Do you bother with dates in your MP3 collection?

[Mark]

Was going to add this to The Classical Download Thread, then decided to take a straw poll of members who have MP3 collections.

Personally, I couldn't care less about adding recording/performance/release dates to my MP3 files. I rarely (if ever) refer to these in CD liner notes, so why would I bother with digital music? Do I ever search by year when looking for files on my PC? No. So I feel justified in leaving them off. Besides which, quite often when you download music, files can have either the wrong year appended ... or no year at all. In both cases, I don't have time to go traipsing all over the net trying to track down the right information. I'd rather just listen to the music.

So how about you lot? I imagine for those who download historical recordings, having the correct dates in the tags is useful. But what's your view in general? Are dates important? If so, which dates: original recording/performance, or CD (or LP) release dates?

[The Mad Hatter]

If I'm uploading from a CD I'll include the date, but if it's something I've gotten elsewhere that didn't come with a date, I won't bother to go looking for it (though generally if I come across it by accident, I'll add it).

I think, particularly in rock and contemporary, it's a good idea to see how things progress.

[BachQ]

I'd rather just listen to the music.

How odd.

[George]

Was going to add this to The Classical Download Thread, then decided to take a straw poll of members who have MP3 collections.

Personally, I couldn't care less about adding recording/performance/release dates to my MP3 files. I rarely (if ever) refer to these in CD liner notes, so why would I bother with digital music? Do I ever search by year when looking for files on my PC? No. So I feel justified in leaving them off. Besides which, quite often when you download music, files can have either the wrong year appended ... or no year at all. In both cases, I don't have time to go traipsing all over the net trying to track down the right information. I'd rather just listen to the music.

So how about you lot? I imagine for those who download historical recordings, having the correct dates in the tags is useful. But what's your view in general? Are dates important? If so, which dates: original recording/performance, or CD (or LP) release dates?

Definitely performance dates, as I sometimes get multiple recordings from the same performer in the same work and need to distinguish.

[beclemund]

For me, dates matter. I often want to find performances based on not only who conducted but when they were performed. My library is generally organized by album title, so for instance, for Bruckner's 9th I have:

Bruckner: Symphony No. 9 (Giulini 1989)
Bruckner: Symphony No. 9 (Jochum 1966)
Bruckner: Symphony No. 9 (Tintner 1999)
Bruckner: Symphony No. 9 (Walter 1959)

For others, there will be multiple dates for the same conductor, so the date definitely helps.

The actual year tag, I leave with the album release date since often items are remastered and if I want to replace a CD in my collection with a new remastering, it's easier to tell if I am duplicating. I also add additional information in the notes as needed.

While most of my MP3s begin as CD purchases that I rip myself, I do take care even with downloads to organize things. There isn't an MP3 download I have made that has not yet had its tag unmodified after purchase.

[Steve]

Definitely performance dates, as I sometimes get multiple recordings from the same performer in the same work and need to distinguish.

When I have multiple recordings of a piece with the same conductor, then I'll include dates. Otherwise, I can generally tell by looking at the performer/orchestra.

[George]

When I have multiple recordings of a piece with the same conductor, then I'll include dates. Otherwise, I can generally tell by looking at the performer/orchestra.

Yes, but what if the multiple recordings are added later? 

[mahlertitan]

about 99% times no, i don't care about dates.

[Bunny]

I put down yes because Itunes usually inputs that information automatically and I don't bother to remove it.

[Mark]

There isn't an MP3 download I have made that has not yet had its tag unmodified after purchase.

Ditto.


I think another reason why dates matter so little to me is that I mainly 'navigate' my collection by album art. I know my CDs and downloads like the back of my hand, and such intimacy means I also know enough to remind me which recording I want to hear. If that recording is in my CD collection, I can check dates there (for example, if someone here asked for these). If a particular recording is on the PC as a download and I need its dates ... well, there's Google!

To go to the trouble of finding (or correcting - you'd be amazed how unreliable are internet music databases, especially when it comes to classical) dates when it's more important to fill in fields like Artist, Track, Album, etc, seems like a crazy waste of my time. As to how I label multiple recordings of a work, it goes something like this. I add the label (in brackets) to the end of the album title for EVERY download in my collection. Where I have two identically named albums on the same label, I do this:

MAHLER: Symphony No. 5 (Decca) - Chicago Symphony Orchestra | Solti
MAHLER: Symphony No. 5 (Decca) - Cleveland Orchestra | Dohnanyi

It's so simple - I even copy this information to the folders in which the files are kept. This way, I really have no need for dates.

[PSmith08]

I use iTunes, so there are some organizational limits. I use the title of the piece as the album title and parenthetically cite the conductor and the year. Sort of like APA citation. However, I tend to go with the composer as the artist, so Keilberth's 1955 Götterdämmerung would be called:

Welch Licht leuchtet dort / Richard Wagner / Götterdämmerung (Keilberth '55) / Classical / 128 kbps

Or, in the case of a symphony:

1. Veni, creator spiritus / Gustav Mahler / Symphony no. 8 in E flat major (Tennstedt '86) / 128 kbps

There are some exceptions, but the rule is as outlined above. It introduces multiple layers of organization, which I like:

1. Alphabetical by composer
2. Alphabetical by work
2.a. Numerical by work, if necessary
3. Alphabetical by conductor or group
4. Chronologically (except in the case of '00s recordings)

Makes it super-easy to find what I want as soon as I want it.

[Bunny]

I use iTunes, so there are some organizational limits. I use the title of the piece as the album title and parenthetically cite the conductor and the year. Sort of like APA citation. However, I tend to go with the composer as the artist, so Keilberth's 1955 Götterdämmerung would be called:

Welch Licht leuchtet dort / Richard Wagner / Götterdämmerung (Keilberth '55) / Classical / 128 kbps

Or, in the case of a symphony:

1. Veni, creator spiritus / Gustav Mahler / Symphony no. 8 in E flat major (Tennstedt '86) / 128 kbps

There are some exceptions, but the rule is as outlined above. It introduces multiple layers of organization, which I like:

1. Alphabetical by composer
2. Alphabetical by work
2.a. Numerical by work, if necessary
3. Alphabetical by conductor or group
4. Chronologically (except in the case of '00s recordings)

Makes it super-easy to find what I want as soon as I want it.

If you use the album title for each song, what do you put in the song title?

[Steve]

Ditto.


I think another reason why dates matter so little to me is that I mainly 'navigate' my collection by album art. I know my CDs and downloads like the back of my hand, and such intimacy means I also know enough to remind me which recording I want to hear. If that recording is in my CD collection, I can check dates there (for example, if someone here asked for these). If a particular recording is on the PC as a download and I need its dates ... well, there's Google!

To go to the trouble of finding (or correcting - you'd be amazed how unreliable are internet music databases, especially when it comes to classical) dates when it's more important to fill in fields like Artist, Track, Album, etc, seems like a crazy waste of my time. As to how I label multiple recordings of a work, it goes something like this. I add the label (in brackets) to the end of the album title for EVERY download in my collection. Where I have two identically named albums on the same label, I do this:

MAHLER: Symphony No. 5 (Decca) - Chicago Symphony Orchestra | Solti
MAHLER: Symphony No. 5 (Decca) - Cleveland Orchestra | Dohnanyi

It's so simple - I even copy this information to the folders in which the files are kept. This way, I really have no need for dates.

Ever since iTunes added Cover-Flow to their viewing options, navigating by cover art has really become quite effortless.

[PSmith08]

If you use the album title for each song, what do you put in the song title?

Perhaps an example would illustrate my system. I should say that I use "piece" to refer to the whole work, though.

[Bunny]

Perhaps an example would illustrate my system. I should say that I use "piece" to refer to the whole work, though.

Okay!  You have the album title in the Album tag space.  For song you have the name of the individual track, aria, or piece.  I do it that way too, but I find it more convenient to use the performer as the artist and add the composer column for composer.  I know that this means that the files will be arranged by artist, but I landed up with a few files with zillions of tracks when i listed the composer as artist.  I have more artists than composers, so it's easier to locate a particular album   on the hard drive when I look for them by artist.  I've also added the album art to the files and use the thumbnail view.  I tried the other view, but I have a large number of albums that are jazz, rock, broadway show tunes and world music and it annoys me to have to sort through them along with the classical.

I notice that you have the composers arranged by first name last name.  Is there a way to sort them by last name while displaying first name last name?  When I tried that, they went into order by first name not last name.

[PSmith08]

Okay!  You have the album title in the Album tag space.  For song you have the name of the individual track, aria, or piece.  I do it that way too, but I find it more convenient to use the performer as the artist and add the composer column for composer.  I know that this means that the files will be arranged by artist, but I landed up with a few files with zillions of tracks when i listed the composer as artist.  I have more artists than composers, so it's easier to locate a particular album   on the hard drive when I look for them by artist.  I've also added the album art to the files and use the thumbnail view.  I tried the other view, but I have a large number of albums that are jazz, rock, broadway show tunes and world music and it annoys me to have to sort through them along with the classical.

I notice that you have the composers arranged by first name last name.  Is there a way to sort them by last name while displaying first name last name?  When I tried that, they went into order by first name not last name.

I think that the only way to get it alphabetized by last name would be to tag it "Strauss, Richard," since iTunes seems to alphabetize off the first character, or first differing character. Which, I suppose, would be fine, if a bit "library-like." For composers, that might not be terrible; however, for artists, that might get a little kludgey.

To be honest, I navigate by album art, so now my complex tagging system is more for the iPod than the PC.

[Steve]

I think that the only way to get it alphabetized by last name would be to tag it "Strauss, Richard," since iTunes seems to alphabetize off the first character, or first differing character. Which, I suppose, would be fine, if a bit "library-like." For composers, that might not be terrible; however, for artists, that might get a little kludgey.

To be honest, I navigate by album art, so now my complex tagging system is more for the iPod than the PC.

That sounds right.

[Steve]

1000 

[beclemund]

The bottom line is organize your collection so it best fits the way you use it. Since composer is a valid ID3 frame, I include that in my tags and list the principle performers, orchestra and conductor in my artist tags.

Even though I try to have rules in place for how I organize things, eventually, something comes along that makes me modify those rules, and there are some redundancies in my tagging. Composer often shows up in its own tag and on album title, but for other titles, a composer name does not make sense. I do try to adhere closely to the title of the CD, tho' even though it makes less sense for classical music in some instances.

I even try to ensure that my album art adheres to an exact 450 x 450 pixel size...

[George]

The bottom line is organize your collection so it best fits the way you use it. Since composer is a valid ID3 frame, I include that in my tags and list the principle performers, orchestra and conductor in my artist tags.

Even though I try to have rules in place for how I organize things, eventually, something comes along that makes me modify those rules, and there are some redundancies in my tagging. Composer often shows up in its own tag and on album title, but for other titles, a composer name does not make sense. I do try to adhere closely to the title of the CD, tho' even though it makes less sense for classical music in some instances.

I even try to ensure that my album art adheres to an exact 450 x 450 pixel size...

How do you guys get that cool screen above the list to appear?