Streamlining the browsing tree & multiple configs

[DavidHB]

Thank you for your interest.

(20-09-2013 16:03)Dieter Stockert Wrote:  I wonder how you are dealing with multi-movement works. For me the best solution was to use track names to specify the movement and use the album track to specify the work (and albumartist to specify the album). I am not really happy with that kind of 'tag abuse', but I didn't find a better way.

I don't think that there is one answer that works for everything. This is for two reasons: (1) classical music is immensely variable in the way that it names things, and (2) the usefulness of any particular scheme will depend on control point behaviour.

I'm a fan of standards, and I do see problems with what you describe as 'tag abuse', though it is widely done in the published tag libraries like freedb. The main issue is how any particular control point will interpret your metadata. If it works for you, then fine, but it is worth trying out your data on more than one control point, so that you can form a view as to how future-proof your scheme is likely to be.

I try to stick with well used tags. The control points I currently use are Kinsky, foobar2000/foo_upnp and (to a lesser extent) UPnPlayer, all running on quite high resolution devices. My Linn DSM also scrolls the metadata, so I am not particularly worried about tag length. This, at least so far, has enabled me to put all the data I want to record about the work in the Album and Track fields.

Because I try to normalise my data, I have made a deliberate decision not to include composer information in the Album field. Kinsky shows the browsing path, which in my case tends to give the composer name. So, with "Beethoven" showing in the path, a typical solution might be to have ''5ymphonies 5 and 7 [Kleiber]" as the Album (and also the folder) name and " Symphony No. 5 in C minor; 1. Allegro con brio" as the Track (and also the file) name. This allows for a reasonably consistent browsing experience across both folder and index views, and identifies what I am listening to to a sufficient degree. If I require more information, there is (almost invariably for me) the CD booklet and, of course, the internet.

I try not to be too dogmatic about all this. Even with my preference for normalised data, I might allow an album title like "Mompou Piano Works", and an associated track name of "Canción y Danza 5 (1942)". If I feel that it works on the control point, I am happy.

If I may say so, I think that this scheme has the merits of being simpler and more standards-friendly than the one you outlined. Specifically, I don't think that it is necessary to use one tag/field for the work name and another for the movement. I also think that keeping Album/folder and Track/file names consistent helps me to navigate the folder tree when I am outside an 'indexed' environment.

If this simple arrangement does not suit your needs, I'd be interested to know why. I'm still relatively new to this game, and it is always possible that I've missed something that will come back to bite me later ...

David