Does it explain why 11 is greater than 100 ?
Cause if so i would go ahead and suggest the manual apply for the noble price !
No, it does not explain.
Sequential numbering is not needed in my work normally. In commercial FX libraries numbering is not important and in my own made fx there is almost never numbers above 9. If it goes over nine it is time to change name or metadata.
But, if for some reason I make or have audiofiles where sequential numbering is important I always make 1 to be 001, 2 to 002 etc to avoid problems you describing. This metod works no matter where I go and with what ever DAW I work with…
just my 2 cents
I am VERY anal about leading 0’s, and I am the first one to admit that there are places in our beloved DAW where leading 0’s SHOULD be “implemented”.
However … there is no software which will sort numbers correctly when they are not preceeded by leading 0’s.
So the problem lies with the person/software who has injected these numbers into the metadata in the first place.
If in this case, this is Nuendo, then I am with you. It’s stupid.
If it’s not Nuendo, then Nuendo can’t possibly solve that problem, unless you give the application the “freedom” to change whatever it feels like changing; be it metadata or file naming/numbering.
Unless I totaly misunderstood the problem …
Fredo
And while we’re on the topic of problems with the media bay.
The nightmare I am having is that it constantly misses characters I type on the keyboard and that it can be super slow when using a database on the fx drive.
Nobel Prize 
Fredo is correct.
Padding with zeros is the way to go.
It is difficult, but not impossible, to produce a sort based on number values rather than the linier occurrence of numeric digits and even harder if you add in alphabetical characters as well. It can also be long-winded to do on-the-fly.
11, of course, is not greater than 100, in a numerical world. But when sorting characters and numbers, unfortunately, it is.
Here’s why.
How do you sort anything, for example filenames? Or names in a phonebook? By comparing them. Letter by letter.
A comes first, then B, then C.
When you have files like A.wav B.wav C.wav, it’s clear you’ll get a proper list.
How would you sort aa, ab, ac, ba, bb, bc, ca, cb, cc?
Right, first everything that starts with A. If multiple files have the same first letter, then you go to the next letter and compare those.
There are 3 items with a as starting letter. aa, ab, ac.
Here, you compare the second letter to get the correct order.
With numbers, it now gets complicated. Because what works in a phonebook with names (there are no people with numbers in their names) does not work with filenames that contain numbers.
Let’s look at a1, a2, a3…a9, a10, a11, a12.
There are 12 items in that list.
All start with a.
The computer advances to the second character to continue sorting there.
Because 1 comes before 2, it starts with a1.
There are 4 items(!!) with a1: a1, a10, a11 and a12.
These 4 items are going to be sorted. a1 is the first, as it has no characters following it. Sorting of a1 is finished.
Then there are 3 items with a1-something: a10, a11, and a12.
These are sorted a10, a11, a12, obviously.
And that’s our list. All of those have 1 at the second position.
a1
a10
a11
a12
That’s the problem. If you want to have a proper sorting, you absolutely need to have leading 0 to fill up for the maximum positions of numbers you have in your files. If you have 15 files, you need to start numbering with 01, 02, 03, 04, 05…15.
If you have 452 files, you need 3 positions. 001, 002, 003…010…097…143…452
The computer cannot understand how Effect-268_Reel-26_Scene-3 should be sorted, that there are logical groups like Effects, Reels, Scenes. It just compares position by position.
Hope that helps.
True, that explains why Nuendo behaves like it does. (and why we should all use leading zeros)
But is it intelligent behaviour that could be changed/improved?
I can live with the strange sorting, but I would not mind Nuendo interpreting the strings like humans do.
Well, the Apple Finder and Windows Explorer do sort the human way, for what it’s worth.
Apparently you are correct. Didn’t realize that.
I have to think that thru if it would work with more complex metadata.
Because this is a clear case of software that “interprets” some things in its own way.
Granted, that’s the way our brain want things to happen, because it is logical to us, human beings.
Dunno if that would work for stuff (numbers) that don’t have a relation which numerical sorting.
But good point.
Fredo
My concern has for a while been a sub-par search engine. In my opinion there needs to be a way to better exclude/include what one needs to see in search results. But that’s a request that’s many years old so I doubt they’ll ever improve that, despite Nuendo being a post app in which MediaBay functions as an SFX database/manager.
IMO it would be helpful if Media Bay did the same.
Fredo,
If not the best we can’t argue that Sound Device are some of the best recording equiment you find on the field for cinema and documentary.
they increment takes from 0 to infinite (i guess… never had such a poop actor i had to go that far… but pretty close)
They use no leading 0’s and everything works fine when sorting by takes. Windows explorer sorts correctly without xtra 0’s (fill so shame to have windows explorer as an exemple for anything). Even my little desktop foobar player does it right for “takes”… BPM… name it.
To make it simple only nuendo doesn’t. would love to see how protools does it. Used it for years never thought about it beeing an issue.
The solution is not to add 00 in front. It is for the developers of nuendo to fix that. Many things make sense in the computer world because binary or hexadecimal or whatever. But than it takes a good developer to improve the interface for the human to use it. Else you would be working with codes of 001010111010… because that’s what digital sound is made of ? no you want a nice sinusoïde cause it makes sense in your human brain.
I record shots and takes. No matter if I use Aaton Cantar, SD or Zoom or what ever.
This way I very rarely go over 9 takes…
Simple answer is…
Using a sufficient number of leading zeros to accommodate the max number of items that will eventually be used is a fact of life for computer users. It should be second nature.
The issue here, as Fredo has pointed out, is not how Nuendo handles numbers. The fault belongs to the person who failed to use leading zeros in their work.
Yeah. For each string the program would have to evaluate the numeric characters as integers i.e., 268 = 200+60+8, rather than the characters 2, followed by 6, followed by 8.
I suppose that’s the method Win and Mac OS file sorting uses…
It’s a common assumption but not completely true. Please read the posts above about sorting in Explorer and Finder. There’s no reason why Nuendo could not use the same sorting technique.
Wow, hold it. It NEVER is that easy.
While there is a way to sort single numbers, I am not sure if this will work with compelex names.
Here’s just one example of two files I just pulled out of my SFX Library.
HKAP2 Seq1.25_MKH 8020_Whoosh 6_08 Surround
HKAP2 Seq1.25_KMR82_Whoosh 7_01 Surround
Let the sorting begin.
Fredo
Exactly
who needs to sort complex names ?
i was talking about “takes” metadata since the begining.
I’m surprise how far this discussion went. Is it that strange to say 11 is smaller than 100 and that no matter what programming complexity it involves i don’t give a F and want it sorted in a correct order by a software i bought almost 2k€ just like all other softwares i use !
Ok let me show you how dumb this is another way.
take nuendo. Create markers… say 11 of them. now open your marker window and sort them by “ID” what do you see ?
Do you need to add a 0 in front af all your markers manually so they sort right ? NO because adding 0’s is dumb and there’s no need to do it because nuendo sorts them correctly HERE. So why not on the METADATA like “take” ? Because it’s an incorrect programmation and certainly not me or who ever using it failing to add 0’s.
I don’t think anyone is defending the fact that it works like this, they are just saying that it’s okay for them. As to the sorting being wrong, I explained why, it’s not a programming error, it’s a missing feature, so ask for the feature, but please lighten up on calling the way it works dumb, or incorrect programming. If I were a software developer I would avoid participating on forums due to this way of speaking.