[uzi2]

so they'll change this in an update?

I haven't had any confirmation of this, but it is a known issue that has been raised on a number of occasions in the respective threads and bugzilla.

 

[bhabba]

 
I think that's just an omission from the table and that "track number" is supported, whereas "Discnumber" isn't, so a double album will play track1,1,2,2,3,3....

  yea exactly, I really hope they will put this as considerate on the next update.

 
I hope so, too! But to underline its importance to us we could vote for bug #106 ("Disc id not recognized (double album)")

 
 

At present is made to fit side to side in the X5 and top to bottom in the X3, which is the wrong way for both, if the aim is to display square album art in full

so they'll change this in an update?

 
I haven't had any confirmation of this, but it is a known issue that has been raised on a number of occasions in the respective threads and bugzilla.

 
same advice applies to this issue: If you didn't do so already, vote for bug #119 (Album art not being resized properly)!

 

[CH23]

same advice applies to this issue: If you didn't do so already, vote for bug #119 (Album art not being resized properly)!

Thanks!

 

[uzi2]

   
 
 
same advice applies to this issue: If you didn't do so already, vote for bug #119 (Album art not being resized properly)!

... and bug#103 is the similar issue for the X5

 

[thericochet]

And if it's resized 'properly', what takes up the rest of the screen exactly?
The current 'now playing' screen is better than any I've seen which shows the full album art (in tiny fashion) and fills the rest of the space with nothing.
Calling it a 'bug' is quite bizarre - it's a design matter; a good one. It's why the now playing screen looks much better than e.g. the one on an ipod Classic, where the art is token and might as well not be there).

 

[bhabba]

  And if it's resized 'properly', what takes up the rest of the screen exactly?
The current 'now playing' screen is better than any I've seen which shows the full album art (in tiny fashion) and fills the rest of the space with nothing.
Calling it a 'bug' is quite bizarre - it's a design matter; a good one. It's why the now playing screen looks much better than e.g. the one on an ipod Classic, where the art is token and might as well not be there).

 
Yes, of course it is a design decision. But a pretty bad and ugly one in my eyes. Obviously the designers wanted the track info and progress bar on the bottom of the screen to be transparently overlayed on the album art. Considering the aspect ratio of the whole display there are only two possibilities to achieve this without leaving some space blank: Either to compress the album art (i.e. change its aspect ratio which normally is exactly quadratic) or to crop it on its sides (which is the case now). Although I think cutting off the album art is better than compressing it I don't consider it acceptable! Not only the left and rigth sides of the album art get lost but also the bottom of it becomes barely visible! In my opinion they should forget about the transparent overlay of the track info and progress bar and return to fully display square album art graphics! The gained visual elegance of a transparent overlay just isn't worth the disadvantages it brings along!

 

[uzi2]

  And if it's resized 'properly', what takes up the rest of the screen exactly?
The current 'now playing' screen is better than any I've seen which shows the full album art (in tiny fashion) and fills the rest of the space with nothing.
Calling it a 'bug' is quite bizarre - it's a design matter; a good one. It's why the now playing screen looks much better than e.g. the one on an ipod Classic, where the art is token and might as well not be there).

Do you consider the display of the album art to be better than FW2.1?
That made perfect use of the portrait screen to display all necessary info without overwriting the album art, which is shown in it's entirety...

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Tables in OP updated with latest format support in X5 firmware 2.20.

 

[darkarn]

Subbed! Am I right to say that the precedence is as follows:

Embedded
External/folder art of the same filename as the music file
Folder art “front”
Folder art “cover”
Folder art “folder”
First image file in the folder in alphabetical order

PS: I think the contents of this thread should be part of the manuals within the players too

 

[CH23]

Subbed! Am I right to say that the precedence is as follows:

Embedded
External/folder art of the same filename as the music file
Folder art “front”
Folder art “cover”
Folder art “folder”
First image file in the folder in alphabetical order

PS: I think the contents of this thread should be part of the manuals within the players too

Or just a link to the FiiO "root directory" on Head-Fi.: http://www.head-fi.org/f/180/fiio

 

[Poimandres]

Hi Joe,
I recently converted my entire collection to q10 vbr ogg with embedded art and also a cover.jpg in every folder. I am currently using firmware 2.0 and I was wondering if the album art should be showing (cover.jpg) or if that was not part of the 2.0 firmware and only in the 2.2 firmware.

 

[uzi2]

Hi Joe,
I recently converted my entire collection to q10 vbr ogg with embedded art and also a cover.jpg in every folder. I am currently using firmware 2.0 and I was wondering if the album art should be showing (cover.jpg) or if that was not part of the 2.0 firmware and only in the 2.2 firmware.

The cover.jpg is redundant as even if you were using 2.2 the embedded art will take priority.

 

[tjw321]

...  
As you can see, support is uniform across all formats, except for ogg vorbis, where embedded album art is not supported.  Please also note the file naming and format requirements for external art and external lyrics.  Embedded lyrics are currently not supported.
...

 

The cover.jpg is redundant as even if you were using 2.2 the embedded art will take priority.

It won't for ogg.

 

[Poimandres]

Nope. Something as simple as album art too.

 

[tjw321]

Nope. Something as simple as album art too.

Is cover.jpg not working even on 2.20?