in the market but don't ask me how. I started on another hoster but couldn't come up with a key canger that didn't suck. But, what has this to do with the zipping karaoke files or not?

Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.

Pot stirred. There are several advantages to keeping files in a zipped container format:

When syncronizing a library, It takes less time to copy less bytes, plus less files to copy.
Renaming files is as simple as renaming the zip. If you have a well-behaved program that renames the unzipped files to the name of the zip, then there is no need to rename the contents of the zip.
Only one file to search for, instead of two.
The file system only has to keep track of one file.
Zipping / Unzipping takes milliseconds to a second or two to process. Especially with today's processors.
For future programs, storing the metadata for the track can be as easy as including a file into the zip, say an xml file, containing metadata and album art.
Simplicity.

Pot stirred. There are several advantages to keeping files in a zipped container format:

When syncronizing a library, It takes less time to copy less bytes, plus less files to copy.
Renaming files is as simple as renaming the zip. If you have a well-behaved program that renames the unzipped files to the name of the zip, then there is no need to rename the contents of the zip.
Only one file to search for, instead of two.
The file system only has to keep track of one file.
Zipping / Unzipping takes milliseconds to a second or two to process. Especially with today's processors.
For future programs, storing the metadata for the track can be as easy as including a file into the zip, say an xml file, containing metadata and album art.
Simplicity.


1. I cannot respond to point 1 because I don't know what "syncronizing" a library does.
2. Why would you search for both file names?
3. If you had a "well behaved program" it would automatically rename all associated files without zipping.
4. True, decreasing the total number of files in a directory decreases the total search time. However, once the zip file is found the program then either has to read the file names from within the zip or simply unzip (Unzip: uncompress and copy) and hope that the two file names match, usually to a tempory directory and then search that directory for the files again using the fully quallified path. Whatever you do to it there is more work involved in zipping than not zipping.
5. Zipping is fast? True again. Not zipping takes no time at all.
6. Metadata is just another file, one more thing not to zip.
7. Simple for whom? Not for the computer and not for the developer.

A little insight into modern programming: The vast majority of us don't know how our code works. The commands have to get from a semi-english language down to billions of bits of binary and for that we depend on the programming that has gone on before. That's the work of perhaps hundreds of people that I have no way of checking. Fifteen years ago somebody could have been careless because they were mad at their great aunt Zelda over something she said at little Debbie's birthday party and that's why your computer crashed in the middle of a gig.

A little insight into modern programming: The vast majority of us don't know how our code works. The commands have to get from a semi-english language down to billions of bits of binary and for that we depend on the programming that has gone on before. That's the work of perhaps hundreds of people that I have no way of checking. Fifteen years ago somebody could have been careless because they were mad at their great aunt Zelda over something she said at little Debbie's birthday party and that's why your computer crashed in the middle of a gig.

"Syncronizing" a library is copying file for file from one drive or folder to another, making sure the contents are the same. Always good to have a backup.

And, it's simple for the fact of having to keep track of one file, not two, for both the end user, the program, and the file system.

It's obvious that we have differing opinions, and that's what makes debates great, and also makes us knowledgable of both sides of the coin. But... What does Aunt Zelda and computers crashing at gigs have to do with the pros and cons of zipping or not? I'm not here to start a flame war, and I certainly don't appreciate the tone and subtle dig at me. You don't know me. :sqconfused:

Ok for the sake of argument... lets use AutOKdj and Winamp as an example and this may actually lead to proving Exweeds point.... here it goes.

Winamp reads meta tags (ie the ID3 tags of mp3's) first then in the absense of those it looks to the directory and file structure for the name and any other information is pretty much made up if it don't find what it needs in the order in which it needs it.

So to that.... in order for AutOKdj to display the song search and entry screen correctly you have to do one of 2 things:

A) Use a mp3/cdg files and be sure that you have completed all of the ID3 Tag information correctly for DiscID/Album, Artist, Song Title and Track.

B) Use a file structure such as this: c:\Karaoke\SC8888\01 - Artist - Songtitle.zip

Pros for A:
No lyric screen hicups while enqueing from the host computer. Translation less time to process the files during the enque process.

Cons for A:
Dual file system... easy to mess up one file and have the whole file not work because they have to match. One little goof can cause a whole slew of problems. No two singers can sing the same song in the same playlist if singer A is singing New York New York and Sing B enques that very same song... it will put Singer A in as the singer of the second one...

Pros for B:
Single file system... easy to rename with proper utilities... can be more than one file for other program compatibilites...

Cons for B:
When encueing from the host computer the lyric screen can pause causing problems for the singer...


Bottom line here is using a dual file system as far as AutOKdj is concerned causes some problems that are not tolerable to some KJ's

While using Zip can cause problems too that singer's don't like....

So your choice I choose mp3/cdg because of the lyric screen issue and just watch my playlist for duplicate songs/singers and modify... as needed.

I don't use zip because of the lyric screen hicups... which still occure even though I'm running a dual core processor and loads of memory... however, if you use the singer kiosk (ie AutOKfe) in conjunction with the host PC this hicup is less pronounced if not apparent at all.

But... What does Aunt Zelda and computers crashing at gigs have to do with the pros and cons of zipping or not?
Essentially it is that the con of zipping is that it increases the likelyhood of a computer crash. In your explaination of sycronizing (which is illegal in the US but that's another topic) you express the need to check the copy to make sure it is correct. Good idea. Zipping is at best a copying process and is there a check on the copy process? I don't know, I didn't write the zip library and in all likelyhood neither did anyone else who wrote karaoke software. With zipping you're not dealing with one file as opposed to two you're dealing with five as opposed to two assuming that you already have the zip file. To wit: 1. the zip file is read. 2. the CDG file is expanded and written. 3. the MP3 file is expanded and written. 4. the CDG is opened and read. 5. the MP3 file is opened and read. Without zipping you only have steps 4 and 5.

I don't think the idea of one file being easier that two is going to fly. If the CDG and MP3 file names do not match a bulk zipper is not going to work so you have to do it manually. If you have to do that you might as well just make the file names match.

I gave up on karaoke software because of AutOkdj.

And the truth comes out. Quit being sour grapes exweed.

And the truth comes out. Quit being sour grapes exweed. Well, yeah..... AutOkdj took money out of my pocket but that has nothing to do with zipping. If you were charging money for AutOKdj I could compete. You have the low end of the market cornered and I can't out advertise MTU and Compuhost in the upper end so further development is pointless. That's not so much sour grapes as I see it but a decision based on reason. Just like not zipping.

Well, yeah..... AutOkdj took money out of my pocket but that has nothing to do with zipping. If you were charging money for AutOKdj I could compete. You have the low end of the market cornered and I can't out advertise MTU and Compuhost in the upper end so further development is pointless. That's not so much sour grapes as I see it but a decision based on reason. Just like not zipping.

Ok, enough baiting and low blows.... if AutOK were the bottom of the barrow why do thousands of KJ's use and swear by it? That's a rhetorical question so just think before you post, alright.

You have the low end of the market cornered and I can't out advertise MTU and Compuhost in the upper end so further development is pointless.

So low we're in hell.

So low we're in hell.

If this is hell I don't ever wanna see heaven....:sqwink:

here is a batch renamer that mya be of interest

http://www.freedownloadscenter.com/Multimedia_and_Graphics/Misc__Sound_Tools/Zip_Contents_Renamer.html

Ok, enough baiting and low blows.... if AutOK were the bottom of the barrow why do thousands of KJ's use and swear by it? That's a rhetorical question so just think before you post, alright.

He means bottom of price, e.g. free. And he's right I have to say. AutoKDJ is a nice program. With that being said, I can see how he is priced out of the market due to the autoKDJ program having more features than the bargain basement cheap hosters (You know which ones), and not having enough money or clout to throw out to advertise against the big ones. People would always say "Yeah, yours does xxx features, so does AutoKDJ, and it's free!". How do you compete with that?

My $0.02 without nasty shots or jabs at anyone.

He means bottom of price, e.g. free. And he's right I have to say. AutoKDJ is a nice program. With that being said, I can see how he is priced out of the market due to the autoKDJ program having more features than the bargain basement cheap hosters (You know which ones), and not having enough money or clout to throw out to advertise against the big ones. People would always say "Yeah, yours does xxx features, so does AutoKDJ, and it's free!". How do you compete with that?

My $0.02 without nasty shots or jabs at anyone.

If I misunderstood so be it.... but I've read his posts on this board and other boards to know better.... this is a classic baiting post... if I'm wrong then I'm sorry...

Thing is hands down AutOKdj is the best I've seen and that includes being better than the so called big guns.... if Toqer were to start charging $200.00 for his plug in I'd be first in line with a fist full of dollars to get my copy... so it's not all about the money a product costs it's what it can do.... I was "" this close to purchasing another well known product that cost nearly $200.00 but was swayed to AutOK based on features not price...

I call 'em as I see 'em.

Now can we get back to renaming zip files?

Joker, you just insist on being offended. If that's your idea of a good time then set to it and have fun. Big gun was right, I said and meant the low end of the market, as in price. For a couple of years I had the cheapest hosting software on the market, not only in the price you paid but it would run on the least machine. AutOKdj out cheaped me. I can't knock AutOkdj because you can't knock freeware. What would I say "It's not worth the money?"

Toqer came up with a fresh way to make a buck with software and hats off to him for that. He cost me a little money for sure but I'm not mad about it. That's just the nature of shareware.

Joker, you just insist on being offended. If that's your idea of a good time then set to it and have fun. Big gun was right, I said and meant the low end of the market, as in price. For a couple of years I had the cheapest hosting software on the market, not only in the price you paid but it would run on the least machine. AutOKdj out cheaped me. I can't knock AutOkdj because you can't knock freeware. What would I say "It's not worth the money?"

Toqer came up with a fresh way to make a buck with software and hats off to him for that. He cost me a little money for sure but I'm not mad about it. That's just the nature of shareware.

My appologies then sir.... I misunderstood your post... carry on..:sqbiggrin: No harm no foul....

I disagree... Big-gun's software is hands down 10x better than autokj...
KGR is by far the best software I have used. It can't be compared to a winamp front end player... Thats like comparing apples to oranges.
I am not knocking AutoKJ but its not in the same category at all.

I have been using his software for 3 years and have saved more $$$ by not redoing books every 2 months that what the software costs by nearly 10x
To some its pricey to me its an investment, cost of 2 gigs


First of all Autok is not a front end for winamp... it is skined right in with it... you must have it confused with other programs such as Roxbox for example that is a front end player...

As for this KGR care to share a link.... also what is the full name for it?

I'm not sure I follow you about not having to print books every 2 months... does that have to do in the fact that you don't use them or what?

With AutOKdj plus the AutOKfe it is totally possible to work without books if you want to. Autokdj has the ability to output the song data base in the form of CSV so that it can be imported into programs such as Excel or even KJPro for book making...

never mind I have checked out Karaoke Go Round before... to be honest I wasn't impressed with it... however I'd be willing to give it a whirl agian just for the sake of argument....

Heck I forgot that they make a renamer too....

And I love the MP3+G Toolz I don't know any PC based KJ's that don't or haven't used that little gem...

I'm having a hell of a time getting autokdj to work. I love the front end but I have renamed my zip files to comply with the winamp naming conventions and it has created a huge problem. The contents of the zip have the original file names meaning that I must rename each file individually. This is simply infeasible.

I have tried zip contents renamer but I have archived my songs using a newer version of zip meaning that zcr cannot unpack them. Is there any other way to get this to work??

Well i don't think it really matters if the file names are the same as the zip name, it should all still work perfectly fine.

If you really want to rename everything, then you could always use kj file manager. The demo version only does 99 files at a time but you could still use it. Its super easy to use and really fast when you don't have the check zip integrity option on.


you can get it from http://www.latshawsystems.com/ProductDetails_KJFileManager.aspx

I would suggest unpacking all the zips and then renaming them using mp3+g toolz. http://www.activeaspsoftware.net
You can do as many files as you want at one time...
To unpack cleanup the filenames and rename and re zip is about a hour for about 2000 at least on my comp.