Streamlining the browsing tree & multiple configs

[haggis999]

(20-09-2013 14:09)DavidHB Wrote:  I'm sorry if this sounds a bit obvious, but the folder view is a function of the way the folders are arranged within your music folder (the folder MinimServer is directed to by its contentDir option). In my case, because (following my 'CD shelf' paradigm), the genres are separately stored, my top level categorisation is into genre folders.

My brain is so hard-wired to thinking in terms of metadata that I never considered the possibility that you might be using genres in your folder structure! In my case, I ripped first and thought about genres later - and fully expect to adjust my genre definitions over time. My focus on metadata means that I never have to change my folder structure after ripping.

Quote:I use track names to specify the work, as this works with all the Control Points I have tried.

It is quite common for metadata found on various online databases to include the work name as a prefix to the track name but I find this a hindrance to easy browsing with an interface that has a limited number of viewable characters. My initial tests before banishing all work references from the track titles showed that it was often the case that all tracks appeared to have the same name because there was only room to see the work prefix. I was using a Samsung Galaxy Note 2 'phablet' as my control point and this has much less space than Kinsky on an iPad.

Quote:The good thing about this view is that it mimics the way that I am used to accessing my collection. You already know the bad news ...

In my case, I was actively trying to throw off the restrictions of my previous 'shelf scanning' access to my collection. If a work did not appear on the visible spine of the CD I would soon forget it was available. As you say, compilation CDs simply exacerbate that issue.

Quote:What the problem demonstrates is that no one view is ever going to give us all that we need, and that, when the combination of a Control Point and MinimServer offers us a range of browsing options, it is self-defeating to try to cram too much of our browsing activity into any one view.

I guess this is where we part company. Can you be a little more specific about situations where you think a metadata-based view just doesn't work?

Quote:You get plenty of classical CDs that contain two or more disparate works by different composers and of pretty much equal 'weight'. It is a real pain to know where to file those CDs on the shelf, and that is a hint that, in the digital collection, you should not necessarily keep the individual works together.

I agree that the physical filing of CDs can be a right pain at times. My solution has been to file all composer-specific CDs in alphabetical composer order (though a few CDs with minor items by other composers are included in this section). All compilation CDs are simply filed randomly, in what is thankfully a much smaller section of my shelving.

In the digital domain, a tool such as JRMC makes it easy to instantly switch from an album-oriented view of your music to a composer-oriented view, or any other tag based view you can imagine. I was more than happy to pay the price for JRMC (trivial compared to an Akurate DSM! ) to get access to what is probably the most powerful media application currently on the market.

A NAS doesn't have the horsepower to run something like JRMC, hence my keen interest in MinimServer for PC-free browsing.

David