EPTThe files, however, are scattered randomly throughout my computer.
How do you organize your music library? - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Comeh
United States18919 Posts
The files, however, are scattered randomly throughout my computer. | ||
|
Ecael
United States6703 Posts
On September 17 2009 14:22 Jawa~ wrote: I have 100ish GB, I have it all organized by Artist / then whatever the album folder is. I am not anal about sorting, but very anal about having things in the album sorted by the correct track number. I hate when I have albums with the tracks sorted alphabetically, ruins the album experience! I also have a folder where all my P2P downloads go before I sort them. It's kind of a rotating "new music" folder I have one too, a disaster in itself, can't keep speed of listening and filtering out crap to be nearly on par to download. | ||
|
Wala.Revolution
7584 Posts
I am quite OCD about my organization so I organize both by tagging and manually filepath. Problem is some classical pieces have ridiculous long names and I have to use '...' at end to denote that it was cut short. Also I find it hard that windows keep re-ordering music alphabetically because I don't want to put #. in front even though I uncheck 'by name' and 'auto-arrange'. Took me hours -_- | ||
|
intruding
157 Posts
| ||
|
probu
Canada36 Posts
1. Remove the songs you don't actually listen to. So many people keep every song they get their hands on. If you only really listen to a couple songs from a particular album, store the rest elsewhere. You don't have to delete it (some people are virtual pack rats) but you can archive it away from your more common files. 2. Use archival software like iTunes (if you have an ipod/iphone) or Foobar (if you don't have an ipod/iphone) that allows you to tag any bit of song information, from duration to album or genre, and fill in as much information as possible. iTunes even has a section for comments about a particular song/group of songs, which can later be used as search criteria. I'll tag songs with the time I'd play them, like "party" or "studying" or "dinner music" so I can sort them by those keywords later. When you use a software organizer you can sort and search for your music in any way you want. One drawback to large music libraries is loading time, for which you can separate your music into a broad category, perhaps by genre, in folders on, say, an external hard drive. Without organizing software you can still keep your songs ordered, but access becomes much more difficult when you can't search/sort/group with a single click. | ||
|
Meta
United States6228 Posts
 It's actually pretty annoying. | ||
|
doktorLucifer
United States855 Posts
How reliable are the playcount statistics in foobar? This might sound silly, since we're talking about computers, but I've found that my various playlists/playcount stats/song ratings don't store correctly.. or in a weird way on Winamp. Winamp also has my main 120GB of music indexed in the library, but it doesn't store "most played" information correctly (or any information correctly, for that matter. ~_~) | ||
|
Wala.Revolution
7584 Posts
On September 17 2009 15:38 Meta wrote: I had a single folder holding over 2000+ songs. Nowadays when I try to access it, explorer.exe stops responding. So I had to make a new folder It's actually pretty annoying. What is considered a folder? Like a folder in desktop? Does that mean you need to seperate music into more folder in desktop? | ||
|
intruding
157 Posts
| ||
|
doktorLucifer
United States855 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
Everything else will be perfectly the same as listed above. It'll scan your hard drive when it firsts installs and create a database of everything that can be reordered/tagged/etc. It's not as lightweight as Foobar, but it doesn't really need to be unless you're running XP with 1GB of ram or something. It's still substantially lighter than WMP/iTunes. | ||
|
Espers
United Kingdom606 Posts
Winamp can do pretty much every point you've mentioned, why are you so attached to foobar? :o I really love the smart view of Winamp too, not many people use it because it requires some fornula learning, but I can have a whole different section for compilations, so my normal section (or view) isn't cluttered with 1 song artists. Good cause I have a lot of compilation albums :p | ||
GTR
51674 Posts
i don't really care about 'memory hogging' and all of that crap now since i got my new laptop. | ||
|
Mah Buckit!
Finland474 Posts
| ||
|
doktorLucifer
United States855 Posts
On September 17 2009 16:43 Mah Buckit! wrote: Wow OP you must have a shitload of cds around. Yea, man. *Shifty-eyed* *Eyes explode.* I will continue using WA until/if I decide to go use foobar only. It has views based on folder structure/artist/album etc, in a place that actually encourages switching around based on what you're looking for/how you want to browse around for, which is actually nice, since all the shit in my main folder is actually pretty well-organized. Artist/album view fails me, since 50% of my stuff consists of random mutliple-artist black-metal/trancecore compilations ~_~ On September 17 2009 16:30 Espers wrote: @intruding Winamp can do pretty much every point you've mentioned, why are you so attached to foobar? :o I really love the smart view of Winamp too, not many people use it because it requires some fornula learning, but I can have a whole different section for compilations, so my normal section (or view) isn't cluttered with 1 song artists. Good cause I have a lot of compilation albums :p Waaaiiit... so that "compilation" view only shows compilations? o_o | ||
|
intruding
157 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10939 Posts
| ||
|
FaCE_1
Canada6184 Posts
| |--------------->CD pretty simple | ||
|
NovaTheFeared
United States7232 Posts
| ||
|
Spinfusor
Australia410 Posts
On September 17 2009 13:47 Thesecretaznman wrote: "Series takes highest priority, followed by composer," does that mean if there is no discernible series name, you just ignore, and label the root directory with the composer name? Yeah, if there isn't an appropriate series, throw it under composer, or if still not, performer. I use it pretty tightly so series is the smallest section I have. I can divide it into 3 classes: a) Collections that would require excessive folder creation (e.g. EMI's Great Conductors series with 40 two CD sets of different conductors) and look neater stored together. b) Collections like 10 random opera highlights, 11 Great Violin Concertos etc which would otherwise be a pain/impossible to sort. c) Unsortable discs, the only one at present being a disc of 3 different works, by 3 different composers, played by 3 different performers. | ||
| ||
