I sort. Genre, artist, title. All alphabetical. I'm wondering about Faux Rillz & artist broken by date. It must give a nice perspective for the artists you have a lotta records. But it seems like it'd be easier subfiling alphamebetimackally than hunting for a date.
My genre categories are quite broad. Since everything gets entered into the database, misfiling can usually get sorted out w/ a control-f.
I have significant amounts of 45s from New Orleans, Philadelphia and to a lesser extent Chicago. I also have James Brown and related crates and a couple of boxes of nothing but Hammond 45s.
pre 83 later major releases later indy releases Early-mid 90's boom bap bugger artists early/mid 90's boom bap indy and minor artists mid-late 90's indy Crate that Chad hates (anticon and other weird rap) and a section for artists with one quality 12" worth keeping (think Omnescience-"Amazin")
rest is filed:
Hip Hop LP's all together Jazz Latin Soul Expensive Shit (all non hip hop genres) Reggae/Dub etc Rock
and my 45's are completely fucked except somehow all reggae/dub has remained together for the most part. Seen.
This has been my style for the past year or so, but in the present reorganization, I'm going straight a to z with a few exceptions:
*various artists sorted by genre after z *nature records sorted by sound source (birds, frogs, humans) after various artists *Indian records sorted alphabetically after nature records (I have a gang of them from the 1960s, but I don't know enough about the artists or films to find them again if I filed them alphabetically)
In the above scheme, the spoken word records are being filed where they fall in the alphabet...but there are always problems. Such as...
...Jean Shepherd Reads Poems of Robert Service (Folkways) -- File under Shepherd or under Service?
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
the spoken word records are being filed where they fall in the alphabet...but there are always problems. Such as...
...Jean Shepherd Reads Poems of Robert Service (Folkways) -- File under Shepherd or under Service?
File under Shepherd, since he's the one doing the talking.
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
So, there's several people on this album, and Terkel just compiled?
the spoken word records are being filed where they fall in the alphabet...but there are always problems. Such as...
...Jean Shepherd Reads Poems of Robert Service (Folkways) -- File under Shepherd or under Service?
File under Shepherd, since he's the one doing the talking.
THIS ANSWER HAS BEEN ACCEPTED.[/b]
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B? So, there's several people on this album, and Terkel just compiled?
Various artists, if it were me. Right, it's basically a radio documentary that Terkel made. I have a feeling I might have one or two other Terkel records, which might make a little room in the T section between Teresa and Tes.
The contemporary analogue would be if "This American Life" made records, would they be filed under T for "This American Life" under G for Ira Glass or under Various Artists?
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
So, there's several people on this album, and Terkel just compiled?
Various artists, if it were me.
Right, it's basically a radio documentary that Terkel made. I have a feeling I might have one or two other Terkel records, which might make a little room in the T section between Teresa and Tes.
The contemporary analogue would be if "This American Life" made records, would they be filed under T for "This American Life" under G for Ira Glass or under Various Artists?
THIS ISSUE REQUIRES FURTHER STUDY.[/b]
Is Studs Terkel the main voice we hear? Then I'd put it under "T" for Terkel.
BUT...if it's a bunch of other people, and all Terkel did was produce it, or compile it, or announce it, or whatever..."various artists." Or "soundtracks," if you have a section for that. (Myself, I put what few multi-artist soundtracks I have - radio, TV, movie, whatever - in "various artists." Good enough for The Rolling Stone Record Guide, good enough for you and me.)
This has been my style for the past year or so, but in the present reorganization, I'm going straight a to z with a few exceptions:
*various artists sorted by genre after z *nature records sorted by sound source (birds, frogs, humans) after various artists *Indian records sorted alphabetically after nature records (I have a gang of them from the 1960s, but I don't know enough about the artists or films to find them again if I filed them alphabetically)
In the above scheme, the spoken word records are being filed where they fall in the alphabet...but there are always problems. Such as...
...Jean Shepherd Reads Poems of Robert Service (Folkways) -- File under Shepherd or under Service?
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
Sincere advice appreciated.
Thanks, JRoot
JRoot, I love the style of your collection. Just the notion that you have to have a section for critter records is rad to me. I have a small handful and love 'em.
I'd file Terkel under spoken T. I assume that I'm going to want to grab the record because of Studs, not the depression era boozer/World War soldier he was interviewing.
The Robert Service record gave me the same problem. I eventually went Spoken S.
Again the database helps a bunch cuz you can just make an "extra data" cell for notes on hot tracks, producer you don't want to forget, or narrator name.
I also have the problem you note with the Indian records. My country section includes some "international" that doesn't get the filing love because I'm unfamiliar. It's generally cover art recognition. Not sure what to do about that one.
Good luck to all the people sucking down coffee in prep to play with records instead of going to work.
Does Project 3, 101 Strings or Martin Denny type stuff get filed in Jazz?
Quandaries like this, plus the nuisance associated with genre-specific expansion (e.g. if you outgrow a shelf in the jazz section, you then have to move the entire next section to accommodate the jazz section's growth), led me to abandon genre-specific filing in the current reorganization.
I have enough problems with just alphabetical.
Jean Shepherd Reads Poems by Robert Service is going under Shepherd
The Studs Terkel production Born to Live is going under T in A to Z for now. I am contemplating the addition of a "History" section outside of A to Z, where Born to Live might end up making a permanent residence. The history section might be a problem genre, though ("Movement Soul" -- file under M in A to Z, in comps, or in history?), and I'm trying to get out from under problem genres. But the history section would be a good natural home for a few records (Life magazine 1968 year in review, Supersonics championship broadcast highlights, Man on the Moon, etc.). I'll have to examine the situation further.
Any further advice or suggestions on the subject would be helpful.
I organize some records by country. Some stuff by label (CTI, Blue Note, etc.) Then I have your general US funk/soul, US jazz, 12"s, new funk, comps, hip-hop albums, 12"s, instrumental albums, etc.
Basically, I think once you get to a point when you've got a crate or 2 worth of the same stuff of a similar vein, it's time to make a new section, makes life a hell of a lot easier, especially when you are pushing 15K plus....
I'm wondering about Faux Rillz & artist broken by date. It must give a nice perspective for the artists you have a lotta records. But it seems like it'd be easier subfiling alphamebetimackally than hunting for a date.
It's not usually that hard to find. And there aren't that many artists that I own more than two or three titles by.
I'm wondering about Faux Rillz & artist broken by date. It must give a nice perspective for the artists you have a lotta records. But it seems like it'd be easier subfiling alphamebetimackally than hunting for a date.
It's not usually that hard to find. And there aren't that many artists that I own more than two or three titles by.
This is the right way to catalog the records by a single artist within an otherwise alphabetical system. The alphabet imposes order on the collection, but within a single artist, chronology is the proper way to file the records.
As with all taxonomies, even chronlogy has its flaws. Do you file records by their release date? Or by the date that the music was recorded?
Either way, it's not hard to find the records by a single artist when you file them chronologically within an otherwise a to z system.
I'm wondering about Faux Rillz & artist broken by date. It must give a nice perspective for the artists you have a lotta records. But it seems like it'd be easier subfiling alphamebetimackally than hunting for a date.
It's not usually that hard to find. And there aren't that many artists that I own more than two or three titles by.
This is the right way to catalog the records by a single artist within an otherwise alphabetical system. The alphabet imposes order on the collection, but within a single artist, chronology is the proper way to file the records.
As with all taxonomies, even chronlogy has its flaws. Do you file records by their release date? Or by the date that the music was recorded?
Comments
seriously, i tried by city/region of the world. it sucked. i think im moving to alphabetical by artist with some just grouped together by label.
I sort. Genre, artist, title. All alphabetical. I'm wondering about Faux Rillz & artist broken by date. It must give a nice perspective for the artists you have a lotta records. But it seems like it'd be easier subfiling alphamebetimackally than hunting for a date.
My genre categories are quite broad. Since everything gets entered into the database, misfiling can usually get sorted out w/ a control-f.
I have significant amounts of 45s from New Orleans, Philadelphia and to a lesser extent Chicago. I also have James Brown and related crates and a couple of boxes of nothing but Hammond 45s.
pre 83
later major releases
later indy releases
Early-mid 90's boom bap bugger artists
early/mid 90's boom bap indy and minor artists
mid-late 90's indy
Crate that Chad hates (anticon and other weird rap)
and a section for artists with one quality 12" worth keeping (think Omnescience-"Amazin")
rest is filed:
Hip Hop LP's all together
Jazz
Latin
Soul
Expensive Shit (all non hip hop genres)
Reggae/Dub etc
Rock
and my 45's are completely fucked except somehow all reggae/dub has remained together for the most part. Seen.
This has been my style for the past year or so, but in the present reorganization, I'm going straight a to z with a few exceptions:
*various artists sorted by genre after z
*nature records sorted by sound source (birds, frogs, humans) after various artists
*Indian records sorted alphabetically after nature records (I have a gang of them from the 1960s, but I don't know enough about the artists or films to find them again if I filed them alphabetically)
In the above scheme, the spoken word records are being filed where they fall in the alphabet...but there are always problems. Such as...
...Jean Shepherd Reads Poems of Robert Service (Folkways) -- File under Shepherd or under Service?
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
Sincere advice appreciated.
Thanks,
JRoot
Jazz
Soul
Reggae and Latin
OST
Classical
it all used to be alphabetized
but since I play out every week, that became unlikely-lots of stuff in crates and the floor
File under Shepherd, since he's the one doing the talking.
So, there's several people on this album, and Terkel just compiled?
Various artists, if it were me.
THIS ANSWER HAS BEEN ACCEPTED.[/b]
...Born to Live, compiled and edited by Studs Terkel (Folkways) -- File under B for Born to Live, under T for Terkel, or under Various Artists and under B?
So, there's several people on this album, and Terkel just compiled?
Various artists, if it were me.
Right, it's basically a radio documentary that Terkel made. I have a feeling I might have one or two other Terkel records, which might make a little room in the T section between Teresa and Tes.
The contemporary analogue would be if "This American Life" made records, would they be filed under T for "This American Life" under G for Ira Glass or under Various Artists?
THIS ISSUE REQUIRES FURTHER STUDY.[/b]
45s have their own box based on genre as well.
As in, if I was really drunk, where would have I put this record at?
Usually the answer is in the jazz section, with the sleeve sideways and the record scared, lonely, and cold somewhere near the couch.
Is Studs Terkel the main voice we hear? Then I'd put it under "T" for Terkel.
BUT...if it's a bunch of other people, and all Terkel did was produce it, or compile it, or announce it, or whatever..."various artists." Or "soundtracks," if you have a section for that. (Myself, I put what few multi-artist soundtracks I have - radio, TV, movie, whatever - in "various artists." Good enough for The Rolling Stone Record Guide, good enough for you and me.)
JRoot, I love the style of your collection. Just the notion that you have to have a section for critter records is rad to me. I have a small handful and love 'em.
I'd file Terkel under spoken T. I assume that I'm going to want to grab the record because of Studs, not the depression era boozer/World War soldier he was interviewing.
The Robert Service record gave me the same problem. I eventually went Spoken S.
Again the database helps a bunch cuz you can just make an "extra data" cell for notes on hot tracks, producer you don't want to forget, or narrator name.
I also have the problem you note with the Indian records. My country section includes some "international" that doesn't get the filing love because I'm unfamiliar. It's generally cover art recognition. Not sure what to do about that one.
Good luck to all the people sucking down coffee in prep to play with records instead of going to work.
b/w
Spectral order.
in PSYCH broooooo
A Psych section would be a problem.
Quandaries like this, plus the nuisance associated with genre-specific expansion (e.g. if you outgrow a shelf in the jazz section, you then have to move the entire next section to accommodate the jazz section's growth), led me to abandon genre-specific filing in the current reorganization.
I have enough problems with just alphabetical.
Jean Shepherd Reads Poems by Robert Service is going under Shepherd
The Studs Terkel production Born to Live is going under T in A to Z for now. I am contemplating the addition of a "History" section outside of A to Z, where Born to Live might end up making a permanent residence. The history section might be a problem genre, though ("Movement Soul" -- file under M in A to Z, in comps, or in history?), and I'm trying to get out from under problem genres. But the history section would be a good natural home for a few records (Life magazine 1968 year in review, Supersonics championship broadcast highlights, Man on the Moon, etc.). I'll have to examine the situation further.
Any further advice or suggestions on the subject would be helpful.
Thanks,
JRoot
Basically, I think once you get to a point when you've got a crate or 2 worth of the same stuff of a similar vein, it's time to make a new section, makes life a hell of a lot easier, especially when you are pushing 15K plus....
EASY LISTENING
It's not usually that hard to find. And there aren't that many artists that I own more than two or three titles by.
This is the right way to catalog the records by a single artist within an otherwise alphabetical system. The alphabet imposes order on the collection, but within a single artist, chronology is the proper way to file the records.
As with all taxonomies, even chronlogy has its flaws. Do you file records by their release date? Or by the date that the music was recorded?
Either way, it's not hard to find the records by a single artist when you file them chronologically within an otherwise a to z system.
A good question.
I go by when the music was recorded.
My Whispers LP section would confound a novice.