My sets most of the time were either absurdly weird and non-fitting, or dead-boring (for the audience) – hawtin, x-103, tikiman, like a tim to name a few [emoji41]
But my challenge is how to sort the classic… haha
But my challenge is how to sort the classic… haha
i organized my classical records by the birthday of the composer
so its nice overview from early monophonic choral music, polyphonic, medieval,
early renaissance, mainly i have baroque, and viennese classicism, not much romantics,
very little modern
if many composers are on the lp, i still place it under first on the list
otherwise you will have many categories, i have one, chronology
so its nice overview from early monophonic choral music, polyphonic, medieval,
early renaissance, mainly i have baroque, and viennese classicism, not much romantics,
very little modern
if many composers are on the lp, i still place it under first on the list
otherwise you will have many categories, i have one, chronology
Last edited:
I like that method too
I suppose you‘re being quite strict since sorting is sorting and 31.12.1000 < 1.1.1001…
I suppose you‘re being quite strict since sorting is sorting and 31.12.1000 < 1.1.1001…
I gathered them in type. Like Symphonies, Choir, String quartets etc. I learned how the back looked for a certain record. That strategy was carried over to my CD collection (+1k) and worked there also. Now, as I have ripped all of them to disk, I use search. I don't know - maybe was the old access times lower 😉
//
//
When it comes to rock music, that is strictly alphabetical based on the groups name.
Ripping all that to disks would take too long...
Ripping all that to disks would take too long...
A good memory helps a lot...
My way of sorting them is, just to remember where I placed them last.
I do not have lots of records approximately 750 or may a few more or less, never actually counted these at home.. But I have photographed and catalogued on my computer and mobile phone.. So I know or at least can check what Music I have at home.
There are 4 different stashes *of course standing upwards* for the ones used most and than less and less and seldom.. The ones I do not listen too *Approximately 200* is a separate Place, and that works well, because there is no one else who mixes them up. My wife she does not even touch the records, nor the CD's..
In the Shop where I associated with, we have about between 50'000 - 100'000 Records on two floors.. There these are sorted by the kind of Music, and then by Artists..
Special place for the Expensive ones, where prices exceed 100USD / Record and there are several. another special place for the 5LP's for 10Dollars and so on.. easy to find any thing when in stock for everybody
Happy Weekend..
My way of sorting them is, just to remember where I placed them last.
I do not have lots of records approximately 750 or may a few more or less, never actually counted these at home.. But I have photographed and catalogued on my computer and mobile phone.. So I know or at least can check what Music I have at home.
There are 4 different stashes *of course standing upwards* for the ones used most and than less and less and seldom.. The ones I do not listen too *Approximately 200* is a separate Place, and that works well, because there is no one else who mixes them up. My wife she does not even touch the records, nor the CD's..
In the Shop where I associated with, we have about between 50'000 - 100'000 Records on two floors.. There these are sorted by the kind of Music, and then by Artists..
Special place for the Expensive ones, where prices exceed 100USD / Record and there are several. another special place for the 5LP's for 10Dollars and so on.. easy to find any thing when in stock for everybody
Happy Weekend..
I organise my records according to how I would think of the record to find it.
So in general it would be by composer. If it's a compilation with several composers, I would file it under the composer of the composition that's most salient to me on the record. There are some primary instruments, artists and conductors that I will file together in sub-groups. And some genres of classical music that I have a few record of that will be filed together.
It makes sense to me, and I can find the record I want to find. And that's all that matters to me.
So in general it would be by composer. If it's a compilation with several composers, I would file it under the composer of the composition that's most salient to me on the record. There are some primary instruments, artists and conductors that I will file together in sub-groups. And some genres of classical music that I have a few record of that will be filed together.
It makes sense to me, and I can find the record I want to find. And that's all that matters to me.
Within the general heading of its genre (classical, jazz, rock etc.) it's by the reason for keeping the record. If it's the composer , then that. If it's the artist, then that. If the instrument , then that. etc etc.
Will following method work ?
Since people get mood to listen to a particular 'form of music'
1) Make main sections depending on 'Form of music'
Example |Opera|ORCHESTRA|Symphony|
2) The sub division in above main section would be alphabetically arranged composer or performing artist.
3) If any further arrangement needed make sub-sub division .
4) Idea is to follow a pattern in each category to easily access <Music form><Artist><Particular piece>
I understand there would be lots of types of music which would be hard to categorize. But a consistent patern would make things easier.
I am clueless about various classical music so dont go by names I have typed.
Regards
Since people get mood to listen to a particular 'form of music'
1) Make main sections depending on 'Form of music'
Example |Opera|ORCHESTRA|Symphony|
2) The sub division in above main section would be alphabetically arranged composer or performing artist.
3) If any further arrangement needed make sub-sub division .
4) Idea is to follow a pattern in each category to easily access <Music form><Artist><Particular piece>
I understand there would be lots of types of music which would be hard to categorize. But a consistent patern would make things easier.
I am clueless about various classical music so dont go by names I have typed.
Do you mean 4 million records ? Thats lots of records 🙂
Regards
My vinyl-records collection is actually unfortunately only 4 meters, not 4 millions (which would amount to approx. 200 km) 😀
Concluding from all the suggestions/methods used it seems to me that (because classic records are so diverse) the most simple order seems to be the best… for deep dives into buried information (like where an interpret appeared etc.), a good database seems the best one can get.
I often think of those relation-visualisations as stunningly great tools...
linked-jazz
or this one, too: Ishkur
and of course music-map
Concluding from all the suggestions/methods used it seems to me that (because classic records are so diverse) the most simple order seems to be the best… for deep dives into buried information (like where an interpret appeared etc.), a good database seems the best one can get.
I often think of those relation-visualisations as stunningly great tools...
linked-jazz
or this one, too: Ishkur
and of course music-map
Last edited:
... can't believe nobody mentioned yet Rob's method, from "High Fidelity" !
maybe because he's not much into classical music?
(sorry, this won't necessarily help you much, but that novel can be a fun reading - the author is Nick Hornby, of course)
_
maybe because he's not much into classical music?
(sorry, this won't necessarily help you much, but that novel can be a fun reading - the author is Nick Hornby, of course)
_
yeah, I didn't want to spoil it, for those who were to read the novel...
mine is really only a joke, and I don't want to reveal it, since it is somehow the "resolution" of that story.
The novel is about the midlife/sentimental crisis of the owner of a used-vinyls shop; to put order in his life, our anti-hero undertakes to reorganize his entire, gigantic records collection...
The method he ends up chosing is very personal to him, so as I said it wouldn't help very much (in fact it would hardly apply to the case of audiofeline...)
_
ahh. OK.
One wouldn't know so I asked. A friend here had around 5000 records probably more on last count few years back. He moved to new bigger home (Not because of records mind you 🙂).
I have probably 100 arrranged alphabetically which I play occasionally.
Regards
Classical music, I order by composer, composer of the main work or first composer listed if there are equal works. CDs with lots of short works, such as aria compilations, get filed under "various". Other genres are kept together alphabetically by artist.
When I had lots of cassette tapes I used to number them and keep a card index file alphabetically by composer for each classical work and alphabetically by artist for everything else.
I rip all my classical CDs and change the tags so that each work becomes an album, even the short pieces with only one movement, that makes file structure much easier. I tried out a Plex server one time, it changed all my carefully written tags and put the cds back together. That was incredibly annoying.
When I had lots of cassette tapes I used to number them and keep a card index file alphabetically by composer for each classical work and alphabetically by artist for everything else.
I rip all my classical CDs and change the tags so that each work becomes an album, even the short pieces with only one movement, that makes file structure much easier. I tried out a Plex server one time, it changed all my carefully written tags and put the cds back together. That was incredibly annoying.