|
Posted by Romy the Cat on
11-26-2017
|
Yesterday we with whole family were trying to reorganize our
CD collection. The lover did move the CD alphabetically but we did not check if
they know the alphabet. Anyhow, it was mess now and we decided to sort it out.
I think it take take a few other weekends. Yesterday I was moving the CDs and commanded
the small kids. Amy was typing the composer’s names for the labels, God, the
woman can do it with no spell checker! Thomas was running and destroying everything
begging us to give him for adaption. Anyhow. We did what we planned for the
first day.
I wonder if any of you can recommend any better organization
techniques for off the wall CDs. I use the following logic for my CDs organization
(I use different logic for LPs):
1)
By composers alphabetically
2)
Big composers have concertos, ballets or chamber
and some other sub-sections
3)
Pianists alphabetically by musicians’ name
4)
Violinist alphabetically by musicians’ name
5)
Violists alphabetically by musicians’ name
6)
Chamber, by groups name
7)
Early music, by composer
8)
The rest of instrumentalists, alphabetically by instrument
name.
9)
Operas, by composers
10)
Singers crossover, by singer
11)
Conductors crossover, by conductor
There are many other sections but above takes the bulk of CD
partition. There are always some CDs that do not fit anywhere and I use my own preference
that I not always remember and it is a problem. If I have for instance a CD of Hollywood
String Quartet that plays Schumann and Brahms and I for instance feel that Schumann
play was very specials then I will put it to Schumann chamber, not to Brahms chamber
and not to Chamber section. Another CD of Hollywood String Quartet that do not
have any remarkable play (good luck to find the Hollywood Quartet with non-remarkable
play) I will put in Chamber section. So, as time goes by and if I am looking
for Hollywood play Brahms Piano Quartet No. 2, op 26, then I might not remember
that it was combined with Schumann and need to be looked in Schumann section. Probably
to be more discipline it has to be in Schumann section… but I so much want to
keep this CD as Schumann and NOT as Brahms. Again, it was juts “for instance” ….
Anyhow, if anyone has a good technique to resolve it then
let me know
|
|
|
|
Posted by xandcg on
11-26-2017
|
Hi.
The problem with albums with more than one composer could be solved placing them based on the first one what appears in the album name. Well, later could have the problem of not remembering which one appear first, but if you keep a catalog of your albums (IDK) it would be easier.
Cheers!
EDIT: Discogs allow you to easily create a database just by searching they metadata (what is huge and you can always add and/or correct something) and clicking in a button, and you can later export it in CSV format if you like.
EDIT_2: I think MusicBrainz even allow you to download they entire database, they use postgresql.
|
|
|
|
Posted by rowuk on
11-28-2017
|
The order does not matter if you have an accessible database. You can just randomly give them a catalog number and sort in the computer. It could also mean that you discover treasures that normally are not even on the radar. The degree of database maturity makes it insignificant if multiple composers or performers are on the disc. The database could also address mood and other states of mind and body.
I really like random.
|
|
|
|
Posted by decoud on
11-29-2017
|
|
The problem is that each record varies along more than one dimension - composer, performer, performance context, etc - whereas the physical organisation has at best two dimensions: column and row on the shelf. One solution is to apply a dimensionality reduction algorithm to the corpus -- e.g. tsne -- which will cluster similar records together, and then order them by the embedded number. Still needs a database to identify individual records, but their physical neighbours will then be kindred.
|
|