Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Same video scrobbled differently on Youtube and Youtube Music #1795

Closed
reitzig opened this issue Nov 9, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Same video scrobbled differently on Youtube and Youtube Music #1795

reitzig opened this issue Nov 9, 2018 · 6 comments
Labels
connector This issue or pull request is related to connectors outdated This issue or pull request is outdated

Comments

@reitzig
Copy link
Contributor

reitzig commented Nov 9, 2018

Let's have a look at two versions of the same video.

  • Watching on youtube.com, it scrobbles as:

    Leo Moracchioli feat. Mary Spender — Sultans of Swing

    The artist is not ideal -- we'd want Leo Moracchioli -- but fair enough.

  • However, on music.youtube.com, it scrobbles as:

    Leo — Sultans of Swing (Metal Version) (feat. Mary Spender)

    Now that's a very different artist!

    No wonder, those seem to be the data Youtube Music provides:

    image
    image
    image

    (Note the different variants even within the app. D'oh.)

I don't see a robust way to resolve this, given what Youtube Music provides (now).

Could the scrobbler maybe use the ID to query youtube.com about the track information? Internally, web-scrobbler treats music.youtube.com like youtube.com, so the video title from youtube.com should always be the better choice (in the sense of "contains what the addon expects").

@inverse
Copy link
Member

inverse commented Nov 10, 2018

If a video ID is exposed in theory we could use their data API to get more information if that's exposed in the video.

@inverse inverse added the connector This issue or pull request is related to connectors label Nov 10, 2018
@reitzig
Copy link
Contributor Author

reitzig commented Nov 11, 2018

The ID seems to be part of the URL, and it seems to be updated when tracks change (SPA-style).

@jaccarmac
Copy link
Contributor

Interesting idea for sure. As you noted I chose one of the slightly different sources of information to use. It wasn't a random choice, the playlist view is the only place where the format is consistent. Querying YouTube as a canonical source would be roughly equivalent, and unfortunately there's no great way to solve the problem "properly" as YouTube is a very fuzzy data source. Personally I'm sympathetic to my own solution as Google seems to be adding metadata to YouTube for YT Music purposes, but that they'll finish doing it is far from certain.

@reitzig
Copy link
Contributor Author

reitzig commented Nov 12, 2018

Yeah, I noticed some flat-out wrong meta data on Youtube Music; apparently Google's heuristics are (very) faulty. Maybe that can't be avoided.

Another idea to circumvent this would be to leverage last.fm data: as an option (?), only scrobble if the track already exists (and is of "good enough quality", if that's possible to determine) on last.fm; otherwise ask the user what to do.

FWIW, if seems clear that there's not good solution, but arguably the addon should to the same thing for the same track, no matter where it's played?

@inverse inverse added bug Something isn't working and removed bug Something isn't working labels Nov 17, 2018
@alexesprit
Copy link
Member

Another idea to circumvent this would be to leverage last.fm data: as an option (?), only scrobble if the track already exists (and is of "good enough quality", if that's possible to determine) on last.fm; otherwise ask the user what to do.

This is default behavior. It does not work properly, because Last.fm's database is full of garbage (literally, it detects obviously wrong data as a valid song).

If a video ID is exposed in theory we could use their data API to get more information if that's exposed in the video.

Using YouTube API is not solution; API have limitations (don't know exact numbers, but we reach this daily limit in few hours).

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Dec 17, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the outdated This issue or pull request is outdated label Dec 17, 2019
@stale stale bot closed this as completed Dec 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
connector This issue or pull request is related to connectors outdated This issue or pull request is outdated
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants