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

Idea: improve lyrics screen #113

Open
jose1711 opened this issue May 10, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Idea: improve lyrics screen #113

jose1711 opened this issue May 10, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@jose1711
Copy link
Contributor

Now that multiple lyrics parsers exist I think it could be useful if ncmpc improves lyrics screen. Prior to showing the lyrics itself it could show a sub-tab containing source where the lyrics came from - either file if found on a local filesystem or name of the parser (azlyrics, tekstowo…).

[*file] [azlyrics] [tekstowo] [genius]

We're no strangers to love
You know the rules and so do I
A full commitment's what I'm thinking of
You wouldn't get this from any other guy
I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling

Lyrics will be pulled only for currently active source (file above) while first working source will be used and set as active by default (the same way how it works now). Default keybinding for switching sources could be the same as for activating lyrics screen (7).

@MaxKellermann
Copy link
Member

ncmpc already shows where lyrics came from. But I don't understand the rest of your idea. What does "set as active" mean? What does "switch sources" mean?

@ferdnyc
Copy link
Contributor

ferdnyc commented Apr 8, 2023

@MaxKellermann

I get the impression @jose1711 wants to be able to pick-and-choose from different lyrics sources' results for a given song's lyrics, in the cases where requesting the same lyrics from all the providers would produce results from more than one of them. (Presumably, different results — or at least, potentially different results — from each provider.)

If we accept the premise that different lyrics providers can produce different results for the same request, then by extension some of those are likely to be "better" or "worse" results than other providers might supply. In which case, it's somewhat understandable that users might want the ability to review the different options and select the one they feel is the "best" result, instead of blindly "settling" for whatever's supplied by the first provider with a match.

(I'm not sure how much I'm on board with that premise, personally. But I can sorta see where it's coming from... assuming I've understood the request correctly.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants