Wee collections. Big collections. Ten discs. Ten thousand discs. An LP collection. A tape collection. An Mp3 extravaganza. A collection nearing Harry-gantuan proportions. Or just a 1976 BASF tape of Verdis Requiem from a radio.
This thread is about our precious collections.
Anything about our collections, because we all have them to a greater or lesser extent; mixed media, CD's only, Digital, DVD's etc...how do we keep them, catalogue them and store them? What are the most precious in our collectons? How many have we 'borrowed' and 'lended'? What kind of cataloging system do you use? How often do you add to it? WHAT do you add to it? Do you take stuff away from it over time? Do you give a flying furtwangler about your collection at all? How do you clean your collection? Are things in sleeves, cases or what, and are your covernotes kept separte? If you have something of a Digital collection, what about it? Do you press labels? What do you keep it on? Do you have boxes, shelves, racks or what? Do you group by year, composer or what? What else is in your collection? And why does the Sun roate the Earth at curious angles? ???
Well, this is just to get things going, selfishly, because today I just completed the task of cataloging everything, printing collection sheets from Excel, re-organising in order, etc...and I am very satisfied that my wee collection is as fine as it had been before the Great Fire of Glasgow. It took me all day to do it, and with such yearly frothing my collection has grown. It's contents, cleaning and cataloging and stuff I will reveal as things go on... :-*
MODERATORS: Eh...I seem to have put this 'sub-thread' in the wrong 'thread.' Can it be moved to 'Genereal Classical Music Discussion' ?
Maybe this can be a start, John:
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,572.msg10307.html#msg10307
I'm a huge prick, but I'm also a huge believer in Used, Library, Listening-by-Any-Means, and Selling, so, I'm currently weighing in at a very svelte 600. You should see me trim the fat, baby! 8) The Library's as tight as a du...
I can play Shostakovich in my head anytime I want; why do I need a cd?
A lot of topics on collection in the OP, some of wich have been covered before.
Other relevant threads:
How do you organize your recordings? (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2294.0.html)
Show us your classical CD collection (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1153.msg27702.html#msg27702)
CD storage solutions (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,1531.0.html)
Q
By all the symphonies! :'( :'( :'(
The puropse of starting this post was out of a collectors interest in what others are doing with theirs, not to be hit with links which have already 'been covered' (some of them
four years ago :o ) and thereby kill much of the the post before it begins. BY all the Gods I am so disappointed. I will find a collectors forum somewhere then, where people are interested in what others are doing NOW with their collections and how they're enhanced. >:(
I also started it in the wrong thread. :'( :'( :'( :'(
QuoteI can play Shostakovich in my head anytime I want; why do I need a cd?
I too am a bit of a 'huge prick' :-[, so I would say the answer to your dichotomy is probably in the
listening to the music media rather than the mental playing of it. :D
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 03:24:48 AM
By all the symphonies! :'( :'( :'(
The puropse of starting this post was out of a collectors interest in what others are doing with theirs, not to be hit with links which have already 'been covered' (some of them four years ago :o ) and thereby kill much of the the post before it begins. BY all the Gods I am so disappointed. I will find a collectors forum somewhere then, where people are interested in what others are doing NOW with their collections and how they're enhanced. >:(
I also started it in the wrong thread. :'( :'( :'( :'(
I too am a bit of a 'huge prick' :-[, so I would say the answer to your dichotomy is probably in the listening to the music media rather than the mental playing of it. :D
Hey, cheer up. People were trying to be helpful, not be spoil sports. It was hard to understand what you really wanted with the first post (that is, it went every which way), so perhaps they did not go the direction you really wanted. I'm still not entirely sure myself.
And congratulations on the cataloging!! That is a lot of work! I am actually doing something similar . I have an id column that so far is blank (and no idea what will go there). I like keeping the jewel cases pristine (meaning without anything sticky - I really hate that), so I can't see myself actually putting any markings on the cds, booklets or cases. I also keep them in virtually no order. And people in my house think they (the cds) look ugly, so most of them are in boxes. Thus, my real focus has been on a) keeping track of what I have and b) keeping statistics of my collection (I love statistics), though most of it is done with the electronic version of the collection and not the discs themselves.
I rarely look at most of the cds anymore, though I try to look at some that I know could have bronzing issues. I think I've found all the ones that might have been impacted as no problem cds have appeared in the last 5-6 years. I never clean them, but that is beacause I don't touch them much anymore. I've bought one cd rack over 20+ years, so I tend not to spend money on that. But as I mentioned, I keep them in boxes pretty much (which is a pain when I want to find a particular libretto - no, I don't box them in any order either).
I do download the booklets from Chandos and Hyperion where available. I wish more companies made the booklet available.
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 03:24:48 AMI will find a collectors forum somewhere then, where people are interested in what others are doing NOW with their collections and how they're enhanced. >:(
You're trying to find higher ground standing on Mt. Everest.
Quote from: snyprrr on February 13, 2011, 07:37:36 PM
I'm a huge prick, but....
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 03:24:48 AM
I too am a bit of a 'huge prick' ...
I too have a huge prick....oh wait...are you guys talking about the same thing I am? Anyway, since links to older threads on this topic have been posted, I don't know if John's thread will take off. I will wait then before saying anything more about my collection.
Sarge
Quote from: ukrneal on February 14, 2011, 03:41:28 AM
I do download the booklets from Chandos and Hyperion where available. I wish more companies made the booklet available.
Just an FYI: Naxos does that, as does SDG. Pretty nice of them. :)
CDs do collect, yes they do.
Quoteukrneal: cheer up...most of it is done with the electronic version of the collection and not the discs themselves...
:D
Does this mean you back your collection up to digital and catalogue from there, or do you use an 'electronic' program to catalogue your Audio CDs?
I have a collection of mixed media formats, so that all my disparate hardware can play it all at the drop of a hat, although I do not wear hats. I use a wee program called 'My Music Collection' by Nuclear Coffee to catalogue everything, although for some years now I have looked for a program dedicated to cataloging Classical Music only, and haven't found
ANYTHING satisfactory. >:( Still, the little program I use has some statistical analysis in it, so here's a peek...not very good, I know, but a robust and multi-faceted Classically dedicated program has not yet been developed anywhere. :-[
I keep all CDs in 120mcg clear wallets, with cover and notes where possible. In the digital realm, everything is is MP3 format with minimum ripping @ 192kbps. Digital and Audio CD's share the same space and are in alphabetical order by COMPOSER. Because of the space saving by digital compression and use of clear wallets instead of cases (I hate cases, my greedy wee fingers burst them too easily), my collection whilst satisfactory for my needs at the moment, looks somewhat paltry and small compared to...er...the labyrinths of Harry et al!
I also churned out a printed, appendable catalogue and a 'list' of the works I have, which can be seen in this photo of my little 'drawer' of music. The media device on display is not my primary one.
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 05:05:06 AM
:D
Does this mean you back your collection up to digital and catalogue from there, or do you use an 'electronic' program to catalogue your Audio CDs?
I haven't spent money on programs nor spent time poking around what is available for free online. I use one of a couple programs to rip (more in a moment on that) and I use excel to catalog. I enter it all in myself (by hand, which keeps me close to the collection). Eventually I will create the tables and graphics (pie charts) you showed when I have everything input. This has the added bonus of keeping me up to date on excel! :)
I rip my classical collection to 320 kbps (sometimes VBR for opera or other cross-track pieces), although I started at 128. I quickly decided that I needed better quality when I got good headphones and shifted to 256 kbps (eventually 320). Because I often travel, I use portable external drives, so space was an issue at fist. I expect to ultimately rip a second FLAC version and keep both file extensions on one or two external drives. They get bigger every year, so hoping to get at least a 1 TB portable drive this year. This means eventually re-ripping everything, but that's ok (I'm in no rush). I have a backup, but it is starting to get out of date and I probably need to copy it to my newest drive. I rip everything to mp3. I keep my rock/jazz/latin discs on itunes, which allows me to see classical in one place and everything else in another.
I've never been staisfied with any media programs. EAC has always been slow for me (and I rarely have discs with scratches, so rarely need it). I used winamp and Media Monkey at times (and one that I forget off the top of my head). I was thinking of using winamp for the FLAC files. Windows Media and itunes seem no better or worse than others from my opinion. They all pretty much stink for classical users.
Your catalog looks cool, and I hope to eventually create cool looking charts like you have. Incidentally, since 2005/06, I've started keeping track of the cost too. Currently at about $8.3 per disc as of my last check some months ago.
Okay, here's a question (to anyone who wishes to answer): what would be the features of an ideal cataloguing program catered for western classical music enthusiasts? Thanks in advance.
Quote from: Opus106 on February 14, 2011, 05:42:46 AM
Okay, here's a question (to anyone who wishes to answer): what would be the features of an ideal cataloguing program catered for western classical music enthusiasts? Thanks in advance.
Navneeth, my Astonomical friend, I have a spec sheet!
It must be dedicated solely to Classical Music, with appropriate logos and wording. There was only ever one of those out there and it went defunct in 2006, but it was sadly lacking features.
It must have the capacity to investigate any popular media format with connection to Amazon, freedb, gracenote, etc, and the optional ability to re-write digital tags with the new/discovered data. Addition and extaction of Pictures (covers, etc) is also handy. An easy to input and extract information schema. Auto look up Audio CD's. Export to Excel, CSV, etc. Simple Database sorting. Variety of printout options. DVD and Blu Ray support. A little player on it would also be nice... :-\ :-X...
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 05:05:06 AM
I use a wee program called 'My Music Collection' by Nuclear Coffee to catalogue everything, although for some years now I have looked for a program dedicated to cataloging Classical Music only, and haven't found ANYTHING satisfactory.
Two questions:
a) Does this program cost money?
b) Does the cataloguing system allow for a field for recording date? This is very important once you get into multiple performances of the same pieces by the same people (e.g. Wand, Furtwängler, Karajan's multiple cycles of everything, etc.).
I have over 2000 CDs, some 60-odd LPs, and a not very well organized collection of mp3s of streaming radio broadcasts. I started an excel sheet a while ago but managed to make a total mess of it and then never bothered to clean it up or update it. I do a lot of comparative listening, so I would love to have a decent catalogue if only to remind myself of other performances I have in other collections or on other media.
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 06:18:56 AM
Navneeth, my Astonomical friend, I have a spec sheet!
It must be dedicated solely to Classical Music, with appropriate logos and wording. There was only ever one of those out there and it went defunct in 2006, but it was sadly lacking features.
It must have the capacity to investigate any popular media format with connection to Amazon, freedb, gracenote, etc, and the optional ability to re-write digital tags with the new/discovered data. Addition and extaction of Pictures (covers, etc) is also handy. An easy to input and extract information schema. Auto look up Audio CD's. Export to Excel, CSV, etc. Simple Database sorting. Variety of printout options. DVD and Blu Ray support. A little player on it would also be nice... :-\ :-X...
John,
I use the greatest MP3 tagging program ever. It is called MP3 Tag. It not only does all that stuff, but if you keep a master folder with all your music divided into sub-folders, then you can open as many folders as you want, up to and including all of them, and it will export reports in a variety of formats. It can do stuff that I haven't figured out yet, so probably more than one can ever hope. I suspect that since one of the formats is HTML, that I can open it with Excel and play around til my heart's content.
Did I mention that it's free?
MP3Tag
8)
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on February 14, 2011, 06:59:41 AM
John,
I use the greatest MP3 tagging program ever. It is called MP3 Tag. It not only does all that stuff, but if you keep a master folder with all your music divided into sub-folders, then you can open as many folders as you want, up to and including all of them, and it will export reports in a variety of formats. It can do stuff that I haven't figured out yet, so probably more than one can ever hope. I suspect that since one of the formats is HTML, that I can open it with Excel and play around til my heart's content.
Did I mention that it's free?
MP3Tag
8)
How does it work? Let's say you have 20 discs ripped already to Windows Media, Itunes or other player. Can you import all the data to this tag program, manipulate it to your heart's content (including changing it using external sources like Amazaon, freedb, etc. without manually entering in data) and then export the updated info back to the player without screwing things up everywhere?
Quote from: ukrneal on February 14, 2011, 07:32:41 AM
How does it work? Let's say you have 20 discs ripped already to Windows Media, Itunes or other player. Can you import all the data to this tag program, manipulate it to your heart's content (including changing it using external sources like Amazaon, freedb, etc. without manually entering in data) and then export the updated info back to the player without screwing things up everywhere?
http://mp3tag.de/en/index.html
[From experience] You just have to open the folder which contains the ripped sources and start editing. It's as simple as that. When you access those files again using your favourite media player, the tags will be as you'd edited them.
Quote from: ukrneal on February 14, 2011, 07:32:41 AM
How does it work? Let's say you have 20 discs ripped already to Windows Media, Itunes or other player. Can you import all the data to this tag program, manipulate it to your heart's content (including changing it using external sources like Amazaon, freedb, etc. without manually entering in data) and then export the updated info back to the player without screwing things up everywhere?
I don't know, I don't do that. Let me know though.
I use it for all my tagging. When I rip, my ripper downloads from various online db's. I never like the tags, so I open the folder I ripped to in this program and modify the tags to suit myself, including the file names. At that point, however many files you have open (and I never had more open than it could handle so I don't know what the limit it) are subject to being a 'report'. Or a playlist if that's what you want. But if you select 20 files, for example, and then select File>Export... then you can choose which format you want, and which fields you want, and then save it. If it is a compatible format, you can open in Excel and do as you wish. You can do all sorts of custom fields too. It has lots of capabilities that I don't use. My wants are finite; I want to put tags I can live with on digital files. All the other stuff is extra for me, but it might be perfect for you.
It's free, did I mention? :)
8)
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on February 14, 2011, 06:59:41 AM
John,
I use the greatest MP3 tagging program ever. It is called MP3 Tag.
Yes Gurn, I agree it is an outstanding program, it is what I have used since 2008 for all my music. But it doesn't have advanced cataloging features. :-[
QuoteMensch: a) Does this program cost money?
b) Does the cataloguing system allow for a field for recording date? This is very important once you get into multiple performances of the same pieces by the same people (e.g. Wand, Furtwängler, Karajan's multiple cycles of everything, etc.).
Yes. It costs about £30.
Yes. It makes allowance for recording dates. It also makes allowance for 'Classical' collections, with "composer" fields etc. But it is still not exclusively Classical. Nice easy interface, the best exporting to Excel I've found. I don't recommend it, but I don't not recommend it. ???
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 08:17:03 AM
Yes. It costs about £30.
Yes. It makes allowance for recording dates. It also makes allowance for 'Classical' collections, with "composer" fields etc. But it is still not exclusively Classical. Nice easy interface, the best exporting to Excel I've found. I don't recommend it, but I don't not recommend it. ???
Thanks. Not willing to spend that kind of money at this time. I would need separate fields for ensemble, conductor and vocal and instrumental performers as well. Otherwise it's useless for my purposes.
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 08:17:03 AM
Yes Gurn, I agree it is an outstanding program, it is what I have used since 2008 for all my music. But it doesn't have advanced cataloging features. :-[
True enough, but what it has can be used for that purpose if one desires. Especially if you totally don't use IDv1 tags. Anyway, I only use MP3 and FLAC, so I can do things that Apple files, for example, wouldn't allow.
QuoteYes. It costs about £30.
Yes. It makes allowance for recording dates. It also makes allowance for 'Classical' collections, with "composer" fields etc. But it is still not exclusively Classical. Nice easy interface, the best exporting to Excel I've found. I don't recommend it, but I don't not recommend it. ???
They aren't specific, really, about what I can do. Can I point it at a folder on my hard drive and it well read and catalog via the IDv2 tags? That's what I would want, not just reading the ID tags on my CD's. I suspect it will do that, but their blurb is non-specific about it. :)
8)
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on February 14, 2011, 08:24:22 AM
Anyway, I only use MP3 and FLAC, so I can do things that Apple files, for example, wouldn't allow.
I rip my CDs to ALAC, and mp3tag, despite what its name might suggest, handles those files well. :)
I have about 2000 CDs, 90% classical. Probably more than half of them have been purchased since joining CMG & GMG several years ago. The great majority rarely if ever get played and it's probably foolish of me to have so many, but I sold most of my books and LPs 20 years ago and have often regretted it.
They are stored in CD-depth shelving units on the wall of our music room, and I have a small shelving unit in my office where I temporarily store items I listen to via computer while working/playing. They're shelved alphabetically by composer, with a separate section by performer for compilation albums. Subsections are shelved by type of composition (symphonies, quartets, etc) and within each by performer/conductor.
I keep a simple catalog in Excel, sequenced identically to the shelving sequence.
For iPod/Sansa portable listening I have ripped a couple of hundred favorites in LAME, mostly at 320 CBR but with my recent hearing losses (getting older!) I can't hear the difference between that and 256 VBR with most music. I keep thinking someday I might rip everything to FLAC and go with a server feeding my DAC, but CDs are so darned convenient it's unlikely I'll ever feel compelled to.
Since I'm listening to my music via the computer and a DA converter I found it useful to rip all CDs to an external hard disk, and to secure all the work I also use a second backup disk.
For the collection (and listening) management I wrote my own software (in Perl) which reads cuesheets and other information from the folders. I put all information into the cuesheets, including keywords, and different symbols. E. g. special remarkable recordings get a "star", the ones that give me special joy get a "heart", which helps me to remember how I liked some rarely played things, when I'm looking for something to play. I have a printed list, and one in HTML on the computer, so one can easily search for keywords etc.
I like to have a system I can adapt to my personal wishes, and also it is a nice programming project, which motivates me to dive deeper into the programming language.
The software also turned out useful for cleanup and formatting of the track information I get from the Internet when ripping (with EAC), I can have the English and French names of keys etc. translated into German, extract the the composition name out of multi track compositions, recognise and remove pre-emphasis, do the lossless compression into my preferred format (ape), etc.
As someone who was at one time employed in the collectibles field, I'm the first to admit what I have is not a collection. It is an accumulation.
When I got home from work today, two CDs I ordered were waiting for me with the mail -- Joshua Bell/West Side Story Suite because I like Joshua Bell and the tunes from West Side Story and Mercury Living Presence/Balalaika Favorites because I was curious to hear what authentic balalaika music sounds like. I also won last night a vinyl lot of David Oistrakh recordings, some of which I already had but well worth the total price for the records I wanted.
I have a couple of thousand CDs in my house upstairs in my music room on shelves in alphabetical order by composer, by performer, or by genre, depending upon what makes the most sense to me. I can't always find what I'm looking for right away, but I can usually put my finger on it pretty quickly. My vinyl is in my luxurious office garage where I actually spend more time these days, arranged pretty much in the same manner. My CD recorder is out there too, so when I listen to a record I don't have on CD, I routinely burn a copy as I listen. My computer that has itunes on it is in a third location, and any recording I might want to listen to again or, especially in my car, I download and burn travel CDs that I don't have to worry about scratching or losing.
I've purchased many large lots of both CDs and LPs so I've acquired a mish-mash of stuff and duplicates along with the recordings I was actually interested in and I've made a lot of great discoveries that way. I don't try to keep any kind of an inventory, although it certainly would be helpful. Maybe some day.
Quote from: Sadko on February 14, 2011, 12:28:18 PM
For the collection (and listening) management I wrote my own software (in Perl) which reads cuesheets and other information from the folders. I put all information into the cuesheets, including keywords, and different symbols. E. g. special remarkable recordings get a "star", the ones that give me special joy get a "heart", which helps me to remember how I liked some rarely played things, when I'm looking for something to play. I have a printed list, and one in HTML on the computer, so one can easily search for keywords etc.
The software also turned out useful for cleanup and formatting of the track information I get from the Internet when ripping (with EAC), I can have the English and French names of keys etc. translated into German, extract the the composition name out of multi track compositions, recognise and remove pre-emphasis, do the lossless compression into my preferred format (ape), etc.
Very interesting. Is your program available commercially, on the public domain, or is it just for you (lol). :)
Quote from: John on February 14, 2011, 11:22:09 PM
Very interesting. Is your program available commercially, on the public domain, or is it just for you (lol). :)
The software is tailormade for me (you even can - but need not - write little temporary progam scriptlets within a cuesheet you are working on to automate certain tasks), and that means also the usage might not be so easy for someone else.
If there was a wider interest I might think about making a public version, but that would take some more programming time.
Sadko - I didn't think that anybody had an interest in this other than myself. I am planning a similar little app with a friend which will transfer the track titles from a cue file into either the cue or tags of a second recording. Ideally it will have an off-set feature to factor in whether another work comes first, such as on this disc (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bach-Goldberg-Variations-Partita-Glenn/dp/B000N2G1HQ), where the Partita would disrupt the attempt to auto-tag the Goldbergs.
This became essential when I began to collect Bach and Chopin, as tagging multiple Sonatas & Partitas, Goldbergs, Well-Tempered Claviers or Preludes/Etudes is a recipe for repetetive strain injury.
Quote from: John on February 13, 2011, 05:57:52 PM
Wee collections. Big collections. Ten discs. Ten thousand discs. An LP collection. A tape collection. An Mp3 extravaganza. A collection nearing Harry-gantuan proportions. Or just a 1976 BASF tape of Verdis Requiem from a radio.
This thread is about our precious collections.
Anything about our collections, because we all have them to a greater or lesser extent; mixed media, CD's only, Digital, DVD's etc...how do we keep them, catalogue them and store them? What are the most precious in our collectons? How many have we 'borrowed' and 'lended'? What kind of cataloging system do you use? How often do you add to it? WHAT do you add to it? Do you take stuff away from it over time? Do you give a flying furtwangler about your collection at all? How do you clean your collection? Are things in sleeves, cases or what, and are your covernotes kept separte? If you have something of a Digital collection, what about it? Do you press labels? What do you keep it on? Do you have boxes, shelves, racks or what? Do you group by year, composer or what? What else is in your collection? And why does the Sun roate the Earth at curious angles? ???
Well, this is just to get things going, selfishly, because today I just completed the task of cataloging everything, printing collection sheets from Excel, re-organising in order, etc...and I am very satisfied that my wee collection is as fine as it had been before the Great Fire of Glasgow. It took me all day to do it, and with such yearly frothing my collection has grown. It's contents, cleaning and cataloging and stuff I will reveal as things go on... :-*
MODERATORS: Eh...I seem to have put this 'sub-thread' in the wrong 'thread.' Can it be moved to 'Genereal Classical Music Discussion' ?
Well I give a flying furtwangler about this:
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5129XPnkORL._SS500_.jpg)
Just ask Sarge he'll tell you all about it!
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on February 14, 2011, 04:30:07 AM
I too have a huge prick....oh wait...are you guys talking about the same thing I am? Anyway, since links to older threads on this topic have been posted, I don't know if John's thread will take off. I will wait then before saying anything more about my collection.
Sarge
LOL!!! Sarge your post above has got to be the funniest one this year!! LOL!!!
marvin
I've got a large classical collection around 7,000 CDs.
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 15, 2011, 06:41:18 AM
I've got a large classical collection around 7,000 CDs.
The way this thread has gone, I have to say that mine is smaller than yours. :-[
:D
My collection isn't particularly large.I'm not sure how many I have;probably about 500 or so.
It's a rather quirky collection, and very eclectic. There are quite a few great masterpieces I don't have,not because I don't love them,but because there are so many interesting rarities available that I have tended to get these
instead of standard masterpieces I've already heard zillions of times.
I have everything from music by Palestrina,Lassus, Dufay, Byrd, Gesualdo and other early masters to
things by Carter,Boulez, Henze,Berio, Rouse and other contemporary composers.
My collection has all manner of interesting rarities by the likes of Anton Rubinstein, Arnold Bax, Charles Koechlin,
Franz Berwald, Wilhelm Stenhammar, Franz Schmidt, Pavel Haas, Walter Braunfels, Franz Schreker,
Alexander von Zemlinsky, Zdenek Fibich, Nikolai Myaskovsky, Sergei Taneyev, Ernst Krenek,
Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Albert Roussel, Antonio Carlos Gomes, Eugen D'Albert, Riccardo Zandonai,
Albert Lortzing, Gheorghe Enescu, Alexander Glazunov, Reinhold Gliere,Bohuslav Martinu, John Alden Carpenter,
Paul Creston, Carl Ruggles, Carlos Chavez,
Havergal Brian, E.J. Moeran, Johan Svendsen, Mily Balakirev, and others.
No one could ever accuse me of having an uninteresting CD collection !
Quote from: Superhorn on February 15, 2011, 02:24:10 PM
My collection isn't particularly large.I'm not sure how many I have;probably about 500 or so.
It's a rather quirky collection, and very eclectic. There are quite a few great masterpieces I don't have,not because I don't love them,but because there are so many interesting rarities available that I have tended to get these
instead of standard masterpieces I've already heard zillions of times.
I have everything from music by Palestrina,Lassus, Dufay, Byrd, Gesualdo and other early masters to
things by Carter,Boulez, Henze,Berio, Rouse and other contemporary composers.
My collection has all manner of interesting rarities by the likes of Anton Rubinstein, Arnold Bax, Charles Koechlin,
Franz Berwald, Wilhelm Stenhammar, Franz Schmidt, Pavel Haas, Walter Braunfels, Franz Schreker,
Alexander von Zemlinsky, Zdenek Fibich, Nikolai Myaskovsky, Sergei Taneyev, Ernst Krenek,
Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Albert Roussel, Antonio Carlos Gomes, Eugen D'Albert, Riccardo Zandonai,
Albert Lortzing, Gheorghe Enescu, Alexander Glazunov, Reinhold Gliere,Bohuslav Martinu, John Alden Carpenter,
Paul Creston, Carl Ruggles, Carlos Chavez,
Havergal Brian, E.J. Moeran, Johan Svendsen, Mily Balakirev, and others.
No one could ever accuse me of having an uninteresting CD collection !
You have quite an uninteresting CD collection - just had to say it. :D
As for my CD collection, I have many thousands but decided that counting them up is a waste of time. I don't catalog them either, just keep them in alphabetical order by composer. Also, no listening log - I'm not interested in what I heard but what I'm hearing and will hear in the future. I do have a few downloads, but they're not important to me. Overall, my collection is perfect.
Storage can be a pain. Many of my cds are in a large entertainment center that also houses my audio equipment; remaining cds are in closets. As you all know, a well-decorated home does not show musical products or equipment. That's why I kept my clarinet and sold my piano; it wouldn't fit in any of the closets. 8)
Yes, how tacky rooms look with a musical instrument on display!
(http://lh4.ggpht.com/_hUw_VQ5l9r0/Sf7vA7Dme4I/AAAAAAAAET0/XxuiuMho0DM/dallas_dougnewby_thumb3.jpg?imgmax=800)
Perhaps this chair would improve the decor?
(http://homedesignfresh.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Octopus-Chair-Lounge-Homedesignfresh-4-500x359.jpg)
Quote from: Bulldog on February 15, 2011, 02:58:29 PM
You have quite an uninteresting CD collection - just had to say it. :D
As for my CD collection, I have many thousands but decided that counting them up is a waste of time. I don't catalog them either, just keep them in alphabetical order by composer. Also, no listening log - I'm not interested in what I heard but what I'm hearing and will hear in the future. I do have a few downloads, but they're not important to me. Overall, my collection is perfect.
Storage can be a pain. Many of my cds are in a large entertainment center that also houses my audio equipment; remaining cds are in closets. As you all know, a well-decorated home does not show musical products or equipment. That's why I kept my clarinet and sold my piano; it wouldn't fit in any of the closets. 8)
Don - LOL! ;D I have a large collection also but have it on a computer database, so could definitely give a pretty exact amount of CDs owned (into the thousands); plus the variety is quite varied to my satisfaction; storage is always an issue for me (I've been in the same house for 34 years and it does not get bigger!) - so, I'll continue to
add & cull my collection to fit into the space available but possibly obtain recordings that I prefer - BUT, isn't that the fun of enjoying and participating in this forum? Dave :D
Quote from: Sherman Peabody on February 15, 2011, 04:39:28 PM
Yes, how tacky rooms look with a musical instrument on display!
(http://lh4.ggpht.com/_hUw_VQ5l9r0/Sf7vA7Dme4I/AAAAAAAAET0/XxuiuMho0DM/dallas_dougnewby_thumb3.jpg?imgmax=800)
Perhaps this chair would improve the decor?
(http://homedesignfresh.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Octopus-Chair-Lounge-Homedesignfresh-4-500x359.jpg)
Yes, a delightful enhancement. Glad to see that you're on my side. ;D
Catlog in Word format...
Entry by work,let the computer sort it. Sort priority can be changed.
I had ClassicCat, which was great, but has disappeared and old program won't carry over to this computer.
copied mid-edit Cyrano de Bergerac is by Alfano
Quote from: Bulldog on February 15, 2011, 02:58:29 PM
Also, no listening log - I'm not interested in what I heard but what I'm hearing and will hear in the future.
I tend to be horrified whenever I read what the me-of-several-years-ago has been saying :'(
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on February 16, 2011, 12:56:25 AM
I tend to be horrified whenever I read what the me-of-several-years-ago has been saying :'(
That's why I try never to read my GMG posts from more than, say, a month ago: it's really scary. That's also why my listening log (see attached photo) is absolutely bare-bones: just enough to track what I'm hearing and who's playing it. I use Microsoft Word, but only because I'm too dumb to have figured out what program would be better.
As for my collection: before moving to London in September, I had to digitize my entire pre-existing collection, or at least anything I thought there was the slightest chance I'd want to listen to while here. iTunes informs me that I have 120.95 GB of music, that is to say, "13844 songs" or 58 days, 7 hours, 30 minutes, and 17 seconds. I've bought about 20 CDs here in England, though, and received slightly more than that from MusicWeb, so the collection's gotten even larger.
I guess an average of 1 CD = 1 hour would put me at 1450 CDs, plus the undigitized CDs back in Texas.
QuoteGURN: They aren't specific, really, about what I can do. Can I point it at a folder on my hard drive and it well read and catalog via the IDv2 tags? That's what I would want, not just reading the ID tags on my CD's. I suspect it will do that, but their blurb is non-specific about it.
The wee program has no problem with tags up to id3.x. :) It can read tags from any media you point it at. :D
But still, it is not classical. :'(
My collection is uninteresting? A lot of people has classical collections filled with the same old familiar masterpieces by Beethoven,Bach,Mozart,Chopin,Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninov etc,
But I have things likes Respighi's only symphony ,the "Sinfonia Drammatica," ,Rubinstein's "Ocean "symphony,
the three Max Bruch symphonies( quite underrated works) , the six Chavez symphonies, the complete Josephslegende by Richard Strauss, Koechlin's Jungle Book complete, Szymanowski's Harnasie balet, the Dvorak Slavonic Rhapsdies,(not to be confunsed with the Slavonic dances), the Stenhammar Serenade in F for orchestra,
some Myaskovsky symphonies,the cello concerto and some string quartets, Taneyev's Suite de Concert for violin and orchestra, the Prokofiev Cantata on the 20 anniversary of the Russian Revolution, the "Color" symphony of Arthur Bliss,
the Bruch oratorio "Song of the Bell", the D'Indy symphony no 2, to name only a handful of works you have almost zero chance of ever hearing live.
Among the obscure but interesting operas I have are Roussel's Padmacvati,Nielsen's Saul&David, Enescu's Oedipe, Krenek's Jonny Spielt Auf, Il Guarany by Antonio Carlos Gomez, Zandonai's Francesca Da Rimini ,
Gwendoline by Chabrer, The Charlatan by Pavel Haas, Flammen by Erwin Schulhoff, Doe Vogel by Walter Braunfels, Osud and The Excursions of Mr. Broucek by Janacek, Libuse, The Kiss, The Devil's Wall, by Smetana,
Intermezzo, Friedenstag, and Die Liebe Der Danae by Richard Strauss, Langgard's Antikrist, Prokofiev's Semyon Kotko, Rimsky-Korsakov's Sadko, Legend of Kitezh, Kaschchei the Immkotal by Rimsky-Korsakov,The Demon by Anton Rubinstein etc.
That's uninteresting? Try some of these recordings ! Sheesh !!! And I left our a lot of other ihnteresting stuff in my collection.
I think Bulldog was just tugging the bone. Your collection sounds extremely plunderable, and you make reference to some works that have got me interested.
QuoteRespighi's only symphony, the Sinfonia Drammatica, Rubinstein's "Ocean "symphony, The Demon by Anton Rubinstein
Quote from: John of Glasgow on February 16, 2011, 07:54:17 AM
I think Bulldog was just tugging the bone. Your collection sounds extremely plunderable, and you make reference to some works that have got me interested.
Yes, I was "tugging the bone", and Superhorn swallowed it.
My real point was that a person's collection reflects his/her own preferences; what that collection looks like to others means nothing.
Quote from: Superhorn on February 16, 2011, 07:20:23 AM
My collection is uninteresting? A lot of people has classical collections filled with the same old familiar masterpieces by Beethoven,Bach,Mozart,Chopin,Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninov etc,
But I have things likes Respighi's only symphony ,the "Sinfonia Drammatica," ,Rubinstein's "Ocean "symphony,
the three Max Bruch symphonies( quite underrated works) , the six Chavez symphonies, the complete Josephslegende by Richard Strauss, Koechlin's Jungle Book complete, Szymanowski's Harnasie balet, the Dvorak Slavonic Rhapsdies,(not to be confunsed with the Slavonic dances), the Stenhammar Serenade in F for orchestra,
some Myaskovsky symphonies,the cello concerto and some string quartets, Taneyev's Suite de Concert for violin and orchestra, the Prokofiev Cantata on the 20 anniversary of the Russian Revolution, the "Color" symphony of Arthur Bliss,
the Bruch oratorio "Song of the Bell", the D'Indy symphony no 2, to name only a handful of works you have almost zero chance of ever hearing live.
I recently acquired the Boris Tchaikovsky string quartets on Northern Flowers - maybe you'd like to check them out.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 16, 2011, 08:05:57 AM
I recently acquired the Boris Tchaikovsky string quartets on Northern Flowers - maybe you'd like to check them out.
Are they good (the quartets, not so much the recordings)?
Quote from: Scarpia on February 16, 2011, 08:06:48 AM
Are they good (the quartets, not so much the recordings)?
Yes, they are VERY good and recorded in 1991. Actually, I haven't heard any Boris that I don't enjoy. For me, Boris trumps Pete.
Edit: I was way off concerning the recording date - it's 2008.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 16, 2011, 08:12:26 AM
Yes, they are VERY good and recorded in 1991. Actually, I haven't heard any Boris that I don't enjoy. For me, Boris trumps Pete.
Oooops, I missed "Boris." I do have one release of Boris Tchaikovsky.
Quote from: John of Glasgow on February 15, 2011, 10:45:02 AM
The way this thread has gone, I have to say that mine is smaller than yours. :-[
:D
Well, my CD buying has slowed down considerably this year so far. I just don't see a whole lot that I want right now and I own most of the recordings that I have wanted to buy. There are still a few stragglers that I haven't gotten around to yet like Wagner's operas, which will be some of my next purchases I'm sure. In terms of organizing my collection, this is still a work in progress. I would at least like to get all the composers in alphabetical order, but I would also like to get some larger storage cabinets like an armoire or something. I have many of them in filing cabinets right now and also in large plastic containers.
Quote from: Bulldog on February 15, 2011, 02:58:29 PM
As for my CD collection, I have many thousands but decided that counting them up is a waste of time. I don't catalog them either, just keep them in alphabetical order by composer. Also, no listening log - I'm not interested in what I heard but what I'm hearing and will hear in the future. I do have a few downloads, but they're not important to me. Overall, my collection is perfect.
Storage can be a pain. Many of my cds are in a large entertainment center that also houses my audio equipment; remaining cds are in closets. As you all know, a well-decorated home does not show musical products or equipment. That's why I kept my clarinet and sold my piano; it wouldn't fit in any of the closets. 8)
This pretty much mirrors what I was going to say. Maybe 1 to 1.5k CD's (don't know or care the precise number), organized on shelves alphabetically. Space is a challenge. No digital files. No databases, catalogs, listening logs, logbooks, or logarithms.* I can easily find what I need as is. I don't buy too much anymore since I already have a comically large number of discs that will last me til Kingdom come. I haven't listened to all the discs I have yet.
As for content: mostly classical, then jazz, then rock and misc. My classical section includes most of the core repertoire and a good number of obscurities, covering all periods and genres. My chief focus is symphonies: 653 different ones by 119 composers so far. I will slowly add the complete symphonies of about 80 other specific composers. *This is the one area I do keep databases.
QuoteGrazioso: ...653 different ones by 119 composers so far...
Not a bad estimation for one who has no mind to count his discs!
:P
Quote from: John of Glasgow on February 14, 2011, 05:05:06 AM
I also churned out a printed, appendable catalogue and a 'list' of the works I have, which can be seen in this photo of my little 'drawer' of music. The media device on display is not my primary one.
Well John, that is one way to
CAT-a-logue! ;D Looks very much like our cat, Bunny.
Quote from: Brian on February 16, 2011, 02:49:59 AM
That's why I try never to read my GMG posts from more than, say, a month ago: it's really scary.
Wonderful...that means you're growing and learning at a phenomenal rate. Just wait until you get out of school, Brian. I think most folks go through the most rapid period of change, re-evaluation, and adjustment during their first two or three years out of school. (Perhaps this helps account for why so many academics, who never leave school, seem stuck in perpetual adolescence. ;) ) And then there's having children....
Quote from: ChamberNut on February 17, 2011, 07:33:35 AM
Well John, that is one way to CAT-a-logue! ;D Looks very much like our cat, Bunny.
The Woots listening to Depussy.
(http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=11327.0;attach=28355;image)
I had not done a count in a long time, but my collection is now as of today - 609
I'm quite happy with my collection, even though it is a merely pea-sized collection compared to some. :D
I have a cd collection, now that you mention it. 1,329 classical, 425 jazz and 414 everything else. I also like to cuddle and take long walks in the park. :D
When my external hard drive dies, I am in big trouble...
Quote from: MN Dave on September 06, 2012, 08:14:04 AMWhen my external hard drive dies, I am in big trouble...
Buy an extra one, or backup in "the cloud" (justcloud.com, carbonite, etc).
My big regret is that my LP and 78 collection got scrambled three years ago when I moved. With about 15,000 disks, there's little hope of getting them back into order again.
Quote from: Todd on September 06, 2012, 08:20:57 AM
Buy an extra one, or backup in "the cloud" (justcloud.com, carbonite, etc).
Yeah, I might do that. They couldn't possibly both die at the same time, right? :)
Quote from: MN Dave on September 06, 2012, 09:24:43 AM
Yeah, I might do that. They couldn't possibly both die at the same time, right? :)
How much space do you need? Portable hard drives are getting bigger and bigger and they are easier to deal with (and now up to 2 tb).
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 06, 2012, 09:30:14 AM
How much space do you need? Portable hard drives are getting bigger and bigger and they are easier to deal with (and now up to 2 tb).
That's what I have now, a portable.
Quote from: MN Dave on September 06, 2012, 09:31:58 AM
That's what I have now, a portable.
Oh! Well then, just buy a second one and copy it. I actually have three that I rotate. I keep one at the office and one at home and I use the other. This way, I always have one where I need it (and it means if there is an event at one location, the other is still protected). If you keep an eye out, you'll eventually find a good deal somewhere.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 06, 2012, 09:43:17 AM
Oh! Well then, just buy a second one and copy it. I actually have three that I rotate. I keep one at the office and one at home and I use the other. This way, I always have one where I need it (and it means if there is an event at one location, the other is still protected). If you keep an eye out, you'll eventually find a good deal somewhere.
Thanks, fellas!
I use Drobos. They're four drive enclosures that back themselves up, so if a drive dies, you just pop in a new one and it rebuilds it from the backup. Works great.
I have about 1500 Discs in my collection, just over half of these are Classical. I dont own a stereo anymore and dont have a lot of space at the moment so everything is stored in boxes and digitally in iTunes on my computer. I listen on my iPod - I like having a large collection on there which i can listen to anywhere at any time :). Im very proud of my collection and get a lot of enjoyment out of it :D
Has anyone found any decent cataloging software yet? Developers are missing a big niche market here.
ITunes is my cataloguing software.
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 12:54:54 PM
ITunes is my cataloguing software.
It has been about 4 years since I used itunes. I have downloaded it and am about to install it to see if it has any new cataloging features... :)
So if I get a second external hard drive and copy one to the other. Does the back-up drive know to only copy over new files each time I back-up? In other words, if it already contains a file, it won't create a duplicate, will it?
Quote from: MN Dave on September 06, 2012, 02:45:10 PM
So if I get a second external hard drive and copy one to the other. Does the back-up drive know to only copy over new files each time I back-up? In other words, if it already contains a file, it won't create a duplicate, will it?
If you don't want it, no.
There's plenty of software out there that will sync a pair of folders or drives together so they match. I use SyncToy all the time; it's very easy to use, and free. Backing up my itunes library as I type, as a matter of fact.
Quote from: jwinter on September 06, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
There's plenty of software out there that will sync a pair of folders or drives together so they match. I use SyncToy all the time; it's very easy to use, and free. Backing up my itunes library as I type, as a matter of fact.
Can I use that on a Mac?
Alas probably not, it's made by Microsoft. But there must be syncing software out there...
Quote from: jwinter on September 06, 2012, 04:09:30 PM
There's plenty of software out there that will sync a pair of folders or drives together so they match. I use SyncToy all the time; it's very easy to use, and free. Backing up my itunes library as I type, as a matter of fact.
Why, thank you for that, even though it was for Dave. I have downloaded it and am setting things up now. This will be very handy for me. Respect! :D
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 12:54:54 PM
ITunes is my cataloguing software.
Well, I tried it again and I still don't like it. Uninstaller in action....
Like most software, you kinda have to take the time to learn how it works. It's definitely the most powerful software of its kind. There really isn't much competition, because there isn't any way to compete with it.
The problem is that most if not all softwares are designed for pop music listeners, where each track is just a song. Classical users have to do much of the work on their own, or to "learn it". I hardly want to go through the trouble.
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 05:03:51 PM
Like most software, you kinda have to take the time to learn how it works. It's definitely the most powerful software of its kind. There really isn't much competition, because there isn't any way to compete with it.
Can you elaborate on that?
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 05:03:51 PM
Like most software, you kinda have to take the time to learn how it works. It's definitely the most powerful software of its kind. There really isn't much competition, because there isn't any way to compete with it.
Yes bigshot, it is excellent software for music I agree...I used it for 6 months a few years back...but for my own needs and preferences, it is, for me, what used to be called 'bloatware'. Being Apple, and given their market dominance, you
may be right about it being "the most powerful software of its kind". Its just I don't need 'Bonjour' handshakes with Apple servers, updates, etc...all I want is a
wee music cataloging program, not a full blown media center. It was worth a try again anyway. Thanks. 0:)
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 08:54:31 AMMy big regret is that my LP and 78 collection got scrambled three years ago when I moved. With about 15,000 disks, there's little hope of getting them back into order again.
Pay some kid to do it. I mean, if you've pretty much written off the collection at this point, what is there to lose?
I have a lot of 78s. A kid would break them unfortunately. I barely trust my friends to handle them. You should have seen me worrying like an old hen when they were moving it all. I swear, I'm never allowed to move again. My friends all threw their backs out. But I didn't trust movers with my 78s.
Quote from: Scots John on September 06, 2012, 05:27:22 PMIts just I don't need 'Bonjour' handshakes with Apple servers, updates, etc...all I want is a wee music cataloging program, not a full blown media center.
I'm running a Mac mini media server that drives my home theater too, so all that stuff works for me. Are you PC or Mac?
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 09:19:55 PM
I'm running a Mac mini media server that drives my home theater too, so all that stuff works for me. Are you PC or Mac?
Aha! Thats probably why I find iTunes clumsy for my needs...I run a PC and laptop...perhaps if I got a Mac, using iTunes as my music / media base would be much better, it being Apple. Hmmm....also, Macs are better for most of my computer preferences, DTP (newsletters), writing, music, this kind of thing...I must start lobbing some heavy hints about getting a Mac for Xmas... :D
Trouble is, I am Microsoft Certified and Systems certified....knowing literally
nothing about Macs... :-[ But the seed of a Mac filled Xmas has now been planted! :-*
Quote from: bigshot on September 06, 2012, 05:03:51 PM
Like most software, you kinda have to take the time to learn how it works. It's definitely the most powerful software of its kind. There really isn't much competition, because there isn't any way to compete with it.
It's true there isn't much competition, because they all pretty much do the same thing. I use itunes, media monkey, windows media, winamp, EAC, and a couple others. I would not say that itunes is more powerful than any of these. They all have pretty much the same features. In fact, one area that itunes is weaker (being Apple) is that it does not (or did not) support some extenstions like FLAC. Itunes is not the only one guilty of this.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 06, 2012, 10:02:56 PM
It's true there isn't much competition, because they all pretty much do the same thing. I use itunes, media monkey, windows media, winamp, EAC, and a couple others. I would not say that itunes is more powerful than any of these. They all have pretty much the same features. In fact, one area that itunes is weaker (being Apple) is that it does not (or did not) support some extenstions like FLAC. Itunes is not the only one guilty of this.
Yes. Good point. Maybe I will kill that Mac seed after all. Everything is proprietary with Macs, that much I know. And yes, I guess iTunes have their .m4a files and all the rights of that to protect, so they don't entertain anything else like FLAC, which is a
great lossless codec. Hmm. Maybe I will ask for an Android tablet for Xmas instead...
Quote from: Scots John on September 06, 2012, 10:16:25 PM
Everything is proprietary with Macs, that much I know. And yes, I guess iTunes have their .m4a files and all the rights of that to protect...
Apple opened up the ALAC source code last year. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17378.msg571956.html#msg571956)
Quote from: Opus106 on September 06, 2012, 10:49:31 PM
Apple opened up the ALAC source code last year. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17378.msg571956.html#msg571956)
Indeed they did, and a few record companies have started to offer ALAC downloads - Hyperion for example - and this removes the step (for those who wanted everything in iTunes) of converting FLAC to ALAC before import.
I think it's important to distinguish between music player software and mastic cataloging software (and the beast that iTunes has become, attempting to be both, as well as a 'home' for apps, movie and much more.
I use iTunes as my catalogue, although I am always looking for something better, for the reasons others have given. I use Audirvana + as my (Mac-based) player. One feature the latter offers is the ability to create proxy records in iTunes. So, for example, if I have a FLAC file, Audirvana will allow me to import a proxy record into iTunes which looks just like any other record, but it points to a file housed outside the iTunes environment.
When I want to listen to anything I simply drag and drop the tracks/album from iTnes to Audrivana. The same approach works whether I am playing music ripped into iTunes or proxy records for files held elsewhere.
At least I am able to have everything in one place, and this has avoided (too many) duplicate purchases. The biggest problem I am facing is that at 130,000 tracks and growing, iTnes is too sluggish.
Quote from: Scots John on September 06, 2012, 05:27:22 PM
Yes bigshot, it is excellent software for music I agree...I used it for 6 months a few years back...but for my own needs and preferences, it is, for me, what used to be called 'bloatware'. Being Apple, and given their market dominance, you may be right about it being "the most powerful software of its kind". Its just I don't need 'Bonjour' handshakes with Apple servers, updates, etc...all I want is a wee music cataloging program, not a full blown media center. It was worth a try again anyway. Thanks. 0:)
No worries, John. Unless Apple's changed it substantially in the past couple of years, iTunes sucks in every way unless you're a happy captive of their proprietary media files. For classical cataloging it was a horror. And
If all you want is a catalog, why not just create your own in Excel or SQL server? You're going to have to populate everything manually anyway, since online music dbs are usually created by blind chimpanzees banging away randomly on keyboards.
Per a reader's request (and because I totally agreed) I split this topic where it started being a discussion of the merits of various codecs. That's a topic unto its own and it can be found here;
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,20926.msg657391.html#msg657391
8)
Once upon a time, I had a small collection. Now, I have a large collection. The end.
I always prefer to buy my classical music on a physical CD, but if there's a download site that offers the same CD considerably cheaper in a digital format (must be in a lossless format and have a downloadable booklet) then I buy digital. Buying in digital format is fun, but the feeling of opening a parcel with some new CD's is much better. I'm sure you people know what I'm talking about. :)
I also rip all the CD's I buy into my HD as FLAC. I don't like the idea of archiving music in a lossy format - even in 320kbps and even though I propably could never hear any difference between 320kbps mp3 vs. lossless.
Actually, when I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip it into my HD and I never actually listen from the CD directly. Still I like to have the physical CD (I think they look nice on the shelf and it somehow feels nice to open and read the booklet.) :) I guess at some point there's going to be a problem with shelf space... But for now there's no problem, my collection really isn't that big yet, I've only been collecting for a couple of years.
Here's how I catalog (and listen to) my collection:
(http://spoiler.kapsi.fi/collection.png)
So, I use Foobar2000. It's a bit of a pain to set up to your liking, but I like how it is now, I think it was worth the trouble. I wish I knew how to make it look better, I'm not that good with themes/graphics, but I think the current look is ok.
As you can see, I use seperate tags for the name of the work ("grouping") and the movements ("title"). The column browser is quite convenient, first I choose the composer, then the work (usually I write the catalogue/opus numbers last, but in Bach's cantatas I made an exception since there's so much of them and I'd never remember their names, and looking for a specific cantata would be pain), and if I have more than one recording of a work, the album column is for choosing that. If I want to listen through for example a song recital CD with various composers, it's no problem, I just choose all composers and pick the album from the album column.
Below the column browser, I have tags for the year of the recording and the composing. There's also replaygain info, although I don't use it nowadays. The "last played" thing is nice to have too.
On the bottom I tried to make a somewhat stylized display of what's playing right now. There's the composer, work, movement, artist tag, "involved people" tag (as in the picture alto, tenor etc.) and a nice copyright symbol and the label. The bottom one is "comment" tag, if there's some necessary information (as in this case "Revised by Bach in 1735") I write it in there.
The cover is of course nice to have there too. When I buy a physical CD, I always scan the cover and the booklet too (at least the pages that are in english). It's a bit of work with the colour/contrast corrections and dust removing and all, but it's become a habit and I actually like doing it. :)
Oh, and the playlists on the left are cd's that I'm not that familiar with yet. The list seems to be getting longer and longer... One of these days I'll start to actually LISTEN to the CD's I buy before buying more. :D
I have my whole collection in an internal HD, but I've also scheduled a weekly backup to an external HD (someone mentioned SyncToy, I use it too). I also have, just in case, another backup on a private backup server, I use a software called WinSCP to make backups in there. It works pretty much like SyncToy - it mirrors what changes I've made in the collection on my HD and reflects the changes on the server.
As for styles, I like anything from middle ages to 21st century. I don't always feel like listening to everything, it depends on my mood, but it's nice to have a variety of different styles at hand.
-radi
Quote from: radi on September 20, 2012, 12:25:40 PM
I always prefer to buy my classical music on a physical CD, but if there's a download site that offers the same CD considerably cheaper in a digital format (must be in a lossless format and have a downloadable booklet) then I buy digital. Buying in digital format is fun, but the feeling of opening a parcel with some new CD's is much better. I'm sure you people know what I'm talking about. :)
Actually, when I buy a CD, the first thing I do is rip it into my HD and I never actually listen from the CD directly. Still I like to have the physical CD (I think they look nice on the shelf and it somehow feels nice to open and read the booklet.) :) I guess at some point there's going to be a problem with shelf space... But for now there's no problem, my collection really isn't that big yet, I've only been collecting for a couple of years.
Yes, I know
exactly what you're talking about, radi. I will always opt for the CD
unless there's no other possible way to obtain the recording I'm wanting. It's not just opening the plastic, it's that new CD smell, that new printed ink smell of the inside booklet. Opera recordings are always things of wonder as if they include the full libretto, then you'll get this massive booklet. A lot of them are thick, it's like reading a novel. 8) I think the last opera I bought was Mussorgsky's
Khovanshchina with Abbado conducting and that booklet was so thick it could kill a roach just by dropping the booklet on it. Anyway, so yeah, I love owning the physical CDs. There's nothing like opening that CD and what do you get with a download? Nothing but a file telling you what that recording is. What people don't realize and something I think is lost in today's music buying public is that sense of sentimentality and appreciation for everything that goes into getting a recording put out. From the actual recording sessions, to the cover design, to the liner notes, etc., this really excites me, obviously not as much as the music itself, but it's certainly apart of the experience I think. Whether I'm holding an LP or a CD, there's nothing like this feeling in the world.
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 20, 2012, 07:07:37 PM
Yes, I know exactly what you're talking about, radi. I will always opt for the CD unless there's no other possible way to obtain the recording I'm wanting. It's not just opening the plastic, it's that new CD smell, that new printed ink smell of the inside booklet. Opera recordings are always things of wonder as if they include the full libretto, then you'll get this massive booklet. A lot of them are thick, it's like reading a novel. 8) I think the last opera I bought was Mussorgsky's Khovanshchina with Abbado conducting and that booklet was so thick it could kill a roach just by dropping the booklet on it. Anyway, so yeah, I love owning the physical CDs. There's nothing like opening that CD and what do you get with a download? Nothing but a file telling you what that recording is. What people don't realize and something I think is lost in today's music buying public is that sense of sentimentality and appreciation for everything that goes into getting a recording put out. From the actual recording sessions, to the cover design, to the liner notes, etc., this really excites me, obviously not as much as the music itself, but it's certainly apart of the experience I think. Whether I'm holding an LP or a CD, there's nothing like this feeling in the world.
I sometimes regret having bought so many albums digitally. To imagine how awesome the cd's would look on the shelf and the things you talked about, opening the case for the first time, the smell of a fresh booklet etc. :) But for me, unfortunately, money does matter. On eClassical pretty much all of the albums are about 50% cheaper (maybe more) compared to the cd's, and with their Daily Deals it's another 50% off, so it's just too good to resist... If money wasn't an issue, I'd still buy even the daily deals on cd.
I wish I was into operas! Somehow I just haven't discovered the opera-world yet. I have listened to some and watched a few on DVD (loaned from the library) but I find it somehow difficult to concentrate on the stories, especially with the translations and all, and when I try to concentrate on that, I can't get anything out of the music. But I never say never. So many times during my "classical listening-career" I havent liked something in a long time, 20th century music for example, but I've kept my mind open and ultimately learned to love it. Less than a year ago I'd never have thought I'd be listening to Bach's cantatas, or - not being a religious person -
any sacred music for that matter. And now I'm crazy about church cantatas, not just Bach's. :)
Slipping a little out of topic here.. But I can imagine the feelings you were talking about, buying and opening opera boxes with the massive booklets. That must be great. Digital booklets would never be as good. To think about following the plot & lyrics from the monitor, it'd be awful. So, if (and when) I someday start buying operas, I'll definitely choose the physical products. :)
-radi
All my beautiful CDs that used to fill shelves are ripped and boxed in the garage now!
The opera that did it for me was Zefferelli's La Taviata with Cortrubas and Domingo. See if they have that DVD at the library.
Quote from: bigshot on September 21, 2012, 01:12:53 PM
All my beautiful CDs that used to fill shelves are ripped and boxed in the garage now!
The opera that did it for me was Zefferelli's La Taviata with Cortrubas and Domingo. See if they have that DVD at the library.
The opera that did it for me was Bartok's
Bluebeard's Castle, then I quickly went backward into Wagner who is still, hands down, the finest opera composer of all-time. His operas are long, yes, and I certainly can't sit through the entire opera in one setting, but listening to an act a day is very gratifying for me. In fact, I'll probably do this now since I'm on vacation. 8)
Welcome to GMG, Radi!
Quote from: radi on September 21, 2012, 01:10:50 AM
I wish I was into operas!
I never really got into opera until I saw one for the first time,
La Boheme. The difference between live opera and filmed opera is like the difference between making love and watching porn. I don't know your location but if there is a decent opera company in your vicinity you might try seeing the real thing in person.
I would suggest starting with operas that have retained both popular and critical acclaim among diverse audiences over a long period of time.
Carmen, for instance, is wildly popular for good reason, not least of which is abundant great and memorable music. Story is not really important; it's just the framework supporting the music. (If you want a great story then turn to the right medium:
read!)
Most opera plots are silly. Some are silly because they're melodramatic potboilers. (See Verdi, especially
La Traviata or
Rigoletto. Some are silly because they're pretentious. (See Wagner -- pretty much anything.) The best are silly because they're meant to be. (See Rossini's
Barber of Seville.)
My own favorites, bar none, are Mozart's three late operas with librettos by da Ponte:
The Marriage of Figaro,
Don Giovanni, and
Cosi fan tutte. The music is Mozart's best, the librettos were written by a real writer who was a master of his craft. If you prefer drama, start with
Don Giovanni. If you prefer comedy, start with
Figaro. And if you prefer glorious music with celestially beautiful multi-part singing ... well, they're all great, but
Cosi has never been topped.
If your primary interest is the music, then I suggest you forget about watching DVDs and just listen to audio recordings of the works mentioned above.
Finally, the very last thing I would recommend to an opera newbie (unless you're still playing Dungeons & Dragons ;) ) is Wagner's
Ring.
On a good system, opera on bluray is actually better than opera in the opera house... Better sound, better view of the performers, more comfortable. There are many fantastic filmed opera performances now, I rarely pull out my operas on CD and listen to them all the way through any more. It feels like watching a movie with youreyes shut.
Quote from: bigshot on September 22, 2012, 08:31:36 AM
On a good system, ... Better sound, better view of the performers, more comfortable. There are many fantastic filmed opera performances now, I rarely pull out my operas on CD and listen to them all the way through any more. It feels like watching a movie with youreyes shut.
Oy vey! I'd rather have sex than watch porn and would rather ride a real motorcycle than pretend with Wii. But there's room for all kinds in this world and on this forum.
Note, please, the difference between "opera on bluray is actually better than opera in the opera house" and "I prefer opera on video."
And movies are primarily a visual medium, despite incorporating elements of story and sound. "Watching" them with your eyes shut is like "eating" dinner with your mouth taped shut. The analogy would not be to listening to opera recordings, but rather to watching opera with your ears plugged up.
Opera is a visual medium as well as a sonic one.
To see opera at the opera house, I have a limited choice of performers and works to choose from. I have to buy tickets, drive downtown, park, find my seats and stay put. Heaven forbid I might need to pee in the middle of Rhinegold! I get one view of the stage from at least a hundred feet away. Behind me, an old lady unwraps peppermints with the loudest wrappers she can find, while her husband snores. At the end of all this after 11pm, I get to fight the crowd to find my car and drive home exhausted.
On bluray, I can choose any one of hundreds of operas and ballets, with world class performers. I can choose to watch anytime I want, and take a break to eat or pee anytime I want without missing anything or climbing down a row of seats. The performance is in spectacular surround sound, on a ten foot hidef screen. The camera captures the action from the best angle possible. I can rewatch it as many times as I want. If that's porn, bring it on! Even the Met knows this is the future of opera.
Quote from: bigshot on September 22, 2012, 05:19:32 PM
Opera is a visual medium as well as a sonic one.
Duh. Here's another bloody obvious observation: without the music, it ain't opera. Just like without the pictures, it ain't movies.
You have every right to prefer seeing opera on blu-ray to seeing it live, and if you feel you need to justify your preference, there are dozens of reasons you can call on, including those you listed. I took no exception to your expressed preference, only to confusing your preference with an absolute measure of quality. That's a painfully common fault around here ... and everywhere else ordinary people are found, for that matter.
And please note that it's not for your sake that I offered the correction, but for the sake of Radi, the newbie who expressed an interest in learning about opera, lest he mistake your expression of opinion for a statement of fact.
Incidentally, I've enjoyed some of the Met's opera broadcasts in cinemas and think they're great. I hope to see more. But I doubt such broadcasts will displace opera any more than telecast football games put an end to people's enjoyment of long lines, high ticket prices, nightmarish parking, and boorish companions in the stands at the local sports stadium. And I rather think the Met believes that broadcast opera might revive interest in the real thing much as Rozelle's TV-centric shepherding of NFL football boosted interest in that pastime.
Quote from: bigshot on September 22, 2012, 08:31:36 AM
On a good system, opera on bluray is actually better than opera in the opera house... Better sound, better view of the performers, more comfortable. There are many fantastic filmed opera performances now, I rarely pull out my operas on CD and listen to them all the way through any more. It feels like watching a movie with youreyes shut.
Same here.
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 22, 2012, 05:44:42 PM
Duh.
Duh Duh
In the next few years, you'll see opera in high definition being streamed to people's home theaters on a subscription basis. You won't have to live in New York to go to the Met, and you'll be able to attend La Scala from your living room in Sheboygan. When that happens, many many more people will be viewing from the streaming feed than there are in the house. And they'll have better seats than anyone. I wouldn't be at all surprised if operas start being staged in locations rather than opera houses, because the streaming audience will become the profit center, not the live one.
Concert halls are becoming more and more expensive to operate. Technology will turn the concert hall inside out, creating virtual concert halls that turn more people on to opera than have attended it in the past twenty years. The same thing will happen to movie theaters. We'll have movie theaters in our homes, and the programs will come to us. We won't have to go to it.
Hopefully, we'll find better things to do on a Saturday night than to sit in a dark mall theater with sticky floors, or an uncomfortable overpriced seat in the rafters of the third balcony waiting for Brunnhilde to set fire to the joint.
A newbie can't get better advice than to explore the fantastic offerings on bluray. With a large screen and good speakers, the experience can't be topped.
Thanks everyone for the tips. I'll keep those in mind the next time I feel like giving opera a chance. Can't force it of course, I don't really feel
that much interest at the moment.
For me (for now at least) the choice must be bluray, dvd or cd. There's no live opera anywhere near from where I live. I'm sure both live and bluray have their good sides and bad sides.
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 22, 2012, 04:50:39 AM
Welcome to GMG, Radi!
Thank you :)
-radi
Quote from: bigshot on September 22, 2012, 09:42:40 PM
I wouldn't be at all surprised if operas start being staged in locations rather than opera houses, because the streaming audience will become the profit center, not the live one.
The future is here, a year or two ago concerts, operas and musicals started being shown across the country in movie theaters for limited engagements with premium ticket pricing. It is a great way to share the experience with a broader audience.
I see more of that happening with a big explosion in streaming (as you mentioned) and blu-ray releases.
Quote from: radi on September 22, 2012, 11:47:55 PM
Thank you :)
You're welcome, radi. Enjoy it however you can. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that a video recording or webcast of an opera is the same as the real thing. The difference is more than just the frisson of a live symphony or chamber music performance. If you try opera videos and find they don't hold your interest, don't presume therefore that opera doesn't appeal to you without giving the real thing an honest try.
And once you find an opera or two that you really like, give yourself the gift of experiencing the real thing in a quality production some day. After all, it's one of the greatest art forms human beings have ever created. Would you think you had really had the full human experience if you had never visited art museums and seen great paintings in person, but had only seen photo reproductions in books and calendars?
You haven't said where you live, but even if there's nowhere close, you might consider planning that as something for your next vacation that includes a visit to a great city. :)
Quote from: DavidW on September 23, 2012, 05:06:17 AM
The future is here, a year or two ago concerts, operas and musicals started being shown across the country in movie theaters for limited engagements with premium ticket pricing. It is a great way to share the experience with a broader audience.
I see more of that happening with a big explosion in streaming (as you mentioned) and blu-ray releases.
Yep. It's the logical extension of radio broadcasts from the San Francisco Symphony or Metropolitan Opera. And though I would never mistake it for the real thing, I nevertheless love the opportunity we have these days to enjoy webcast performances from orchestras all over the world -- the BP's digital concert hall, for instance, which offers you 30 days of live and archived performances for about what it costs us in gasoline alone to attend one performance in San Francisco.
Quote from: sanantonio on September 23, 2012, 06:26:03 AM
It is a real thing; just a different real thing than the theater experience.
I can see both sides of this argument; and used to side more with DavidRoss but have changed my attitude as technology has improved, rendering the experience of opera via DVD or one of the Met movie theater shows comparable (depending on your system) to the live performance. In some ways, and for some people, it is superior.
Looks as if you still "side" with me. (Didn't know I was on a side.) You are clearly referring to people's individual judgments about the comparative quality of their personal experiences. For some people, the ability to spread out at home, munch chips, fart, belch, and cough at will, fast-forward through the dull parts (imagine: The Ring in twenty minutes!), and so on make their experience preferable to experiencing
the real thing. That's a given.
It's also a given that comparing filmed opera on DVD or other visual media with live opera on stage is like comparing apples and oranges -- or, to be more accurate, like comparing real apple sauce with an engineered apple-flavored synthetic puree that many people seem incapable of distinguishing from the real thing and which some doubtless prefer to the lumpy, inconsistent natural product it replaces.
I'm going to say the thing that's the elephant in the corner in classical music circles... Live performance has become marginalized by recording. Classical music is primarily a recorded medium.
Everyone in forums say, "Listening to a recording isn't really hearing music. You have to go to concerts!" But I would bet that the people saying that are lucky to go to even three concerts a year, if that.
More people listen to classical music on their home stereos in a year than have attended concerts in the entire history of concert halls. If we depended on our local symphonies to hear music, we would know very few works. If we depended on our local music director to present it to us, we would have a very limited range of interpretation. We know so much about great music because of recordings. Concerts have become optional.
In the past, it was different for opera and ballet. Hearing an opera on LP or CD was just half the story. You had only a couple of photos in the liner notes to imagine the visuals. When presented on TV, the screen was so small, and the stagebound telecasts so static, it was a pale shadow of actually seeing the opera live. In order to give the production any momentum at all, TV producers would have to rotate through three camera angles, pretty much at random. I can't tell you how many ballets I saw on TV that didn't reflect the live performance at all because the camera stayed close on the principles. You never got a sense of the whole. You didn't have much of a choice because the screen was 19 inches. The sound of the orchestra was hobbled by being pushed through a three inch speaker. As a.representation of the operatic experience it was an approximation at best.
Right now in my home, I have a high definition projection system with a ten foot screen. The image is crystal clear, and the angle of view I have on performances is better than I get in the audience at the opera house. In fact, from my seat, the screen fills my entire view. On top of that, the direction of operas on video has improved. Camera placement and cutting has gotten to be as sophisticated as in movies. You always get the perfect shot to convey the action. My sound system is 5:1 surround with a frequency response from the lowest edge of human hearing to the uppermost. The sound comes from all around me, creating the uncannily realistic ambience of a large hall. When Mehta plays Ride of the Valkyries, the place rocks. When it's "che gelida manina" the quiet whisper is soft as it should be.
I have no plans to go to a live performance, even though we have the wonderful Walt Disney Concert Hall downtown. I don't need it. The concert hall is in my living room, and in the past year, I've attended more concerts, operas and ballets than I've seen live in my entire five decades on this Earth. As more people get video systems like mine, you'll find more people feeling the same about it as I do.
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 23, 2012, 08:49:34 AMFor some people, the ability to spread out at home, munch chips, fart, belch, and cough at will, fast-forward through the dull parts (imagine: The Ring in twenty minutes!), and so on make their experience preferable to experiencing the real thing.
That may be how you watch video. In my house, the lights go down, a projection screen lowers automatically, the image fills the screen in front of me, the sound fills the room and I'm presented with an opera the same way I see movies in a theater. I don't think you've ever seen what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about TV sets. You probably will find out soon. The prices are dropping and more people are intalling home theaters.
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 09:55:39 AM
Right now in my home, I have a high definition projection system with a ten foot screen. The image is crystal clear, and the angle of view I have on performances is better than I get in the audience at the opera house. On top of that, the direction of operas on video has improved. Camera placement and cutting has gotten to be as sophisticated as in movies. You always get the perfect shot to convey the action. My sound system is 5:1 surround with a frequency response from the lowest edge of human hearing to the uppermost. The sound comes from all around me, creating the uncannily realistic ambience of a large hall. When Mehta plays Ride of the Valkyries, the place rocks. When it's "che gelida manina" the quiet whisper is soft as it should be.
I have no plans to go to a live performance, even though we have the wonderful Walt Disney Concert Hall downtown. I don't need it. The concert hall is in my living room, and in the past year, I've attended more concerts, operas and ballets than I've seen live in my entire five decades on this Earth. As more people get video systems like mine, you'll find more people feeling the same about it as I do.
I don't disagree about much of what you said, but a live performance in the back row with limited view still gives me things that a recorded performance never will. There is also something about the sound of a singing voice that is hard to replicate in a recorded medium.
But there is no reason not to do both (or three if add going to the movie theater to watch a live version there). Just don't kid yourself that they are the same experience - they are not. With this, I am not trying to imply one is better or worse, but that they are different. Your experience in the opera house will differ from the experience in the movie theater and the experience at home.
I've been to quite a few concerts, operas and vocal recitals. Until I got a dedicated listening/screening room, I might have agreed with you. But the sound of an orchestra in my theater is *better* than in the concert hall. Sound technology has taken giant leaps lately. CDs and bluray offer perfect sound... Stone flat frequency response, no audible distortion, a massive dynamic range and no noise whatsoever. But the biggest advance- one that many classical music listeners aren't aware of yet- is surround sound technology.
Most people are aware of surround sound in movies. Outer space zaps and rumbles flying all around you... But there is a LOT more to the technology than that. Most classical music fans are older and don't keep close tabs on what is happening in recorded sound. But a revolution is happening right now. Multichannel surround sound is the biggest audio advance since the introduction of stereo in the fifties. No lie.
The difference between 5:1 done right and stereo is as great as the difference between stereo and mono. It's the ability to place sound in three dimensional space, not just a two dimensional soundstage in front of you. But the most amazing part of the technology is the ability to create a convincing acoustic, which might be entirely different than the acoustic of the room you are listening in.
I first heard what 5:1 was capable of with Mehta's Valencia Ring on bluray. The sound field surrounded me entirely and the orchestra in front of me was dimensional and alive. When the horns blew, I could hear the natural reflection off the back wall of a large hall. I could pinpoint the position of the instruments in front of me. In fact, the left and right are reversed in Rhinegold, and you get a perfect image of the orchestra with the violin section on the right! There are a lot of other great classical surround blurays coming out, ballet from the Royal Ballet, Mahler symphonies, etc. Soon, surround will be a viable format for music, just like stereo and mono.
The sort of 5:1 sound done in the early days of surround is to real surround sound as those old ping pong stereo demonstration records were to true stereo. When you get a chance to hear what 5:1 or 7:1 sounds like with proper installation and full range speakers- not one of those Best Buy home theater in a box sets, it will absolutely blow your mind. It's *that* good.
Can anyone who knows what I'm talking about recommend any blurays? The ones that have particularly impressed me are Mehta's Ring and the Royal Ballet's production of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet. There is a pair of smpler blurays called the Opera Experience that have some great clips too.
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 10:40:26 AM
I've been to quite a few concerts, operas and vocal recitals. Until I got a dedicated listening/screening room, I might have agreed with you. But the sound of an orchestra in my theater is *better* than in the concert hall. Sound technology has taken giant leaps lately. CDs and bluray offer perfect sound... Stone flat frequency response, no audible distortion, a massive dynamic range and no noise whatsoever. But the biggest advance- one that many classical music listeners aren't aware of yet- is surround sound technology.
Most people are aware of surround sound in movies. Outer space zaps and rumbles flying all around you... But there is a LOT more to the technology than that. Most classical music fans are older and don't keep close tabs on what is happening in recorded sound. But a revolution is happening right now. Multichannel surround sound is the biggest audio advance since the introduction of stereo in the fifties. No lie.
The difference between 5:1 done right and stereo is as great as the difference between stereo and mono. It's the ability to place sound in three dimensional space, not just a two dimensional soundstage in front of you. But the most amazing part of the technology is the ability to create a convincing acoustic, which might be entirely different than the acoustic of the room you are listening in.
I first heard what 5:1 was capable of with Mehta's Valencia Ring on bluray. The sound field surrounded me entirely and the orchestra in front of me was dimensional and alive. When the horns blew, I could hear the natural reflection off the back wall of a large hall. I could pinpoint the position of the instruments in front of me. In fact, the left and right are reversed in Rhinegold, and you get a perfect image of the orchestra with the violin section on the right! There are a lot of other great classical surround blurays coming out, ballet from the Royal Ballet, Mahler symphonies, etc. Soon, surround will be a viable format for music, just like stereo and mono.
The sort of 5:1 sound done in the early days of surround is to real surround sound as those old ping pong stereo demonstration records were to true stereo. When you get a chance to hear what 5:1 or 7:1 sounds like with proper installation and full range speakers- not one of those Best Buy home theater in a box sets, it will absolutely blow your mind. It's *that* good.
On this we will never agree. But hey, who cares, if you are watching opera! :)
Heck yes Bigshot blu-rays are awesome!
Still there is a sense of spacious, brightness and clarity in live performance that I have never found in recordings. But then again I don't have uber-expensive equipment either.
It's not just about which is better for personal education, enlightenment, entertainment and reflection... and while dvd/bds gladly serve that personal purpose with excellent fidelity they can not bring culture to the communities that we live in.
Culture desn't exist in the brck and mortar buildings we build. It exists in the hearts and minds of the people. We can pursue culture by preserving antiquated venues and traditions, but it won't work. Real culture will just become more and more irrelevent to society as a whole. The way to keep culture alive is to bring it to the people in a venue they actually use.
If black tie opera galas under crystal chandeliers die out, that doesn't mean that opera has died. Without taking advantage of up to date recording technology, classical music would have probably already died out by now.
By the way, great sounding 5:1 projection systems really aren't all that expensive. It's just that the salesmen that peddle them try to make it that way. With a little careful planning, a regular joe can have a first class screening room in his home. I'm living proof of that.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 23, 2012, 11:27:57 AM
On this we will never agree. But hey, who cares, if you are watching opera! :)
If you ever get to Los Angeles, stop by for a visit. I might just be able to change your mind.
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 11:53:27 AM
Culture desn't exist in the brck and mortar buildings we build. It exists in the hearts and minds of the people. We can pursue culture by preserving antiquated venues and traditions, but it won't work. Real culture will just become more and more irrelevent to society as a whole. The way to keep culture alive is to bring it to the people in a venue they actually use.
But I think you have it backwards, I think that more people attend concerts than there are serious cd/lp collectors for classical music. I meet more people at concerts that attend concerts but do not collect and listen to classical recordings than I do the kind that does both.
I live near a town that has no dedicated cm sections in stores that sell cds, and yet have a full symphony orchestra and concert hall.
Classical music recordings generate so little revenue that the great recordings of the past several decades are being sold as bargain box sets. And you think that recordings are the future?
Did you know that artists in every area of music are making their money more and more by concerts than they are by selling these antiquated things that we call albums?
Quote from: DavidW on September 23, 2012, 12:04:21 PM
But I think you have it backwards, I think that more people attend concerts than there are serious cd/lp collectors for classical music. I meet more people at concerts that attend concerts but do not collect and listen to classical recordings than I do the kind that does both.
I live near a town that has no dedicated cm sections in stores that sell cds, and yet have a full symphony orchestra and concert hall.
Classical music recordings generate so little revenue that the great recordings of the past several decades are being sold as bargain box sets. And you think that recordings are the future?
Did you know that artists in every area of music are making their money more and more by concerts than they are by selling these antiquated things that we call albums?
Sad, but oh so true. This is one of the things I was discussing with another guy the other day at a used CD store I frequent. Classical music, for the past 30 years or so, has been very much specialized area, especially in record stores. As the years pass, these spaces have become smaller and smaller, because, and not to be insulting, but our society is dumb when it comes to the arts. The gentleman I was speaking with was 81 years old and only has about four or five friends that are actually into classical music and this is in Atlanta --- a very large city by Southern standards. There aren't many us left unfortunately.
Quote from: DavidW on September 23, 2012, 11:33:17 AM
Heck yes Bigshot blu-rays are awesome!
Yep. And even modest home theaters today can offer a remarkably good viewing experience for less than the cost of a pair of season tickets to the Met.
Quote from: DavidW on September 23, 2012, 12:04:21 PMI live near a town that has no dedicated cm sections in stores that sell cds, and yet have a full symphony orchestra and concert hall.
That's because everyone buys music online now. I can guarantee you that the difference between the number of people who attend live concerts in your town and the number of people who listen to classical music on the radio, on iPods or on CDs is a difference of an order of magnitude.
Did you know that Amazon sells a ton of classical music as MP3 downloads? Classical music is making money for them.
I think that in general, classical music and opera fans are older and not as acquainted with the way technology has affected the music business. It's one thing to read about iPods and blurays in the newspapers, and quite another thing to actually use new tech. The upcoming generation gets it though. They are reinventing things, and like it or not, we older folks are going to have to get with the program, or fade away as opera companies and symphony associations file for bankrupcy one after another. The Met is making the first step toward a virtual opera company. They won't be the last. If classical music wants to remain relevent, it will have to reinvent the concept of performance.
And for classical music fans, we will reinvent the concept of a collection. Instead of bound volumes of Victor Red Seal 78s, stacks of LPs, or shelves full of CDs, we'll have digital libraries of videos in surround sound, media servers full of digital files, and subscriptions to all you can eat streaming servers packed with deep catalog.
Instead of album covers, fancy dress concerts and shelves full of fetish objects, the focus will be on the music where it belongs.
Quote from: bigshot on September 22, 2012, 09:42:40 PM
Duh Duh
In the next few years, you'll see opera in high definition being streamed to people's home theaters on a subscription basis. You won't have to live in New York to go to the Met, and you'll be able to attend La Scala from your living room in Sheboygan.
You can keep deluding yourself, but your living room in Sheboygan ain't La Scala. I can watch a great travel show about Switzerland, but that's very different from actually being there.
There are various advantages and disadvantages of being there "live" and going blu ray; you seem unwilling to look at these matters logically.
I've presented a lot of logical arguments which haven't been countered. All that happened was a splinter thread for me too posts was created.
I've seen opera live. Have you seen an opera in a hidef projection room with surround sound?
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 02:28:22 PM
I've presented a lot of logical arguments which haven't been countered. All that happened was a splinter thread for me too posts was created.
I've seen opera live. Have you seen an opera in a hidef projection room with surround sound?
You delude yourself. What you've presented is neither logical nor an argument. You have asserted that a picture of an apple is qualitatively superior to the apple itself, in absolute terms, and have stated reasons you prefer the picture to the apple. (Non-fattening, less messy, doesn't involve a trip to the market, etc.)
You haven't even grasped the fundamental fallacy implicit in your claim, despite repeated kind and patient efforts to point it out. Of course, it's awfully hard to grasp something when all your efforts go into arrogantly defending your beliefs rather than earnestly trying to understand what others have to say.
BTW, I'm not Don but I've enjoyed some Met webcasts in the cinema and loved the experience. I expect to do more of it in the future, as well as to enjoy visual opera recordings at home. I have also enjoyed many live opera performances and expect to do so again in the future. They are fundamentally different experiences, no more comparable than apples and fruitcakes.
If you're unable to recognize that, whether due to lack of capacity (I doubt that--it's hardly rocket science) or due to willful obstinacy, so be it. It's hardly a life or death matter.
What's that saying about horses and water? As long as I'm at the trough, if you're not going to drink then I'll just take this opportunity to wash my hands. ;)
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 23, 2012, 02:42:18 PMI've enjoyed some Met webcasts in the cinema and loved the experience.
OK, now imagine that exact experience in your living room on demand with hundreds of operas and performances to choose from...
We've reached a place where you don't have to go to a movie theater to see theatrical quality projection, and we don't have to go to the concert hall to get spectacular, realistic sound. The next logical step is to combine the two and bring theatrical performances into the living room.
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 02:28:22 PM
I've presented a lot of logical arguments which haven't been countered. All that happened was a splinter thread for me too posts was created.
I've seen opera live. Have you seen an opera in a hidef projection room with surround sound?
Yes, and those experiences have been mighty fine. Still, I always knew I was in a room.
Quote from: bigshot on September 23, 2012, 02:53:20 PM
OK, now imagine that exact experience in your living room on demand with hundreds of operas and performances to choose from...
This is getting rather old. All I have tried to point out is that watching a screen is not the same thing as "being there". You might feel that being there is inferior or superior, but it's different.
Okay, I think we understand your position now, Bigshot. You like watching concerts at home while many others enjoy experiencing the opera in person. Let's move on.
Back on topic, I plan on streaming my music. I'm not currently because the ui even with plex is just not there with me. I'm going to get an apple tv, I'm really sold on the convenience. When I was at my parents house, I would just take out my iphone and tell it to stream to the apple tv whatever I was playing and that's it. That simple. I want that simplicity.
It seems that lately my collection is starting to include more choral music and just vocal music in general. I am very picky however with what I buy as I'm not a huge fan of choral music, but do love many choral works. In the past week, I bought two Faure Requiem recordings (one with Herreweghe and the other with Marriner/ASMF), two recordings that feature Berlioz's Les Nuits d'été (Herreweghe, Minkowski), a Durufle devoted to nothing but his choral music, Brahms' Requiem with Herreweghe, and Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream. Quite a change of pace for me, but I got such great deals on these that I couldn't pass them up. :)
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 23, 2012, 05:13:05 PM
It seems that lately my collection is starting to include more choral music and just vocal music in general. I am very picky however with what I buy as I'm not a huge fan of choral music, but do love many choral works. In the past week, I bought two Faure Requiem recordings (one with Herreweghe and the other with Marriner/ASMF), two recordings that feature Berlioz's Les Nuits d'été (Herreweghe, Minkowski), a Durufle devoted to nothing but his choral music, Brahms' Requiem with Herreweghe, and Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream. Quite a change of pace for me, but I got such great deals on these that I couldn't pass them up. :)
That's probably the weakest area in my collection (aside from sonatas for tuba and piccolo), but there is much choral music I would miss very much if I had to give it up--including my two discs of Eric Whitacre's music. As for vocal music, I can't imagine being without DLVDE or 4 Last Songs or Sibelius's vocal music with orchestra or Barber's Knoxville or all sorts of songs with piano accompaniment...not to mention (gasp!)
opera.
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 23, 2012, 05:29:51 PM
That's probably the weakest area in my collection (aside from sonatas for tuba and piccolo), but there is much choral music I would miss very much if I had to give it up--including my two discs of Eric Whitacre's music. As for vocal music, I can't imagine being without DLVDE or 4 Last Songs or Sibelius's vocal music with orchestra or Barber's Knoxville or all sorts of songs with piano accompaniment...not to mention (gasp!) opera.
I'm starting to enjoy choral music a lot more than I used to. I love Sibelius' vocal music with orchestra. I wished he had written more than he did because every work I heard is of high quality. Barber's
Knoxville is also a favorite of mine. Gorgeous music. Yes, Strauss'
Four Last Songs is exquisite and I really need to listen to Mahler's
Das Lied von der Erde again. I have several performances of it. I remember Klemperer's being especially good. What do you think about requiems? Do you have any favorites?
Quote from: Mirror Image on September 23, 2012, 05:43:03 PM
What do you think about requiems? Do you have any favorites?
Like 'em if I like 'em. Brahms, Fauré, Mozart, Verdi
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 23, 2012, 07:07:52 PM
Like 'em if I like 'em. Brahms, Fauré, Mozart, Verdi
These are the 'big four' and all very good (though quite different in impact from one another). There are lots of others - Foulds, Dvorak, Cornelius, Biber, etc. If you like Stanford, you might enjoy his requiem on Naxos. You may remember this was a favorite of our former member Sid. On the other hand, if you have an interest in masses, you might like one of the three by Bruckner (I think I remember you posting that you liked Bruckner). But there really are some wonderful choral pieces to explore from all periods.
Quote from: sanantonio on September 24, 2012, 05:17:20 AM
The series A History of the Requiem is something I recently found on Mog or Spotify (can't remember which; may be on both), which is a three CD set (there's a fourth but it is not available for streaming and is not somethnd I'd be interested in, anyway). Spans the periods from Medieval to 20th century and contains some very nice preformances of some great works.
[asin]B000Y1BRK2[/asin]
Hey, SA,
I checked at Amazon on this one but they cleverly didn't specify; is that Michael Haydn Requiem the c minor one? Or one of the others? I'm unfamiliar with those performers. Do they play period instruments?
Thanks,
8)
Quote from: sanantonio on September 24, 2012, 05:48:14 AM
It is the C Minor Requiem, and Laudantes Consort uses PI at least for Baroque music, but I can't say for Classical and later repertory.
Here's a description of them:
Ah, thanks for all that info. I infer from that, that they play instruments appropriate to the period, in this case right up to the 20th century. That is very cool. Thanks for nudging me towards them. That Classical Era disk 2 looks like just the thing for me!
8)
I got most of my disks (at least three-fourths) at 80 pct off in annual sales in Manila.
Once in a while, I avail of any promos, such as budget boxes and anniversary editions.
Finally, I hear that one can now buy digital editions from some top publishers, and in several cases DRM-free and CD quality. I'll give that a try if I can't order from abroad.