REGISTER NEW USERLOST PASSWORD? WELCOME, Logout

Consistency

Paul's Posts — 08 October 2012

By

Consistency

I mentioned yesterday that perhaps the single most important aspect of a music library is maintaining consistency in the way you tag and list your albums and tracks.

When you go to look for Mozart and there are 5 listings for him: Mozart Wolfgang, Mozart Amadeus Wolfgang, Mozart Wolfgang Amadeus and then the various misspelling of Amadeus you get the idea of what that will look like when you’re scrolling through your iPad.

It would seem simple that when you look for Mozart there’s only one listing.  It’s only simple when it’s done right and getting it right takes a bit of prep and thought.

When you want to listen to the Beach Boys, do you first go to Boys, Beach?  If that seems silly and counter intuitive you’re right – but it does stay with a consistent convention established by Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus.

Tomorrow I’ll share with you how I do it.

email Consistency Forward to a friend and help us engage more readers

Get new and fresh stories like this each morning by joining the folks reading Paul's Posts. Click here

Related Articles

Microphones Serving it up Rolling it off What’s all the fuss about?

Share

About Author

Paul McGowan

Paul McGowan is the CEO and co-founder of PS Audio Inc. a Boulder Colorado design and manufacturing company of high-end audio products and services. McGowan has been designing and building high-end products for nearly 40 years. Hobbies include skiing, music, hiking, artisan bread baking, kick boxing and cooking. He lives in Boulder Colorado with his wife Terri and his 4 sons.

(5) Readers Comments

  1. Soundminded

    October 8, 2012 at 4:20 am

    While this topic is of no direct interest to me (yet) since I’m clearly a Luddite who listens to actual physical discs and an occasional vinyl, I’m puzzled by the problem catalogueing recording libraries seems to present. The problem was solved very effectively for quite some time now. The software of choice IMO is Microsoft Access and its competitors. Even Microsoft Xcel while not optimized for this application is useful. The programs are easy to set up with as many columns as you can ask for, easy to edit, easy to browse, easy to sort, and easy to search and filter by any criteria you choose. Then it’s just a matter of providing a link to an audio file for each one on a NAS for the selections desired. More money and time has been spent to develop these data base programs for general use than undoubtedly all of the systems devised to specifically catalog and search music files combined. Access and its predecessors in Windows is at least 20 years old. Even my Android smart phone came with a pre-installed usable version of MS Office called Quick Office. It has Xcel in it but not Access. Microsoft is constantly trying to sell me an upgrade. Access can be installed in any PC laptop or netbook that runs on Windows. I’m sure it will run on tablets too.

    Any thoughts on using this software instead? It seems to me the others are trying to re-invent the wheel. Why settle for a square one when Access is so well rounded already?

    Access will run on any Windows based PC including XP, Vista, Windows7, and 8. I’m sure there’s a comparable version for Mac and Android.

  2. October 8, 2012 at 5:08 am

    Really looking forward to hearing your approach Paul!

    @Soundminded this might work for you but I can think of a few problems…

    First there’s expertise, is everyone expected to know Codd’s third normal form? Ok that’s a bit extreme but every different music collector learning how to design and create their own database populate it and maintain it… seems like duplication in a different form.

    Next, the database is divorced from what’s important: the music files themselves. How does your music player interact with the database you have built? We want our cataloguing to actually be useful when we are listening to our music, which is surely the entire point. Using Paul’s example, I could normalise the Mozart tags in Access, but how does the music player see this?

    • Soundminded

      October 8, 2012 at 5:57 am

      I don’t think you have to be a genius to learn to use Microsoft Access to the point of being able to set up a music catalog. I think today most elementary and junior high school children are learning the rudiments of Microsoft Office applications. If you won’t teach it to yourself, the course is about 2 days or you can buy a tutorial or rent one from the library. Excel for this application is also easy to learn at least to this level. Personally I keep all of my telephone numbers on an Excel spreadsheet. If I want to send someone an e-mail, I merely click a link that launches Microsoft Outlook and addresses a new e-mail letter. A link to the music file is all it takes. This keeps the catalog software entirely separate from the music software. Each does best what it’s designed to do. Re-inventing data base programs is going to repeat all of the stupid clumsy mistakes and shortcomings that were discovered and elminated in application specific programs like Access decades ago.

      Computer literacy is de-rigeur today and no programs are more important for surviving in the modern world, even just to get a job than Microsoft Office Suite. Anyone who does not know how to use it at least at a basic level is in for a hard time in the working world. If you want to have a computerized file server based music library, you’d better learn how to use a computer. Personally I’m not looking forward to transcribing all my discs or typing in all of those menus. However, if it’s a card catalog you want, then this is the best way to do it IMO.

  3. demeter

    October 8, 2012 at 7:58 am

    Caution: There is also another composer named Mozart: Mozart, Franz Xaver Wolfgang…:)

  4. Steve Parry

    October 8, 2012 at 9:55 am

    I try to order my music the way I would see it in a record store, which is a hybrid approach. I am careful about categorizing the music style, and make sure a good cover image is present, even scanning a cover if needed (I do a simple crop with Microsoft Photo Gallery). Between Cover Flow, the search box, and simple column sorting, that works. Classical IS a headache, as are albums not in the databases associated with XLD. But it is worth it!

Leave a Reply