Maintaining a Digital Music Collection

yeah you can't stream OOP stuff on blogs now rite...

No to mention I suspect that this limitless streaming is going to somehow involve a lot of commercial advertisements somewhere.

Yes, the next paradigm shift is clearly streaming from centralised cloud-based storage, eliminating the need for personal collections of anything bar metadata. I'm already heading in that direction [insert Eurocentric Spotify Premium gloat here - £10 per month for ad-free high-bitrate is money well spent IMO], and I unreservedly welcome it.

I fucking hate paradigms

yeah you can't stream OOP stuff on blogs now rite..

eh, I've spent a fair chunk of this afternoon looking for old Dolly Parton and Buck Owens MP3s and let me tell you there is a LOT of out of print stuff that is just not on the internet

basically whenever one medium replaces another, a bunch of stuff gets lost and I don't find that particularly exciting or awesome

being someone who still buys CDs, can someone tell me how they handle 'liner notes'?

I've been doing this narrative podcast thing recently, introducing tracks, and people are asking me 'wow you are so well researched' and... I'm just... 50% of that stuff is straight from the booklet that comes with the CD and a surprising number of my friends respond to that by saying 'that's exactly what I mean'

Roughly two-thirds of my digital music collection is on Lala.com, which I know because once you register for the site, you can sync your iTunes library with your Lala account and then listen to anything in Lala's database that you already own at any computer.

"old Dolly Parton and Buck Owens MP3s"
these were on CDs at some point? that is kind of surprising that they're not somewhere out there...

Can someone explain Media Monkey to me?

Though most of my music collection is on CD/vinyl, I have loads of promos on my computer that just feel ... disorganised. Would Media Monkey make my life neater?

I have no idea if they were ever on CD (but I kind of doubt it) - I'm talking about stuff like Joshua, Hello My Name is Dolly, Just Because I'm a Woman, etc. Same goes for Buck's 60s LPs.

there is a LOAD of stuff that is just plain not out there

which in a way is both gratifying & frustrating

xp milton: seriously ... I have a good number of free jazz large ensemble recordings I've downloaded, and I have no clue how the current I-tunes/mp3 system would even manage listing all the musicians.

to really have access to everything ever recorded you would def have to have 1) a computer 2) a turntable 3) a CD player 4) a cassette deck and...shit a record player that plays 78s maybe proably? A wax cylinder? 8 track player?

there is a LOAD of stuff that is just plain not out there

which in a way is both gratifying & frustrating

I dunno what's gratifying about it but it annoys me that this fact is always glossed over by hyped-up digital acolytes

I mean its not like this stuff I'm looking for is obscure - these were hits! By major artists! With huge distribution networks! But a few decades later *poof* gone.

xp Was anything really released exclusively on 8-track?

The loss of cassettes is kind sad though.

shakey, you should learn about google blog search, i think everything is out there, it's just a matter of how you look for it:

http://boxofmuzik.blogspot.com/2009/04/dolly-parton-rare-album.html

those files are all gone shasta nice try

Due to a violation of our terms of use, the file has been removed from the server.

don't get me wrong I'm so glad the record company that owns those albums is being so diligent to make sure Dolly fans can only hear that music on albums purchased from used record dealers. which doesn't make them any money anyway.

fucking people. I hate them.

Hey they aren't going to undercut the 17-disc Dolly Parton Boxed Set that's coming out next year!

I dunno what's gratifying about it

perhaps I haven't gone into my big ol crush on oblivion & things that get lost to history here but I think I take as much pleasure in things I can't find as others do in like finding things

well then if there's no blogs, there are torrentz:
http://www.torrentz.com/9d3f1bd617739c27a411978313ce445e7fa1dc76

You aren't exactly proving your point, Steve.

I ain't installing now torrent client software on my machine at work, that is asking for trouble

I mean this stuff is currently scattered hither and yon in various formats and variable quality. What exactly is going to unite everything together again? Spotify?

er I AIN'T BE INSTALLIN NO TORRENT dadgummit

is what I meant to say

MediaMonkey is simply a media library jukebox like MP or iTunes that happens to be lower-bloat (loads quickly and uses fewer resources), with integral folder browser and tag macros. Ideal for those who have their own preferred file organization scheme (eg slsk sharers), or in iPod mp3 players.

@ Milton: I've taken to just keeping hi-res scans of album liners. Since I never had a turntable (ie 12" media) this was fairly easy.

@ others: burning DVD-R backup is pretty silly. After 2 annual rounds of this (losing 2 days of free-time each time), I discovered that I could back up for < $80 total investment with a discount HDD and USB enclosure. If you have an spare old drive a USB enclosure is maybe $15-20.

above should read non iPod mp3 players. Ie, a lot of more audiophile players didn't support tags well until the last 2 years, so users ended up needing hierarchical folder organization that iTunes evidently no longer uses by default.

All this talk of organizing digital files, triple back up of hard drives weekly seems a lot more complicated than having a few shelves full of CDs or LPs (even if they're more of a pain to move and take up more space). I'm not totally addicted to physical media exactly, I just think we're still in an awkward middle phase. Perhaps some type of subscription based cloud style streaming could be the possible future, where you didn't have to worry about organizing or backing up or collecting anything?

Part of having a large digital collection means accepting some responsibility for the database management if you don't want tags like "Presley, Elvis" and "Elvis Presley" as separate artists. There are easy-to-use tools built into iTunes and other apps that make it a snap to handle these tasks. The trick is understanding the benefit of making the effort - like a big one upfront and then pretty small going forward. Kinda like if you want a reasonably filed set of CD shelves you need to decide on an organizing approach.

Meanwhile, the idea that a digital collection reduces the connection with music is crazy to me. Having all this music at my fingertips lets me easily do things like compare versions, or make connections between artists I hadn't before, or simply allow me to dig deeper in my collection as I scroll my artist list and hit on someone I hadn't listened to in ages.

Also - sharing albums is a snap: zip it up, put it on a site like Divshare, email the link. Much faster than making a tape or a CDR.

And what about making mixes for yourself or a friend? Back in the cassette days I really had to think it was going to be worth it to go to the effort it took to create one: pulling out all the source CDs, playing them in real-time, listening to the results, creating the in-lay card. Now with MP3s I'm inspired to pull things from hither and yon and put them together for like-minded folks.

being someone who still buys CDs, can someone tell me how they handle 'liner notes'?

case in point re: the 'awkward middle phase', i tag my music w/ album covers, reviews, label and assorted other stuff that can be procured through mediamonkey or whatever and i figure an easy way to add more indepth info is just around the corner (in case i want to be that completist, i'm not at the moment, i haven't even looked at what comes with cds regularly for years and years) so i don't even sweat that at the moment. i like the idea of ripping everything so i can search tracks, recombine them, backup etc. but it's soooo slow i'm probably 20% done and i feel like at the end i'm not gonna wanna part w/ a sizable portion but we'll see how it goes

say, how accurate are those softwares that claim to automatically tag mp3s by listening to a small sample of it?

"don't get me wrong I'm so glad the record company that owns those albums is being so diligent to make sure Dolly fans can only hear that music on albums purchased from used record dealers. which doesn't make them any money anyway."

i'm all for it. i made five bucks selling a dolly parton album this week. that paid for my lunch from the hot dog vendor.

I think streaming music is gonna be a bunch of bullshit; it's the one way the content providers have of giving us less control over media, and locking us in

half-serious question: will the difficult (impossible?) challenge of figuring out a system to correctly tag classical music that would integrate it with other styles of music in your collection hasten the demise of classical music?

I have no idea if they were ever on CD (but I kind of doubt it) - I'm talking about stuff like Joshua, Hello My Name is Dolly, Just Because I'm a Woman, etc. Same goes for Buck's 60s LPs.

FWIW, I found two of those albums (and ten other early Dolly albums) on USENET.

> I'll hang to my archaic CDs thankyouverymuch.

i'd rip them (losslessly) all the same - i've just done all mine and there are about a dozen that have gone to coppery bit-rot heaven.

> triple back up of hard drives weekly seems a lot more complicated than having a few shelves full of CDs

well, weekly backups should be incremental - only the changed things. which shouldn't take long.

i need to get into the habit of burning new purchases as flacs to dvdr as i buy them. i have about 600G of flacs that i only have one copy of... i have the original cds but it'd take me another 6 months to re-rip them.

"half-serious question: will the difficult (impossible?) challenge of figuring out a system to correctly tag classical music that would integrate it with other styles of music in your collection hasten the demise of classical music?"

?? wouldn't software that auto-tags classical music correctly tag the genre as 'classical' (along with conductor,album name, and other metadata)? Is there something about classical music that makes it harder for software to figure out what album it came from?

It seems that for classical music the auto filled in results are often (currently) messed up, and inconsistent. For example, you put in one CD and in the artist field you get the composer, put in the next CD and you get the conductor, or the orchestra, or the star performer, or all the results are in Japanese (this seems to happen to me a lot actually). And of course, with many classical CDs you'll get works by multiple composers and sometimes by different conductors or orchestras. It's just much less normalized than trying to classify rock music (for instance).

i'm all for it. i made five bucks selling a dolly parton album this week. that paid for my lunch from the hot dog vendor.

hey fair enough, I buy used records too!

the only thing i hate about going digital is not having performance & production credits for an album. i used to love poring over that shit, and while it's not like i'm buying many jazz albums digitally now, it was really important for figuring out who i liked and making connections between different records.

and i meant to add that even when i buy something legally and it has some kind of digital liner notes, half of the time the credits aren't even included ;_;

do digital people keep upgrading the albums they like from mp3 to flac to whatever comes next? seems tiresome. or maybe most people don't care that much about how things sound. i mean, a lot of people listen to horrible internet mp3 sound and don't seem to care.

This is one reason I hang onto CDs after ripping them. If someday I decide my 256kbps AAC files don't sound very good, I can go back and make FLACs. I doubt that will ever happen, I'm too lazy. I like keeping the CD liner notes and artwork too.

I think the poor sound quality of MP3s is less of an issue than it used to be, mainly because people rip at higher bit rates now. With my non-audiophile ears and gear, I rarely notice differences between computer files and tracks played off CDs.

For me, a much bigger difference than the recording format is the combination of room acoustics, speaker positions, and my location in the room. It was a big "Duh" moment, but a valuable one, when I realized I could drastically improve what I was hearing by moving my speakers closer to ear level, getting furniture out of the way, etc.

i didn't read all the thread but there is one little thing i'd like to add. i have downloaded and ripped quite a lot of stuff in the last years (around 160 gb). but i didn't listen to most of it. i still listened to my old cds. i had an archos 20 gb jukebox with some of the digitized music. in may i bought an ipod classic, the biggest one available at 120 gb. first i was a little disappointed as there used to be a 160 gb ipod which apple does not produce anymore and which would have been more or less to store all my mp3s. as i could not transfer all mp3s from the computer to the ipod i started alphabetically. i copied everything from a to q. or synchronized if you want the right tech term. the great thing about this 120 meg limitation is that i am now forced to listen to the music. what i do is i rate it. crap to be deleted from the pc hard disk gets one star, stuff which isn't good enough for the ipod but which can stay on the pc gets two and all the rest which will be kept on the ipod gets three and more stars. i have listened to about 3000 songs (often just for a couple of secs) and rated them. right now most of my smiths mp3s are on the ipod. soon there will be sonic youth, swell, talk talk and yo la tengo. maybe around xmas the ipod will contain only music i like (there are still lots of cds to be ripped). i love my little ipod. and the bose earplugs and the sounddock music system. very handy.

which would have been more or less to store all my mp3s =
which would have been more or less big enough to store all my mp3s

I'm curious how big people's digital collections are. Not in a dick-wagging contest, just how much music do you have at your fingertips at home? And do you struggle with choosing what goes on your portable device?

I have about 225gb and am still ripping my CDs. I've got a 160gb iPod for the main library and an 8gb Sansa for new stuff (past year) with a 16gb microsd card for compilations. I constantly have to shift stuff around, which is a pain, and occasionally swap stuff out of my main library with recently ripped older stuff. I was disappointed Apple didn't release a 240gb model - that's the sweet spot where I'll have space for everything I feel is critical. For me, it's not about listening to EVERYTHING, it's about having the choice to listen to ANYTHING. My play stats indicate I listen to about 20-25% of my collection per year so it's not like there's a ton of stuff I never play.