database for your classical music collection

[KeithW]

Since iTunes is essentially my music database, I hope I can ask this question in this thread...

When adding large box sets (like Brilliant's) do you tag them as one collection (e.g. Bach Complete Edition) or do you tag each individual CD (e.g., Goldberg Variations, Brandenburg Concertos etc.)?

I would always tag at least at the album level.  In many cases, I tag at the level of a work.  So, for example, a box of Beethoven symphonies might arrive as 5 CDs - CD 1 has symphonies 1 & 2, CD 2 has symphonies 3 & 4 through to CD 5 containing the 9th symphony.  I would tag these 5 CDs as 9 symphonies - the album reading something like "Beethoven: Symphony No. 9 in D minor, Op. 125 [Chailly]" - the conductror's name in brackets for purposes of distinguishing between different recordings.  If a conductor has multiple recordings of the same work, as with Karajan, I would use the recording date as well.

I use one of Doug's Applescripts to albumise each work so that the track numbers start with 1 in each case, irrespective of their place in my box set CDs.  http://dougscripts.com/itunes/scripts/ss.php?sp=albumizeselection

I usually make a note in the notes field to show where my recording can be found in my collection (so I would say there that it has come from a Brilliant box set).  I often add the Amazon ASIN in case I need to check something later.  In terms of artwork, I will try to get the original cover art for the recording.  I can point you to good sources of these if you are interested.  I never use the box set cover art unless that is the first issue of a recording.

[bigshot]

I join tracks into complete works, so I can shuffle by songs and have it play whole symphonies. That way I don't really care about the album tag. Everything I need is in the song title and artist fields.

[Coopmv]

I just use an Excel workbook to keep track of (only) my CD's ...

[aap1960]

Hello all,

I've been lurking around GMG for some time, enjoying everyone's opinions and interactions.  I finally dove in and registered just to reply to this thread. (I'm no musician.  And have absolutely no musical skills whatsoever, but I do enjoy listening to classical music.)

I've been a long time user of CATraxx, and can tell you that with some minor tweaks it can be a pretty persuasive database.  It is very customizable.  I've have occasionally gone on the CATraxx forum and have received tips and even a blank database template that I have used as my Classical Music database.

To answer some previous posts: 
•   The program "reads" the CD and will fill out some of the data fields from information uploaded to Gracenote.  I've only had a couple of CD's not be recognized by the program and I have over a 1000 discs (certainly nowhere near the majority of GMG'ers, but a goodly amount to see if the program works for me). The most basic information is usually downloaded into the program, i.e. CD Title, Artist(s), Composer, and track titles and timings. (Now this does depend on people like you and me submitting the information, which does lead to a lot of editing for those of us who are some OC.
•   You can put as few or as many different fields in the database.  There are quite a few in the program with well over 50% of the fields already named and defined.
•   The program will automatically search the internet for the CD cover, usually from amazon USA, but you can have it search amazon Canada, UK, Germany, France or Discogs.
•   You can be as detailed as you want or have a little info as you need.
I've also purchased Musichi Music Suite.  I use it instead of iTunes for my classical music ripping and computer storage.  It, too, has many of the same traits as CATraxx for depth of information, etc. 
At this moment CATraxx costs $40 and I believe is the best $40 I've ever spent.


Tony

[Mirror Image]

As I have written before, there needs to be a CD cataloging program where it's all based on album covers. Once you have found the recording you own, you should be able to use something like Gracenote, in doing this, you will able to pull all the information up of the recording you're looking for and simply add it to your database. Every program I've seen has been way too complicated. Simplicity is key in organizing your CDs.

[mc ukrneal]

Hello all,

I've been lurking around GMG for some time, enjoying everyone's opinions and interactions.  I finally dove in and registered just to reply to this thread. (I'm no musician.  And have absolutely no musical skills whatsoever, but I do enjoy listening to classical music.)

I've been a long time user of CATraxx, and can tell you that with some minor tweaks it can be a pretty persuasive database.  It is very customizable.  I've have occasionally gone on the CATraxx forum and have received tips and even a blank database template that I have used as my Classical Music database.

To answer some previous posts: 
•   The program "reads" the CD and will fill out some of the data fields from information uploaded to Gracenote.  I've only had a couple of CD's not be recognized by the program and I have over a 1000 discs (certainly nowhere near the majority of GMG'ers, but a goodly amount to see if the program works for me). The most basic information is usually downloaded into the program, i.e. CD Title, Artist(s), Composer, and track titles and timings. (Now this does depend on people like you and me submitting the information, which does lead to a lot of editing for those of us who are some OC.
•   You can put as few or as many different fields in the database.  There are quite a few in the program with well over 50% of the fields already named and defined.
•   The program will automatically search the internet for the CD cover, usually from amazon USA, but you can have it search amazon Canada, UK, Germany, France or Discogs.
•   You can be as detailed as you want or have a little info as you need.
I’ve also purchased Musichi Music Suite.  I use it instead of iTunes for my classical music ripping and computer storage.  It, too, has many of the same traits as CATraxx for depth of information, etc. 
At this moment CATraxx costs $40 and I believe is the best $40 I’ve ever spent.


Tony

Welcome and thanks for the information.

[aap1960]

And thank you.  I hope to use the forums' members knowledge to increase my own knowledge and help me discover all that I have been missing in regards to music.

Tony

[rigormortis]

I started 3 years ago by photographing my, then new and small, LP record collection and putting the photos of front- & backside on http://www.flickr.com/photos/hansthijs/
Now that there are some 15,000 or more record photos on it, I cannot go back to a regular DB program and just continue to do so. As long as Flickr is in the air for a reasonable price I have my own photo and tag based DB on the web. If they quit I have a problem to salvage all text that's there. The photo's are on my comp. too, but the accompanying text is only on the web. I guess to make some 15000 print screens again by then 
Maybe I should start already...
Nice discussion btw

[Papy Oli]

Not sure if that will be on interest but i'll put it out there in case it is.

Beside a spreadsheet to list my actual CD collections (model courtesy of Anthony Athletic, a few years back  0:) ) , I have gradually worked on a separate spreadsheet listing the actual works in my collection with composers' name, dates, periods (loosely i guess), genres, Opus numbers. That has helped me keeping a track on works that may appear in "compilation" boxsets only and not on standalone CDs, but also offering me a better understanding of comtemporary composers through the timeline...or just search for a work through it if I read about it here and am unsure if I already have it.

Maybe this is something you have considered doing in the past and this file might hopefully give you a headstart.

My next step might be to add a column with details of actual recording versions where multiples are held and one column for personal markings (1 to 5 stars maybe) & comments.

Any feedback and suggestions most welcome. Corrections on blatant errors too 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/vqtgzql8tfit8cf/CLASSICAL_WORKS_DATABASE.ods

[KeithW]

Not sure if that will be on interest but i'll put it out there in case it is.

Beside a spreadsheet to list my actual CD collections (model courtesy of Anthony Athletic, a few years back  0:) ) , I have gradually worked on a separate spreadsheet listing the actual works in my collection with composers' name, dates, periods (loosely i guess), genres, Opus numbers. That has helped me keeping a track on works that may appear in "compilation" boxsets only and not on standalone CDs, but also offering me a better understanding of comtemporary composers through the timeline...or just search for a work through it if I read about it here and am unsure if I already have it.

Maybe this is something you have considered doing in the past and this file might hopefully give you a headstart.

My next step might be to add a column with details of actual recording versions where multiples are held and one column for personal markings (1 to 5 stars maybe) & comments.

Any feedback and suggestions most welcome. Corrections on blatant errors too 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/vqtgzql8tfit8cf/CLASSICAL_WORKS_DATABASE.ods

Olivier

This is really helpful - thank you for sharing.  I've been working on a similar project to create an authority file of composers' names/dates and their works.  I have pulled in data form a variety of sources - IMSLP, the Library of Congress and some of the great lists from Presto and Hyperion.  My idea here is to use these - and a similar list of works and parts - to create consistency in my digital files - approaching 200,000 'tracks'.  Your list has given me some good pointers on how to organise things.

[flyingdutchman]

I just use my memory.  Works all the time.

[SonicMan46]

This sound like a good project to do in Access.  But it is too much like real work. 

Hi SanAntone - in early retirement, wife & I are transitioning over to Apple - now using a MacBook Pro (month old) & have an iMac on order - for years, I used Access for my databases (had Office @ work & on our home desktop PC) - but not planning to run Windows on the Mac nor do I want to pay for the MS suite w/ Access - was easy to convert my 'smaller' databases to other formats (Numbers, Google Drive, & iPad programs) but the musical databases (Classical & Non-Classical which printout to about 50 & 25 pages, respectively) are large!  I've updated each on the old Dell PC and have exported to Excel, and brought them into Numbers on my MBP - SO, I'll likely just use a spreadsheet format - I'd consider FileMaker Pro but @ $300, a ripoff for my needs (BOY, that's a couple dozen CDs!) - Dave

[KeithW]

Hi SanAntone - in early retirement, wife & I are transitioning over to Apple - now using a MacBook Pro (month old) & have an iMac on order - for years, I used Access for my databases (had Office @ work & on our home desktop PC) - but not planning to run Windows on the Mac nor do I want to pay for the MS suite w/ Access - was easy to convert my 'smaller' databases to other formats (Numbers, Google Drive, & iPad programs) but the musical databases (Classical & Non-Classical which printout to about 50 & 25 pages, respectively) are large!  I've updated each on the old Dell PC and have exported to Excel, and brought them into Numbers on my MBP - SO, I'll likely just use a spreadsheet format - I'd consider FileMaker Pro but @ $300, a ripoff for my needs (BOY, that's a couple dozen CDs!) - Dave

Have a look at Open Office - it offers great functionality at the best price (free).  It comes in Mac format and provides database coverage as well as documents, spreadsheets etc.

http://www.openoffice.org/

[Opus106]

Have a look at Open Office - it offers great functionality at the best price (free).  It comes in Mac format and provides database coverage as well as documents, spreadsheets etc.

http://www.openoffice.org/

Or LibreOffice. It's a fork of OO with a lot of bug fixes and in continuous development.

[Parsifal]

Or LibreOffice. It's a fork of OO with a lot of bug fixes and in continuous development.

Apache Open Office also is in continuous development.  Why is LibreOffice better? 

Currently I have OpenOffice installed so I can switch back and forth between Mac and PC on some small projects I putter around with.  Am I better off switching to LibreOffice?  Will LibreOffice be able to read OpenOffice files?

[Opus106]

Apache Open Office also is in continuous development.  Why is LibreOffice better? 

Currently I have OpenOffice installed so I can switch back and forth between Mac and PC on some small projects I putter around with.  Am I better off switching to LibreOffice?  Will LibreOffice be able to read OpenOffice files?

I was just suggesting an alternative for no good reason. Truth be told, the only reason I have any 'office' program installed in my (home) computer, is because it was already there. At least for basic tasks, I don't think there is much difference between either. I'm sorry if you were expecting something more.

[Parsifal]

I was just suggesting an alternative for no good reason. Truth be told, the only reason I have any 'office' program installed in my (home) computer, is because it was already there. At least for basic tasks, I don't think there is much difference between either. I'm sorry if you were expecting something more.

I was not hoping for something better.  The Appache version is just fine.  It is just disappointing that OpenOffice has fractured into competing camps which are presumably at war with each other and will ruin OpenOffice as a useful platform.  Maybe I should give up and get Microsoft Office.  At least there is only one Microsoft.   

[SonicMan46]

Have a look at Open Office - it offers great functionality at the best price (free).  It comes in Mac format and provides database coverage as well as documents, spreadsheets etc.

http://www.openoffice.org/

Hi Keith - thanks for the suggestion - I've actually used Open Office in the past (on an office PC & also on an old IBM laptop running Ubuntu) - however, I never did much w/ Base and not sure that I need to put an entire office package on the laptop which already has Pages & Numbers; the latter will probably do me OK, just have enjoyed the report output of Access.  Dave

[SonicMan46]

The functionality of the MS Access and OpenOffice Base (at least the one I tried) was fairly large, in favor of Access.  I currently use Office 2010 but learned Access on 2003 and that was what I compared to OO.

Hi SanAntone - we have Access 2003 on the old Dell desktop (although a newer version @ work before I retired) - so what I'm using to update these musical databases - I'll just play w/ Numbers on the MacBook Pro for the moment - Dave

[Madiel]

I have a copy of Access, however I've barely used it.

However, my music spreadsheet had grown uncomfortably large as a single 'page', and I've ended up moving the more voluminous composers onto their own separate pages.  It may be time to bring out the big guns.  And NOW I find out my brother-in-law is an Access whiz...