Apple Aiming to Increase Music Library Matching Limit to 100,000 Tracks 'Before the End of the Year'

[ZamboniRunningAmok]

I'm not getting an iCloud Music Library error message for >25,000 songs. However nothing is happening with regard to populating the iCloud Music Library...iTunes version 12.3.1.23, OSX El Capitan version 10.11.2 Beta

Note: I only have Apple Music and not iTunes Match.

 

[milo]

And now my subscription has lapsed. Your move, Apple.

 

[francbecerra]

I've let mine expire too. No point in having Match anymore if all of my music is not accessible in the cloud.

 

[MRU]

Can folks with libraries over the 25K limit please check and see if Match (either iTunes Match or Apple Music matching) is still throwing up errors? Got a tip suggesting the limit might have been raised.

Thanks!

Just encountered the 25k limit So not raised and been a music match subscriber for years.

 

[milo]

I assume when it changes Apple will announce that since it may bring in/bring back some customers.

 

[MRU]

I assume when it changes Apple will announce that since it may bring in/bring back some customers.

Hopefully. It's a great service, heck I wouldn't even mind paying a smaller additional fee to upgrade it to 100,000 tracks.

 

[milo]

It has its uses, the limit is just too much of a deal breaker for me. Heck, if they even limited it but let you choose tracks to exclude to stay under the limit I'd probably be OK with that. I guess we'll see what happens.

 

[francbecerra]

I thought purchased music didn't count towards the limit. Just bought two songs off the iTunes store and they say 'exceeded limit' on them. I swear Apple's services are shoddy.

 

[OllyW]

I thought purchased music didn't count towards the limit. Just bought two songs off the iTunes store and they say 'exceeded limit' on them. I swear Apple's services are shoddy.

They shouldn't count towards the song limit and yes, Apple's services can be very frustrating when they don't work as advertised.

1. iTunes Match requires iOS 5.0.1 or later on iPhone 3Gs or later, iPod touch (3rd generation or later), iPad or iPad mini, or a Mac or PC with iTunes 10.5.1 or later. Limit of 25,000 songs. iTunes purchases do not count towards limit.

 

[Ries]

Obviously you're not a developer.

It's not as simple as changing

MAX_MATCHES = 25000

to

MAX_MATCHES = 100000

The database size must be increased, the interface needs to be able to handle more matches, the search function needs to handle more and still be quick, the converter, server side code needs to be updated. Maybe licensing requirements or laws might need updating.

If the developers released all they did afterwards, you'd be amazed.

If it is not just changing the limit check, it is badly designed. There should not be any hardcoded limits anywhere else.

 

[francbecerra]

They shouldn't count towards the song limit and yes, Apple's services can be very frustrating when they don't work as advertised.

Now the two purchased tracks say 'matched' on them. That's better than 'exceeded limit', I guess. I let my subscription lapse a couple weeks ago. Does anyone have an idea of when libraries will no longer show iTunes cloud statuses after a subscription expires? I am unable to download or play tracks off the cloud already, but I'm still seeing the statuses on my iTunes.

Visually, it appears that iTunes Match is still doing its thing in my library. I'm still getting 'exceeded limit' pop ups every once in a while (so my library is still matching). It's very odd.

 

[francbecerra]

FYI. All my tracks are over 25k are matching and uploading, which leaves me wondering if Apple quietly increased the limit. Anyone else experiencing the same thing? I've officially combined my two libraries and I'm no longer getting the 'exceeded limit' status on all tracks over 25k. I still don't want to renew my membership until I get confirmation. I called Apple today to confirm, but they wouldn't confirm or deny the increase. They simply said that it means all my music is in the cloud and the rep gave me a case number.

 

[milo]

You're seeing that on an expired account? I'd be skeptical until someone with an active account confirms it.

 

[francbecerra]

You're seeing that on an expired account? I'd be skeptical until someone with an active account confirms it.

Of course I'm skeptical. That's why I'm asking the forum.

Here's the first confirmation:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...tunes-match-25-000-song-limit-lifted.1942484/

 

[riverfreak]

Of course I'm skeptical. That's why I'm asking the forum.

Here's the first confirmation:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...tunes-match-25-000-song-limit-lifted.1942484/

56k songs. None matched or uploaded not even the first 25k, still getting the "exceeded limit" warning.

 

[MRU]

My iTunes Match subscription just renewed and adding a number of albums bought today, they are now uploading/matching without issue or the nag screen.

Never got the 25k limit message that has been nagging me for a couple of weeks now.

Happy days if it has increased on the quiet.

 

[riverfreak]

Happy news indeed!

Turns out I have about 62k songs in my library. AM watched 46k of them and is uploading the remaining 15k.

My library is backed up because I'm leery of library chaos. It drives me slightly insane that artists are sorted by first name. First name? Have these people never been in a record store (or a library for that matter)?

Still, I'm psyched to have all my music across all my devices.

 

[francbecerra]

I'm pretty confident that Apple increased the limit so I bit the bullet and renewed my subscription last night and all my songs are uploading/matching. There's no more skepticism from me. The increase has taken effect on my account.

 

[milo]

It drives me slightly insane that artists are sorted by first name.

I see your point but it could be tricky for software to consistently get right the difference between
Brown, James
Costello, Elvis

and

Heads, Talking
Underground, Velvet

It could work if the user had the option to choose between the two but then some people may complain that's too much work.

 

[navaira]

I had enough problems chasing iTunes files tagged
"Kylie Minogue"
"Kylie Minogue"
"Kylie Minogue "
...all split into different artists because one day in the past some idiot typed in the Gracenote info wrong. And while they were at it, they made sure all four remixes on the CD singles are just called "On A Night Like This" because who would ever need to know what they are listening to.

As for the problem @milo mentioned this might be done using a database (of course you'll never get all artists in there but 99% should be possible). Then again if this database was as good as Gracenote I'd end up with Order, New and Lovers, Army Of so better not

 

[jimthing]

I don't trust the iTunes Match service anymore, that's the fundamental problem. Too many times it deleted my own PRIVATE metadata. Until that changes, no renewal for me, I'm afraid.

 

[francbecerra]

I don't trust the iTunes Match service anymore, that's the fundamental problem. Too many times it deleted my own PRIVATE metadata. Until that changes, no renewal for me, I'm afraid.

It recently deleted some of my album artwork that I had spent time cultivating. It really annoys me how whenever I try to switch album artwork, it reverts to the old artwork even though I asked iTunes to change the artwork. The Cloud can be annoying sometimes.

 

[riverfreak]

I see your point but it could be tricky for software to consistently get right the difference between
Brown, James
Costello, Elvis

and

Heads, Talking
Underground, Velvet

It could work if the user had the option to choose between the two but then some people may complain that's too much work.

True.

But if a user has stored artists name as "Last, First" in metadata that should be preserved.

Otherwise, the ID3 tags should include a sort field. (I believe it does, yes?) with by that field with a checkbox in preferences.

 

[riverfreak]

I had enough problems chasing iTunes files tagged
"Kylie Minogue"
"Kylie Minogue"
"Kylie Minogue "
...all split into different artists because one day in the past some idiot typed in the Gracenote info wrong. And while they were at it, they made sure all four remixes on the CD singles are just called "On A Night Like This" because who would ever need to know what they are listening to.

As for the problem @milo mentioned this might be done using a database (of course you'll never get all artists in there but 99% should be possible). Then again if this database was as good as Gracenote I'd end up with Order, New and Lovers, Army Of so better not

Back when I was actively ripping and curating my library -- much of it pre-online music DB days -- I would use the CDDB lookup as a starting point.

I would then meticulously correct all the tracks for spelling, capitalization, punctuation, album art, and finally genre. Seeing the entries in CDDB made it pretty clear most people don't have attention to detail.

I guess all that work is going out the window if I use AM?

 

[riverfreak]

Actually there IS a "sort as" field for artists, it just isn't used on Apple Music. Because, you know, well it would take an unpaid competent intern like one year to organize the meta information for the entire catalog and just be done with it once and for all. Too much expense to bear.