IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

10 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Your Music Directory Structure, What format is your music organized in?
How do you arrange your Songs and Album folders?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 1031
Guests cannot vote 
Landus
post May 3 2008, 20:00
Post #176





Group: Members
Posts: 63
Joined: 26-February 06
Member No.: 28099



I use the Music\Album\T# - Title.codec structure, but I also put the year in parenthesis after the album. It looks like this:

My Music\Within Temptation\The Heart of Everything (2007)\01. The Howling.mp3

I use MusicBrainz and MP3Tag to do all of my tagging and folder creating/file moving after I rip a CD.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plnelson
post May 3 2008, 20:49
Post #177





Group: Members
Posts: 240
Joined: 3-July 07
Member No.: 44970



QUOTE (Landus @ May 3 2008, 15:00) *
I use the Music\Album\T# - Title.codec structure, but I also put the year in parenthesis after the album. It looks like this:

My Music\Within Temptation\The Heart of Everything (2007)\01. The Howling.mp3

I use MusicBrainz and MP3Tag to do all of my tagging and folder creating/file moving after I rip a CD.


Can someone please explain what this fixation so many people have with the album is all about?

I will grant you that SOMETIMES the songs on the album are related to each other in some specific artistic way - "Sketches of Spain" (Miles Davis), say or "Tommy"(The Who). And house or DJ mix music has to be kept together so you can gaplessly transition from one track to the other as the DJ intended.

But the vast majority of the time the songs are just songs and the "album" is just a container - the physical polycarbonate or vinyl disk the record label decided to put them on. I'm also a photographer and it's like if I bought a bunch of photographic accessories - filters, lens caps, straps, etc, and they all came in the same box so I decided to always store them together after that because of the box they came in.

Many times the SAME song will appear on more than one album - a first release, a later "best of" compilation, and then a late-night TV "greatest hits of the 90's" collection. Other times the "same" album will have DIFFERENT versions of the "same" song - for instance, when the Moby album "Play" was first released it had one version of "South Side" and then later they CHANGED it to include the version with the Gwen Stefani vocals! Also sometimes the US and EU versions of the "same" albums will have different content.

If you feel the album is significant you can always include that information in the tag. But why make it part of the directory structure? As I said above, I keep ALL the songs by a given artist in one flat older. The songs may have been ripped from a CD, bought online, or stream-ripped, it doesn't matter. I've never had any problem with this scheme and it's very easy and simple.

Also, albums are SO 20th century! They are an old-fashioned, outmoded concept, like dial telephones. CD sales are down, online sales are up; most people just care about individual songs anyway, and your kids are going to ask you what an "album" was.

(I know I've made this rant on HA before, here, but I still don't "get" what the big deal with albums is)

This post has been edited by plnelson: May 3 2008, 20:50
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tene
post May 3 2008, 22:04
Post #178





Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 12-April 05
Member No.: 21397



/mnt/blockdevice/mediatype/artist/artist.yyyy-mm-dd.albumname/artist.yyyy-mm-dd.albumname.##.title.ext

Rexeg friendly structure.

This post has been edited by Tene: May 3 2008, 22:04
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Roseval
post May 3 2008, 22:25
Post #179





Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 52303



Iím not interested in file structures at all.
I use the contents of the tags to browse my collection.

To plnelson
In classical Music, a composition in general consist of several parts and they are related and should be played in the right sequence.
Thatís the way I use the album tag, album=composition, song=parts. The album tag is an excellent way to structure your collection by composition


--------------------
TheWellTemperedComputer.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2tec
post May 4 2008, 01:26
Post #180





Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 29-February 08
From: Alberta
Member No.: 51676



QUOTE (Eli @ Mar 25 2005, 18:00) *
Music\Artist\Album\Artist - Album- T# - Song Title .flac
Mine's still the exact same. cool.gif
Audio\Music\Artist\Album\Artist - Album - T# - Title.flac

Personally, I still find this to be the most 'intuitive' and useful structure; although I keep my lossy (distilled) files elsewhere and I'm still fiddling with Various Artists and compilations.

As for why use an album-centric structure? For me, it's mainly due to the fact that most music IT is already structured around the album, ie. Freedb, discogs, etc.

This post has been edited by 2tec: May 4 2008, 01:36


--------------------
Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence~Potter Stewart
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plnelson
post May 4 2008, 17:16
Post #181





Group: Members
Posts: 240
Joined: 3-July 07
Member No.: 44970



QUOTE (Roseval @ May 3 2008, 17:25) *
Iím not interested in file structures at all.
I use the contents of the tags to browse my collection.

To plnelson
In classical Music, a composition in general consist of several parts and they are related and should be played in the right sequence.
Thatís the way I use the album tag, album=composition, song=parts. The album tag is an excellent way to structure your collection by composition


Yes, that's the canonically correct way to do classical. Album = opus.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
milesmonk
post May 4 2008, 19:37
Post #182





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 47869



QUOTE (2tec @ May 4 2008, 05:56) *
QUOTE (Eli @ Mar 25 2005, 18:00) *

Music\Artist\Album\Artist - Album- T# - Song Title .flac
Mine's still the exact same. cool.gif
Audio\Music\Artist\Album\Artist - Album - T# - Title.flac

Personally, I still find this to be the most 'intuitive' and useful structure; although I keep my lossy (distilled) files elsewhere and I'm still fiddling with Various Artists and compilations.

As for why use an album-centric structure? For me, it's mainly due to the fact that most music IT is already structured around the album, ie. Freedb, discogs, etc.


I use almost the same structure. All my complete albums are stored in one directory "Music", in which I use the following structure:
\%Album Artist%\%Album%\%Album Artist% - [%Album% (Disc %discnumber%) - %tracknumber%] - %Title% (%TrackArtist%).ext

"(Disc %discnumber%)", is of course used only when it is multi-disc. And "(%Track Artist%)" only when the song has a "Feat." artist or it is a multi-artist album, in which case %Album Artist% in the file name is rendered as "VA". A multi-artist album, which is not Various Artist has each artist delimited by ";" (which is displayed as "," in foobar2000). So, "Simon & Garfunkel" but "Frank Sinatra, Antonio Carlos Jobim".

Soundtracks are tricky. I used to have a folder in the Music root directory called !Soundtracks, but I now put then within Music\Various\Soundtrack\%Album%. The problem is %Album% should be just the name of the movie, or if it should be the complete title as appears on the CD ("Music Inspired By..."). Also, soundtracks by a single artist pose a problem. Should that be located in the soundtrack category, or in the artist's name? unsure.gif (Currently, most such albums go in my soundtrack category, because most of them were composed for the film, and not just used in it.)

Western Classical (and Carnatic and Hindustani, to a lesser extent) create problems. For a Glenn Gould recording, for instance, should primacy be given to Glenn Gould or to Johann Sebastian Bach? Currently, I list it in a separate folder in the Music root directory, called !Genres. So, the structure for that is:
\!Genres\%Composer%\%Album%\%Performer% - [%Album% - %tracknumber%] - %Title%.ext

I would like to know how others handle Western Classical. Another area of problems: "Sets". (E.g., the Verve sixty-album "Jazz Masters" set, in which most discs are by single artists, but some (two) are compilations.) Currently, they're on a separate partition, so create no problem. tongue.gif

Note: I came up with the above system when not all my music was properly tagged. So, while I would have liked to use %Original Release Date% (or %Date%, if I have the original release itself), I did not.
My aim in coming up with this system was to be able to "sort by name" and have all albums by an artist in release order and the tracks ordered by track number. And also to have all the information pertaining to the file not only in the folder structure, but in the file name itself. So, if I create a flat structure (put all the files in a single folder), the degradation will be graceful, and the files will still be in order. cool.gif

Comments?

This post has been edited by milesmonk: May 4 2008, 19:38
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Roseval
post May 4 2008, 21:00
Post #183





Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 52303



My only comment is that I donít understand why one is so concerned about file structure.
Any decent player uses tags to browse your collection.
Using WMP I can select a composer say Beethoven. I can sort all his works by title, genre and as I have given a couple of tags a very distinct use, by opus number and by year of composition.
Why do I need a complicated file naming convention when filtering and sorting by tags (not to mention the search box) do the job?

If I read these postings about directory/filename structures, I have the feeling that a lot of people simply don’t understand where tagging is about.

This post has been edited by Roseval: May 4 2008, 21:03


--------------------
TheWellTemperedComputer.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DuncanG
post May 4 2008, 21:55
Post #184





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 25-April 08
Member No.: 53061



QUOTE (Supacon @ Mar 25 2005, 23:32) *
...
I'd like to work through my music collection and rename every directory and file consistently one of these days, because over the years I've done so many different things.


If your after a painless method of reorganising your entire media library's file structure and file names in one fell swoop try MediaMonkey. You can specify the file name and path using title formatting and it reads the relevant info from your id3 tags. It also moves album art. If your tags can a bit patchy you can use it to auto tags the files, although I prefer Winamp for this as you can select batches of files rather than single albums.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Slipstreem
post May 4 2008, 22:26
Post #185





Group: Members
Posts: 966
Joined: 7-July 06
Member No.: 32660



It all lives on my external hard drive in a directory called "Music", organised thus...

\Music\Artist\Album

...alphabetically for artist and album.

Winamp picks up on the tags and displays them in almost exactly the same order.

In answer to Roseval regarding directory structure having no importance (apologies if I've misread that), there's nothing to be lost by showing a little discipline and making use of an OSes existing directory structures. It sure makes it easier when you're trying to find something via Windows Explorer. I follow the same disciplines for all installations and file storage. It seems pointless to avoid it and shabby practice not to do it IMO. smile.gif

Cheers, Slipstreem. cool.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Roseval
post May 4 2008, 22:54
Post #186





Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 52303



QUOTE (Slipstreem @ May 4 2008, 23:26) *
In answer to Roseval regarding directory structure having no importance (apologies if I've misread that), there's nothing to be lost by showing a little discipline and making use of an OSes existing directory structures. It sure makes it easier when you're trying to find something via Windows Explorer. I follow the same disciplines for all installations and file storage. It seems pointless to avoid it and shabby practice not to do it IMO. smile.gif

Agreed
One can conjecture up many reasons to have a well structured structure.
1 directory with 20.000 files might affect performance
Coverart as a jpg in the album directory requires an album structure
Finding a missing track using explorer,
Etc. etc.

In practice I have root/artist/album/ not because Iím structuring it this way but because I set my player to do so. Any change in a album/artist/title tag is reflected in the directory structure / filename.

I only browse the file structure to solve problems (hey, track 4 is gone) and in these cases a good structure and meaningful names are important.
However, I do have the feeling that a lot of people are trying to put as much different information as possible in the structure because they donít use or donít understand tagging.


--------------------
TheWellTemperedComputer.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
milesmonk
post May 4 2008, 23:01
Post #187





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 15-October 07
Member No.: 47869



QUOTE (Roseval @ May 5 2008, 01:30) *
My only comment is that I don’t understand why one is so concerned about file structure.
Any decent player uses tags to browse your collection.
Using WMP I can select a composer say Beethoven. I can sort all his works by title, genre and as I have given a couple of tags a very distinct use, by opus number and by year of composition.
Why do I need a complicated file naming convention when filtering and sorting by tags (not to mention the search box) do the job?

If I read these postings about directory/filename structures, I have the feeling that a lot of people simply don’t understand where tagging is about.


I agree completely. The behaviour that I (and some others in this thread) exhibit is most definitely anal-retentive. But it's not only about file-structure. The way I see it, file-structure is only a reflection of metadata. (After all, renaming files in accordance with the scheme I've outlined above is only a click away in foobar2000/mp3tag/[your mp3 renamer of choice].) Changing file-structure isn't all that difficult. But coming up with a consistent and intelligent metadata system is.

So, you see, at the root of things, I'm concerned not so much with the file/folder structure, as with tagging. Who should be "Artist" for a a Classical performance? Sometimes it is the performer who is the highlight (e.g., Glenn Gould/Luciano Pavarotti), and sometimes it is the piece being performed that is the star (e.g., a second-rate philharmonic performing Beethovan). Sometimes, it is the conductor who is given top billing. How do you tag it, and how do you organise/display/sort it in your player of choice?

The questions I had raised for the file structure also apply directly to tagging. Do you tag it uniformly as "OST: [Movie Name]" or "[Movie Name]" or "[Full title as provided on the CD]"? AMG has a habit of using "Soundtrack" as the Album Artist for all multi-artist soundtracks. Do you follow that, or use "Various Artists"? These are questions about tagging as well.

Sure, most people never think twice about such questions. But then, those people aren't following this discussion, are they?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Roseval
post May 5 2008, 00:17
Post #188





Group: Members
Posts: 453
Joined: 26-March 08
Member No.: 52303



QUOTE
So, you see, at the root of things, I'm concerned not so much with the file/folder structure, as with tagging. Who should be "Artist" for a a Classical performance? Sometimes it is the performer who is the highlight (e.g., Glenn Gould/Luciano Pavarotti), and sometimes it is the piece being performed that is the star (e.g., a second-rate philharmonic performing Beethovan). Sometimes, it is the conductor who is given top billing. How do you tag it, and how do you organise/display/sort it in your player of choice?



Iím using WMP so I have tags for
Composer, Album, song, artist, contributing artist, conductor.
These are self explaining
Genre I use for something I donít know how it is called in English but it contains String quartet, string quitet, sextet, etc.
Period I use it for the year of the composition
Sub genre for opus numbers.

The album is the work, so I have each composition separately.
Now Beethoven wrote his first string quartet and called it rather aptly String quartet 1.
Now Brahms wrote his first string quartet and called it rather aptly String quartet 1.
As an album donít exist in PC audio, a lot of players use the album title to group songs together.
To avoid this, every composition is pre fixed with the name of the composer so:
Beethoven Ė string quartet 1 op. 1
Brahms Ė string quartet 1 op.3
Now if you ad the opus number there is no real need to pre fix the composer but I rather have the works grouped by composer then by type.
Beside
string quartet 1 op. 1
string quartet 1 op. 3
is not a very easy way to find a string quartet by Beethoven

You can have duplicates, say Beethoven Ė string quartet 1 op. 1 performed by the Alban Berg Quartet and by Hagen quartet.
Most players group these together so you get part 1 played by Alban and then part 1 played by Hagen. So I add the performer to the album to
Beethoven Ė string quartet 1 op. 1 Ė Alban Berg
Beethoven Ė string quartet 1 op. 1 Ė Hagen

1 You have a piano sonata played by Martha Argerich
2 A violin concert played by Gideon Kremer
3 A sonata for violin and piano played by both.
I want to be able to find all the works performed by Argerich, like wise by Kremer.

For artist I simply use the names so 3 becomes Kremer/Argerich
The contributing artist is the same as the album artist but in case of 3 this becomes Kremer;Argerich
In WMP using artist I see the combinations
Using contributing artist due to the ; I get all the works where the individual artist is involved.
This is also great for jazz or samplers (Artist: Various, Contributing: XYZ

To become a bit more specific: Who should be "Artist" for a a Classical performance is a question I donít have.
Glenn Gould is simply one of the many excellent performers, no reason to treat him different.
Luciano Pavarotti, treat it as it is, pop music
A second-rate philharmonic Ė delete

A bit more serious, there is no reason to use the artist for any thing else as the performer. The only exception is a player not supporting the composer tag (not uncommon as players are designed with pop music in mind). In these case you might consider using the composer as the artist. In fact standard FreeDB output is Artist: Beethoven Composer: unknown.

From a psychological point of view, I understand, sometimes an artist becomes more important than the works but stick to the tags, if you do it right (and your player allows for it) you can find them all


--------------------
TheWellTemperedComputer.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cidinho
post May 5 2008, 01:00
Post #189





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 14-January 08
Member No.: 50470



My Musics\Artist\(Year) Album\Track n. Title

Used to be My Musics\Artist\Title, but now I'm listening to more formal music that actually gets released...

also, I found a problem when downloading old music, like Mozart. I just don't know what year and album it is =P
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
~*McoreD*~
post May 5 2008, 14:27
Post #190





Group: Members
Posts: 568
Joined: 10-July 03
From: Australia
Member No.: 7693



QUOTE (Roseval @ May 5 2008, 04:00) *
My only comment is that I donít understand why one is so concerned about file structure.
Any decent player uses tags to browse your collection.
Using WMP I can select a composer say Beethoven. I can sort all his works by title, genre and as I have given a couple of tags a very distinct use, by opus number and by year of composition.
Why do I need a complicated file naming convention when filtering and sorting by tags (not to mention the search box) do the job?

If I read these postings about directory/filename structures, I have the feeling that a lot of people simply donít understand where tagging is about.


My thoughts exactly. As long as you have the most basic file system organization of your music files there is no need to worry about it more. The era of browsing music through Explorer and listening to music is over. Now a good player provides very customizable, searchable browsing abilities (foobar2000), so a logical order of your music files in AlbumArtist\Album is enough.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
stampgevaar
post May 5 2008, 16:57
Post #191





Group: Members
Posts: 237
Joined: 9-September 06
Member No.: 34997



Music/mixed compilation/album album artist year
Music/compilation/album album artist year
Music/albums/ album artist album year
Music/tracks/genre
Music/live sets/genre
Music/vinyl/label/catalog album album artist year

I like to keep things a bit separated because tracks and live sets aren't really official releases (soulseek/website downloads stuff) and I have way to much vinyl to put them in the same folder with the rest. Also nice to know which label your listening, i think it gives a better image of a certain genre (for house music that is). Also have a lot of various artist albums that's why I prefer separate folders for those (compilation)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tom_vienna_at
post May 5 2008, 17:09
Post #192





Group: Members
Posts: 148
Joined: 22-July 02
From: Vienna
Member No.: 2729



Very simple, as I don't care for "albums" at all:

Artist\Artist - Title.codec

Album-directories only make sense if you like complete albums on your hd. I personally haven't come across an album were I liked each and every track.

edit: typo

This post has been edited by tom_vienna_at: May 5 2008, 17:10


--------------------
Back off haters - strictly love we deal with.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
boombaard
post May 5 2008, 17:36
Post #193





Group: Members
Posts: 336
Joined: 7-February 05
From: Local Cluster
Member No.: 19647



hm.. and since our needs evolve, and this poll has been running a while: (;-))

%composer%/$iflonger([%conductor%],%key%,$substr(%conductor%,$add($strrchr(%conductor%, ),1),$len(%conductor%))',' $abbr($meta(ensemble,0),20)[',' $substr($meta(performer,0),$add($strrchr($meta(performer,0), ),1),$len($meta(performer,0)))],$iflonger([%ensemble%],%key%,$abbr(%ensemble%,25)[',' $substr($meta(performer,0),$add($strrchr($meta(performer,0), ),1),$len($meta(performer,0)))],$abbr($meta(performer,0),35)[, $abbr($meta(performer,1),25)][, $abbr($meta(performer,2),25)][, $abbr($meta(performer,3),20)]))/[%album%][ '('%date%')']/ (where i use %album% to contain the work information)

This post has been edited by boombaard: May 5 2008, 17:41
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steven123
post May 11 2008, 01:46
Post #194





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 12-December 07
Member No.: 49496



QUOTE (boombaard @ May 5 2008, 10:36) *
hm.. and since our needs evolve, and this poll has been running a while: (;-))

%composer%/$iflonger([%conductor%],%key%,$substr(%conductor%,$add($strrchr(%conductor%, ),1),$len(%conductor%))',' $abbr($meta(ensemble,0),20)[',' $substr($meta(performer,0),$add($strrchr($meta(performer,0), ),1),$len($meta(performer,0)))],$iflonger([%ensemble%],%key%,$abbr(%ensemble%,25)[',' $substr($meta(performer,0),$add($strrchr($meta(performer,0), ),1),$len($meta(performer,0)))],$abbr($meta(performer,0),35)[, $abbr($meta(performer,1),25)][, $abbr($meta(performer,2),25)][, $abbr($meta(performer,3),20)]))/[%album%][ '('%date%')']/ (where i use %album% to contain the work information)


shock1.gif

That's weird, I use this exact directory structure/naming scheme!
laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2tec
post May 11 2008, 02:19
Post #195





Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 29-February 08
From: Alberta
Member No.: 51676



QUOTE (tom_vienna_at @ May 5 2008, 10:09) *
I personally haven't come across an album were I liked each and every track.
Owww. Not even Dark Side Of The Moon? dry.gif What about albums like Jeff Wayne's "War Of The Worlds" or "Best Of ..." albums?


--------------------
Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence~Potter Stewart
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
james.miller
post May 11 2008, 14:34
Post #196





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 16-January 04
Member No.: 11286



MUSIC / Artist - (album number) - Album / %N - %T

i put the album number there to keep the albums in the chronological release order.

example:

Metallica - (1) - Kill Em all
Metallica - (2) - Master of Puppets
Metallica - (3) - And justice for all

ect


browsing by tag is fine but for archieve purposes its much easier to have one folder per album.

This post has been edited by james.miller: May 11 2008, 14:36
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tom_vienna_at
post May 11 2008, 17:41
Post #197





Group: Members
Posts: 148
Joined: 22-July 02
From: Vienna
Member No.: 2729



QUOTE (2tec @ May 11 2008, 03:19) *
QUOTE (tom_vienna_at @ May 5 2008, 10:09) *
I personally haven't come across an album were I liked each and every track.
Owww. Not even Dark Side Of The Moon? dry.gif What about albums like Jeff Wayne's "War Of The Worlds" or "Best Of ..." albums?

Sorry, but I don't care for that kind of music at all. I guess it all comes down to personal preferences really.

But I used to have all my music in one folder per album... until I came to the conclusion that I am building up mountains of things. Why keep music on my hd that doesn't sound good to my ear - for the sake of completeness? No, that would be stupid.

But I am aware that other people see things differently - and having the complete album in one folder is just the perfect thing for them.


--------------------
Back off haters - strictly love we deal with.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nick.C
post May 11 2008, 18:24
Post #198


lossyWAV Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1773
Joined: 11-April 07
From: Wherever here is
Member No.: 42400



QUOTE (james.miller @ May 11 2008, 14:34) *
MUSIC / Artist - (album number) - Album / %N - %T

i put the album number there to keep the albums in the chronological release order.

example:

Metallica - (1) - Kill Em all
Metallica - (2) - Master of Puppets
Metallica - (3) - And justice for all

ect


browsing by tag is fine but for archieve purposes its much easier to have one folder per album.
Why not use the year associated with the album? e.g. Mike Oldfield - [2008] Music of the Spheres.

Recently I changed from one folder per album to one file per album, so I no longer have the problem of deep directory structures.


--------------------
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 --feedback 4| FLAC -8 ~= 320kbps
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2tec
post May 11 2008, 18:57
Post #199





Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 29-February 08
From: Alberta
Member No.: 51676



QUOTE (tom_vienna_at @ May 11 2008, 10:41) *
But I used to have all my music in one folder per album... until I came to the conclusion that I am building up mountains of things. Why keep music on my hd that doesn't sound good to my ear - for the sake of completeness? No, that would be stupid.

But I am aware that other people see things differently - and having the complete album in one folder is just the perfect thing for them.

Actually, personally I also don't bother keeping songs I don't like. However, even if I have a single song, it resides in a folder named after the source of the song. In most cases, this is an album / CD / DVD. The main reason I have found I need to do this is to distinguish between the additional images and lyrics that I maintain with the song(s). Without distinct folders, I'm left either maintaining a database or a separate repository, both of which have exactly the same need for structure as my directories now reflect, so why bother?

Besides, it is possible to rename and reorganize directories and files based on tags, so it should be possible to produce a collection organized exactly as your tags are, no?

QUOTE (Nick.C @ May 11 2008, 11:24) *
Recently I changed from one folder per album to one file per album, so I no longer have the problem of deep directory structures.

blink.gif Ok, but how do you listen to tracks in an order different than the album's?

This post has been edited by 2tec: May 11 2008, 18:52


--------------------
Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence~Potter Stewart
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Nick.C
post May 11 2008, 19:12
Post #200


lossyWAV Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1773
Joined: 11-April 07
From: Wherever here is
Member No.: 42400



QUOTE (2tec @ May 11 2008, 18:57) *
blink.gif Ok, but how do you listen to tracks in an order different than the album's?
I use foobar2000 - you can create custom playlists pulling individual tracks out of each album.


--------------------
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 --feedback 4| FLAC -8 ~= 320kbps
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  « < 6 7 8 9 10 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st April 2014 - 16:42