import lyrics from v6 to v7

Sep 28 (8 months ago)
Anthony Mchalski wrote
switching from v6 on a laptop to v7 on a tower and needing to import lyrics from the laptop v6 to the tower v7.
Reply
15 Answers
Sep 30 (8 months ago)
David May agent wrote
I would be happy to help you. You can use this article for that: https://support.mediashout.com/503927-Importing-MediaShout-4-5-and-6-Song-Library-into-MediaShout-7

Let us know if you need more help.
Oct 28 (7 months ago)
Jan Mangold wrote
This link brought me back to this page.
Oct 29 (7 months ago)
David May agent wrote
I apologize for any confusion. Were you able to access the article with the steps?
Dec 08 (5 months ago)
Ogbchurchmedia wrote
That does not seem to bring over the images and title that are associated with each song.
Dec 09 (5 months ago)
David May agent wrote
I would be happy to help you every way possible. Unfortunately that is correct, the backgrounds associated with songs would need to be reassigned once in the MediaShout 7 library- but it will bring over the text content. Version 7 doesn't use "title pages" so you may need to recreate those as well if you currently utilize them as a part of your service look. I'm so sorry for the inconvenience there!
Dec 15 (5 months ago)
Ogbchurchmedia wrote
Oh my that is a major problem, when will that be fixed?! That needs to be converted.
Dec 17 (5 months ago)
David May agent wrote
Unfortunately it's not a matter of something being broken/fixed- it's just that the technology is so much newer/different that we can't use the old format to bring in background selections from existing libraries. We've found the most important part is the text content of the lyrics, since background selections are easily changed and usually updated pretty often. We do hope to add a feature to allow a user to setup a title page and maybe when that happens, you'll be able to set that preference on import. Another factor is, we are working on an "import" tool for old V5/V6 scripts, to open those (backgrounds and all) within MediaShout 7. When that comes around, you'd at least have a pretty good option for importing smaller batches of songs and other cues into MediaShout 7 that way.
Dec 18 (5 months ago)
Ogbchurchmedia wrote
I am glad that you are moving towards a better conversion. I have been a software developer for over 20 years and I know that it hard to rewrite primary functionality and make it work with or convert legacy data. But when it comes to your users content creation you must provide a path for them to use it. Your users have spent many hours in creating this content tuning it to their ministry's needs. To throw it out for the sake of "better code" is short sighted and self centered. It would have been better for you to leave in your old code than to throw out your users content. It would be like Microsoft Word importing old word documents throwing out images, fonts , formatting and colors. For those who spent a lot of time creating that, it would be a great disappointment.
Dec 19 (5 months ago)
David May agent wrote
We totally understand and are doing our best to facilitate this as much as possible. As a developer, it may mean something to you that we moved completely away from C++ program language into another language on .NET framework. It wasn't just beneficial for our development program-- it was the best decision for the entire platform and users going forward. It just wouldn't have been beneficial to create an environment that was bound to the same limitations of the old framework because it was getting so outdated. The old environment was affecting the integrity of user data and program compatibility for the future. While there was no great time for a complete shift like that, it was as good a time as ever to get up to speed so users would have a more future proof platform going forward. And we are seeing some success in the conversion of content with the import tool we hope to release soon. But the challenge has been not only getting content imported where you can just show it, but instead to import in a way where it retains the features it should have as far as editing, storing in the new library etc. As for most users, it wouldn't be valuable to have just a watered down version of their content that they couldn't even modify going forward, but they needed something that actually is able to be built upon for future content. That is why at first it's been ultimately better to recreate content in the new environment as a whole-- but with that said, we're getting close to having at least something available!
Dec 29 (5 months ago)
Ogbchurchmedia wrote
Moving to .NET (C# perhaps) is certainly a worthwhile task, especially if you are dropping windows forms to go to Windows Presentation Foundation. How soon will you have this conversion done?
Dec 30 (5 months ago)
David May agent wrote
You're over my head on those particular components (I'm not a developer or part of that team), but to clarify- Version 7 is already built on .NET and does NOT use C++ components like Version 6 and previous versions did. That's why we're having to recreate or rethink a lot of original features from the older versions. Some we are implementing back in new ways, and some we are recreating as they were, and some are not available at all due to lack of usefulness for the majority of users, etc.
Dec 31 (5 months ago)
Wesley Berger wrote
My question here is the same question I have overall: Why would you even release a software if you're still working on implementing most of the useful features from the previous version?
Jan 02 (4 months ago)
David May agent wrote
I'd be happy to provide some perspective here. While I hear what you're saying and can see why you're coming to that conclusion, we strongly disagree that the software lacks "most of the useful features" from the previous version. It's only little things here and there that were very specific to some workflows. The bread and butter of what MediaShout has always done is there, and improved in many ways.

We are a very small ministry based company, so unfortunately, we did not have unlimited time or funds for development, so this was the most prudent way of releasing the new version and getting it into the hands of users who wanted to adopt it (because it already meets their needs), and then also be able to follow up with a quick round of updates for more specific features that some users would prefer to wait on before upgrading. In order to accelerate the development of those "wishlist" features that were more in the "non-essential" category, we needed to get the product out there for the ones it would immediately benefit (and even brand new users).

While it isn't the most ideal, and honestly some of the more important features we hoped to have earlier are taking more time than expected, the product is in a very good place in its own right in both performance and features, especially after this most recent update. We have focused on stability, simplicity, and performance above all. We built this version from the ground up on more modern code so nothing was carried forward from the past, as the older stuff being brought forward was the cause of many pain points for both our team and customers. Now we have an exciting platform to go further than we've ever been able to go, and long into the future for more modern systems and capabilities.

We'd encourage users to try the software out and see all the benefits. For many, the features they need are there and they'll absolutely love it! The workflow is streamlined and provides a very intuitive new way of doing many things. But for those who are waiting on a certain feature from an older version, etc. they are always welcome to wait to update. We'll happily reset our free trial for anyone who needs to check it out multiple times before deciding on a purchase!
Jan 18 (4 months ago)
Erin wrote
I too am a software developer and can understand the challenges. I do have issues with some of the design decisions that have been made.

- The minimal content that is brought over in the import is one of them - in addition to the background and formatting, I didn't see that it brought over the playorder either.
- Even if I create a new lyric the playorder doesn't appear to let me use the same verse/chorus multiple times in a way that they're "linked" so that if I make a change in the Chorus it shows up in every chorus.
- I also found that some of the fields that are part of the lyric in MS6 aren't available in MS7, for instance I used the Hymnal page property.
- I also don't see a way in to group, tag, or add notes to a cue in the library. I have many copies of the same song and it would be helpful to have some way to identify the difference in the library.
- I also haven't figured out what the value of having two places to find my lyrics - the Lyric library and the Cues library.

I feel fortunate that I didn't specifically purchase MS7 - we needed a computer upgrade and purchased a new computer from MS which came with MS7. Because of that I don't feel pressured to use MS7, I continue to use MS6 until I see that it has the features that will make transitioning worthwhile and less painful.
Jan 20 (4 months ago)
David May agent wrote
Hey Erin! Thanks for your thoughts. I'm totally with you. Just to speak into some of these--

We do desire more of the formatting to be brought over for the songs on an import from older versions. The big challenge is the database used to live in a Microsoft Access database, and now it is just a JSON file. A lof of the nuances didn't really translate. But we're working on tools to cope with that (for instance, a tool to import scripts from v6 to v7, which could in turn result in you being able to import any cue like a song and then save to your cues library with formatting, background, etc.).

Regarding a change to one chorus affecting all the others, we do ultimately want that, but it's interesting because a good amount of users want the opposite and are happy that it is different in this version. So I'm not sure what will be the winner or how it will play out. If you change a Chorus in the lyric window (lyric database), it will affect all that are inserted. But if you change it after you get it into your script, you're just changing it on a one page at a time basis. At least currently.

I'm with you on the hymnal page. It's honestly just a lot more simplified in 7. They didn't try to build out some of the stuff that was less frequently used and often caused database issues. I'm so sorry for the inconvenience there.

It may be good as a feature request to add fields for notes, etc. You can put songs into a "folder" now but that's the most similar thing. I'd say most of the time you could put the info you need in the title itself though, like "Yes and Amen (Tomlin)" or "Yes and Amen (McClarney)."

I agree with you it's a little confusing to have two places for lyrics to be found. The idea behind it is that your lyric library (accessed on the insert lyric window) is just a place to manage the raw text database of lyrics and pull in songs from SongSelect. The Cues Library is where you store any cue (including songs) with all formatting, background, etc.). But we are trying to think that through and maybe offer a way to reconcile lyrics from a script or the cues library back to the lyric database at least with the new play order or template once we get templates in.

I'm glad you were able to get your copy of V7 as a part of the bundle and sit on it until you are comfortable moving up. There are many great benefits already, but some things could mature a little bit if you want them to be more like versions in the past. For now, the main benefits of 7 are its streamlined simplicity and ease of use to accomplish the basics.