Getting organised...
- Thread starter julian2002
- Start date
Forget to mention the more obvious sub-division categorisation some classical fans also use: conductor, ensemble name and soloist.
Also, in my collection, solo band members are kept separate from their band's albums. So Mark Knopfler for me would be filled under K, and not under D for Dire Straits (some I have no doubt would also say that they should all be filed in the bin
).A question for the jazz-o's. How do you file certain solo artists who also had prominent careers in a lot of other different bands? People like say Oscar Peterson or Herbie Hancock for example.
Main (classical) collection mostly alphabetical by composer, with subdivisions within composer as symphonies, misc orch, concerti, instrumental, vocal/choral, operas. Side orders for organ, guitar, star-name vehicles and samplers. Different rack/sections for rock/pop (alphabetical by band), blues and jazz (random piles). Some day I intend to split the classical according to style (baroque, mainstream romantic, slavic, nordic, English, American, chamber, string orchestral - although in my case that's mainly English) - as I often feel "I fancy like some...." but then never get much beyond 'B'. If I do that though, I will need to set up a database for cross-filing problem discs (more than one composer is of course already a problem; is Howard Hanson American or Nordic; should Elgar's Intoduction and Allegro go under Strings or English).
bottleneck
talks a load of rubbish
personally..
I buy a new LP or CD and shove it on the end of the pile.
thats it!
well... alright, I try and keep albums by the same band together, but thats it.
I know where everything is 'cos I play them.
I buy a new LP or CD and shove it on the end of the pile.
thats it!
well... alright, I try and keep albums by the same band together, but thats it.
I know where everything is 'cos I play them.
wadia-miester
Mighty Rearranger
Just as the alpha's goes, when the good lady has finished with them, it's just a short spin on the carasell to replace em'. nice and easy. WM
For those few records, I don't need to put them in a specific oder. Anyway when the next guest comes the order is anyway rearranged.
... just like then when I had three lunatics a few weeks ago
I must say that I am very lucky that my wife doesn't touch my records.:buddies:
The problem are the kids: I still remember that day when coming in my room I saw 200 (?) LPs spread over the floor out of their innersleeves and covers.:bub: :gatling: :clint: :laser:
... just like then when I had three lunatics a few weeks ago
I must say that I am very lucky that my wife doesn't touch my records.:buddies:
The problem are the kids: I still remember that day when coming in my room I saw 200 (?) LPs spread over the floor out of their innersleeves and covers.:bub: :gatling: :clint: :laser:
SCIDB
Moderator
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 2,501
- Reaction score
- 2
Hi
For single artists, groups & bands, I place the CDs in alphabetical order (groupname or surname). All styles together. For multi cds by a particular artist, I place in chonological order, first with the studio albums then with the best of/greatest hits.
For Various artists cd albums, I place in alphabetical label order. For each label it then goes in chonological order.
For cd singles, these are done as per cd albums.
LPs are done again like cd albums & Cd various artists albums.
7" singles are done alphabetically.
12" (& 10") singles are sorted alphabetically but I also have them sorted by era. Pre 1980 & post 1980.
Box sets both vinyl & cd are just piled up.
Cassettes are just dumped in a few boxes.
Having said all the above I have records & cds piled up in mixed heaps allover the house.
SCIDB
For single artists, groups & bands, I place the CDs in alphabetical order (groupname or surname). All styles together. For multi cds by a particular artist, I place in chonological order, first with the studio albums then with the best of/greatest hits.
For Various artists cd albums, I place in alphabetical label order. For each label it then goes in chonological order.
For cd singles, these are done as per cd albums.
LPs are done again like cd albums & Cd various artists albums.
7" singles are done alphabetically.
12" (& 10") singles are sorted alphabetically but I also have them sorted by era. Pre 1980 & post 1980.
Box sets both vinyl & cd are just piled up.
Cassettes are just dumped in a few boxes.
Having said all the above I have records & cds piled up in mixed heaps allover the house.
SCIDB
soundzandpower
BBQ?
As a reggae collector the probs/choices increase.
Some titles are organised by the producer, others by the studio that they were recorded in, still others are arranged by their sub genre ie ska, rocksteady or dub and still others by artist. Oh and some are placed together because they are all on the same label.
Original copies are given pride of postional placment and any of the few reissues that I own are lumped thereafter.
Recent acquistions are lumped together until they've been played enough and then join the mainstream collection.
Then there's a small pile for sale!
Anything other than reggae is thrown together in a secondary pile.
I would recomend Catraxx as a good catoluging data base system.
Some titles are organised by the producer, others by the studio that they were recorded in, still others are arranged by their sub genre ie ska, rocksteady or dub and still others by artist. Oh and some are placed together because they are all on the same label.
Original copies are given pride of postional placment and any of the few reissues that I own are lumped thereafter.
Recent acquistions are lumped together until they've been played enough and then join the mainstream collection.
Then there's a small pile for sale!
Anything other than reggae is thrown together in a secondary pile.
I would recomend Catraxx as a good catoluging data base system.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 0
Samplers at the front by company, then compilations (e.g. with more than two artists), in date order (1100-2003) then the rest alphabetically by artist or composer with sub division by date
All neatly catalogued using Music Collector and exported to the web
Did I mention I used to be records manager before I retired.
All neatly catalogued using Music Collector and exported to the web
Did I mention I used to be records manager before I retired.
Originally posted by Tom Alves
Samplers at the front by company, then compilations (e.g. with more than two artists), in date order (1100-2003) then the rest alphabetically by artist or composer with sub division by date
All neatly catalogued using Music Collector and exported to the web
Did I mention I used to be records manager before I retired.
Tom
I thought I was organised using Davilex, but after looking at your collection I'm simply gobsmacked. It's amazing.
Mucho respect and murmours of "I'm not worthy"..........
Will
US and rest of the world ... that's a good one! Very NOW ;-)
Straight alphabetical for me, but I don't have that many CD's. I just listen to the same ones a lot!! If I did have a lot probably sort by genre and then broad alphabetical.
Straight alphabetical for me, but I don't have that many CD's. I just listen to the same ones a lot!! If I did have a lot probably sort by genre and then broad alphabetical.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 0
I see quite a few have organised by genre. I've never been able to do this successfully. The big three Classical, Jazz and Rock don't allow much scope but if you start subdividing then you get into all sorts of crossover problems especially when many bands / composers are deliberately blurring the difference between classical/jazz and jazz/rock. And then there's folk which blends with classical or jazz or pop and what about World Music
Speaking pendantically Classical really only refers to a period between 1760 and 1810, roughly 50 years.
Speaking pendantically Classical really only refers to a period between 1760 and 1810, roughly 50 years.
sideshowbob
Trisha
Somebody kill me now. I've just bought a copy of Music Collector thanks/curses to Tom. This is possibly the nerdiest thing I've ever done.
-- Ian
-- Ian
How many hi-fi fora are you registered on? How many posts have you made about thinks like tracking force/azimuth/anti-skating-gizmosOriginally posted by sideshowbob
This is possibly the nerdiest thing I've ever done.
? I doubt your latest purchase even comes close in the nerd-charts! Tom - no criticism, but we mostly gave up on our pedantry a while ago - no point trying to explain to these heathens differences between renaissance/baroque/pre-classical/classical/romantic/expressionist/nationalist(s)/serialist/minimalist etc. Just like I have no idea (or desire to find out) about happy-hard-core/gabba/intelligent d'n'b (I'm told there is such a thing
). Shame R'n'B means something totally different now though.I do find I have troubles filing some contemporary "classical" - e.g. Martland, Fitkin who are a good way towards jazz, and Adams' "I was looking at the ceiling...." is Broadway. (FWIW - if the CD is primarily a band showcase it would go in jazz (or whatever), and if it's primarily a composer showcase it goes in classical). And where should film music go (no, "in the bin" not an allowed answer) - ah not a problem I don't yet have any (although may get that RVW "Scott of the Antarctic", and Korngold's "Sea Hawk"). At present they just go in the classical section as I don't really have a serious need for an alternative.
Records manager, please explain, sir?Originally posted by Tom Alves
Samplers at the front by company, then compilations (e.g. with more than two artists), in date order (1100-2003) then the rest alphabetically by artist or composer with sub division by date
All neatly catalogued using Music Collector and exported to the web
Did I mention I used to be records manager before I retired.
Very impressive cataloging system there, by the way.
Must have taken ages to do the initial data input? Where did you get the pictures from for the front and back cover art work for some of the sleeves?Good point Graham, of course "classical", as in classical music, is strictly speaking refers to a specific period in western art history, where all things in art can be said to be influenced by a particular style or form attributable to that period. But really in everyday general use, "classical music" is used as a catch-all term, so why don't we have something more appropriate and less ambiguous?
In that case, would Prokofiev's 1st Symphony ("The Classical") be filed under 20th centuary, as Prokofiev was alive in the 20th centuary, or filed under classical because of its neo-classical outlook?
I think a similar comparison can be made with the term "Rock'n'Roll" music. Strictly speaking, surely this refers to a specific type of music that starting appearing and became popular in the 1950's and early 1960's which is generally played by a 4 piece band consisting of drums, bass, and lead and rhythm guitar, and usually influenced by blues and 12 bar blues patterns? Again, this term is used as a catch all by some to classify any music that can be said to be dervied from this form, even contempoary heavy metal/heavy rock (but not nu-metal
) styles.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 0
Records manager? Where to start. It has nothing to do LPs & CDs. My job was to create systems to manage the creation, use, loan and storage of paper and electronic documents, deeds & files. As we had over nine miles of the stuff dating back some 250 years which hadn't ever been catalogued at a basic level let alone at ISAD(G) and new material was being created electronically with out any thought for the future you can see it was an uphill struggle. I'm out of there. Yee ha.
My cataloguing. Hmm. Only half complete. The album covers, front and back are all scanned by hand. The LP covers have to be stitched together because the scanner is only A4 size.
Time, a nightmare. I spent several years gathereing the initial data then had to abandon it when I retired. Ha. Fortunately I salvaged the text but not the structure. The second good thing is that Music Collector can be built quite quickly because it interogates the cd when it's in the PC and creates and entry for it. Then all I had to do was copy the additional information into the record and build the LP entries from scratch. This time it's only taken seven months so far and I am about two thirds of the way through.
Gives me something to do
My cataloguing. Hmm. Only half complete. The album covers, front and back are all scanned by hand. The LP covers have to be stitched together because the scanner is only A4 size.
Time, a nightmare. I spent several years gathereing the initial data then had to abandon it when I retired. Ha. Fortunately I salvaged the text but not the structure. The second good thing is that Music Collector can be built quite quickly because it interogates the cd when it's in the PC and creates and entry for it. Then all I had to do was copy the additional information into the record and build the LP entries from scratch. This time it's only taken seven months so far and I am about two thirds of the way through.
Gives me something to do
MO!
MOnkey`ead!
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 4,881
- Reaction score
- 1
Originally posted by GrahamN
Just like I have no idea (or desire to find out) about happy-hard-core/gabba/intelligent d'n'b (I'm told there is such a thing
Hardcore and gabba: file under bin.
Intelligent D'n'B: will eventualy need a dedicated shelf once you realise how good it is! :JOEL:
sideshowbob
Trisha
Yes, it's quite good. I'm amazed at how complete the CDDB entries are. It's found nearly everything I've put in so far, which is pretty good considering how obscure some of it is.
I've done 100 CDs in a couple of hours (no cover scans, won't bother with that). Only another few thousand to go. And then the vinyl. Time to give up for the day I think.
I like the idea of exporting it as text and dumping it on a PDA, that way I won't end up buying the same thing twice (that's the plan, anyway).
It also seems a good way of creating a database of things you haven't got, but want. (That list is far too big in my case to be stored in my feeble brain.)
[Edited to add]
In case anyone's interested, I've got this far:
Some records
-- Ian (obviously should have been a librarian)
Last edited by a moderator:
