# Organizing Your Classical Music



## WVdave (Jun 18, 2017)

Please forgive me if there's already a thread about this -- I've only been a member of this forum for a few months.

Just wondering if anyone here has any thoughts on the best way to organize a quickly growing classical music collection. 

Right now, I'm doing it by composer, rather than by the individual artist method that I use for my jazz and rock collections. But what about individual label box sets feature multiple composers and artists? Or individual artists that may cover two or more of a composers' works on an LP or CD? 

And if you organize your collection by composer, do you organize those works numerically, or by the release date or date of the recording? 

I was re-organizing some classical CD's earlier today and just thought there might be few different opinions on this. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

WVdave said:


> And if you organize your collection by composer, do you organize those works numerically, or by the release date or date of the recording?


I do it by category - solo, chamber, lieder, concerto, orchestral, choral and opera.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

By composer, and within that, by the title of the (main) piece on the CD. In the case of recitals, then usually by the artist. For collections of works by different composers, either by the primary piece on it (if there is one) or (in rare cases) by the conductor. I also use some software designed for collections of various types where all the pieces are listed individually by composer and title, and including a 'filed under' column to easily locate oddball works which aren't where they'd be expected. As I have a relatively substantial collection of downloaded music files, the software also serves to catalog those items. The software also has cross-linking by conductor, group, artist, etc. so I can (e.g.) find everything done by any individual.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

By composer starting with the least instrument , so Bach piano works come before violin ( alphabetic) ending with vocal.
CD which hold more then one work by different composer goes in a special section beginning with the biggest work.

Recitals from opera / lied singers are all in a different cabinet alphabetic.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I have one main folder for opera and one main folder for all other classical. 

Operas are simply organized by title, with exceptions of special folders for Baroque, Russian, Mendelssohn and Wagner operas. also I grouped Donizetti's queens into one folder with subfolders for each queen opera. Additionally, sets of multiple operas are in their own separate folders.

Other classical is mostly by composer, with different types of works (piano, symphony, masses, etc.) in sub folders. Again box sets of mixed composers are in their own separate folder.


----------



## Taplow (Aug 13, 2017)

I divide my physical collection into the following sections, in this order:

1. General, composer-identified recordings
2. Recitals and artist-identified collections
3. Opera

Within the first section, I order them by composer, then type of work. So piano sonatas might be followed by piano concertos, followed by symphonies, followed by choral etc. I am not too strict about this. For example, one composer might have their works ordered in a different way than another depending on their output. But the idea is to lead the eye and make things generally easy to find. If there is more than one composer represented on a disc, I file it under the major work on that disc, or if equal (such as the Mendelssohn and Bruch violin concertos on one disc), I file it under the first listed composer on the spine of the CD.

Within the second section, I order by artist.

Within the third, I order by composer and then opera, alphabetically. The only exception ... my Ring cycle operas stay together.

I organise my digital collection in pretty much the same way. Metadata can be tricky, though, since the boffins who defined the available metadata fields for digital audio files did not really have classical music in mind. I use the "Album Artist" field to store the last name of the composer (Beethoven), which orders the albums by composer, then use the "Composer" field for the composer's full name, surname first (Beethoven, Ludwig van). This aids searching, and distinguishing between Strauss, Johann, and Strauss, Richard. I also use the genre field to separate Baroque from Classical (I like it to have its own category), and Opera from everything else. I add the label and catalogue number to the comments field.

Titling is tricky, since if you have two albums with the same name and same album artist, iTunes thinks they're the same thing and lumps them together, even if the other metadata fields are different. It ignores comments, for example. For this I always add the band and conductor to the title. So for several sets of Beethoven symphonies, they would be titled:

Symphonies [OAE: Gardiner]
Symphonies [BP: Karajan 1962]
Symphonies [BP: Karajan 1977]

I then use the "Sort By" fields to ensure the Ring cycle operas stay together, in order, or various albums of string quartets by the same composer stay together despite different titles.

I am available for consultation.


----------



## Taplow (Aug 13, 2017)

Interestingly, iTunes has recently added "Work" and "Movement" fields, with additional metadata for movement number and name. I have not tried this out yet. I add such data to the track title. I don't see any way to display, sort or search by these fields, so they're probably largely useless.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Primary: per composer (family name).
Secondary: for one composer, in sequence
[a] symphonies
* concertos
[c] other orchestral works
[d] chamber music
[e] solo instruments
[f] vocal

Discs with two composers are filed under the (in my opinion) main one, with a cross-reference at the other composer.
Discs with three or more composers are filed after the alphabetical composer albums, with a cross-reference at the composers.

This is both the physical lay-out of my CDs as well as a catalogue on the computer, so I know where to find pieces that are not filed under the relevant composer name.*


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

WVdave said:


> Please forgive me if there's already a thread about this -- I've only been a member of this forum for a few months.
> 
> Just wondering if anyone here has any thoughts on the best way to organize a quickly growing classical music collection.
> 
> ...


I do it by Composer or by instrumentalist/ Conductor for those multi disc collections.
If you are just starting out you may want to save everything to a hard drive where it is easier to make playlists by Composer or whatever criteria you prefer. Once you've amassed several hundred discs this becomes more of a challange


----------



## T Son of Ander (Aug 25, 2015)

It sounds like you're talking about a physical collection, ie LPs and CDs. Personally, I organize by composer. Within each, I then arrange by type of works. Of course, some albums have mixed types of works, like a symphony with a concerto, so arrange those by the lead work. Collections and boxed sets get their own section.

If you're talking digital, it's similar. I also arrange by composer on the computer (iTunes), but I like to tag things a certain way. If the CD I import is all by one composer, then it goes in just like it is, with the composer as "artist" and the name of the major works and the ensemble or orchestra in the "album" field. Any other info I want goes into the appropriate place when you pull up the info box under edit, though it may not necessarily show when you are viewing the library. If an album has works by more than one composer, than it gets split into albums by each one. For example, I have a CD with the Tchaikovsky and Sibelius violin concerto, so that is split as one album per composer. Downloads from Amazon or iTunes are kept as they are, though I may add more info if it sparse.

Once I got everything imported, I made playlists for every composer I have music by. Composers who have a ton of music, like Mozart or Bach, will have multiple playlists (Mozart symphonies, Mozart piano concerti, Mozart chamber music, etc.). The playlists are grouped into folders for each letter. This way I don't have to wade through the library itself; I can just go right to a playlist to easily find what I want. This is important, as my classical library has close to 100,000 "tracks" and around 8,000 "albums."

Once everything was set, I made backups to portable hard drives (yes, plural!). So I have 3 copies of everything and 4 for most - the original CDs or a cloud version if it was bought from Amazon or iTunes; 75% is on my computer*; one copy each on two portable hard drives.

*I have deleted some from my computer, either because it is something I don't like, a recording I don't like or is bad sound quality, or something I have so many recordings of but I'm not real picky about which version I listen to - like the Nutcracker suite; often used as filler, I must have 20 recordings of it. I picked one with good sound and good playing, and dumped the rest off the computer.

The important thing is to find what works for you. I tried a couple different ways until I found what I liked, then went with that.

The MOST important thing is to back up. You don't want to lose anything or waste time and energy having to start from scratch build your digital library again.


----------



## WVdave (Jun 18, 2017)

"_By composer starting with the least instrument , so Bach piano works come before violin ( alphabetic) ending with vocal.
CD which hold more then one work by different composer goes in a special section beginning with the biggest work.

Recitals from opera / lied singers are all in a different cabinet alphabetic._"

Pugg, thanks for the reply -- I was also thinking of you when I posted this thread -- your collection must be amazing!


----------



## WVdave (Jun 18, 2017)

Taplow said:


> I divide my physical collection into the following sections, in this order:
> 
> 1. General, composer-identified recordings
> 2. Recitals and artist-identified collections
> 3. Opera


 That's a great tip -- building a separate category for opera -- I will do that!


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

Like many others have stated, I had my collection by composer from least instrument moving up to symphonies and then symphonic choral works.

This summer I rearranged my collection. I pulled out several genres and organized those by composer; i.e. a Capella choral works, art song, violin sonatas (violin, viola, cello), string quartets, solo key board works (harpsichord, piano, organ). The rest of the collection is still in the original order. I wanted to be able to put my hands onto, say, all the violin sonatas quickly, so having them in one place made this easier. I like this set up by genre more than the way I had it before. Just a suggestion. The goal is to feel good about how your library is set up and the ease with which you can find the selections your after.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks, but I've always shelf-stored my CDs according to alphabetical order by composer, then sub-divided into categories - broadly speaking that is orchestral-chamber-solo instrument-vocal/choral. Opera and boxed sets are kept separately because of their size but the same alphabetical by composer rule applies. The bigger my collection gets the more sense it makes for me to be strict about my filing - it saves me so much time however borderline OCD I possibly am about it.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Physical discs (rarely used anymore)

Non-vocal
Opera
Other vocal

Each then by composer in roughly chronological order. Discs with works by multiple composers are stored together. I don't separate works by the same composer down by composition type, although for major composers I generally keep each of orchestral, chamber and piano together. 

Computer-based:

This derives from a system I set up for my first iPod nearly 15 years ago - before iTunes for Windows was even available. Over the years I've jury-rigged the system to work with iTunes, JRiver and Squeezebox, all of which I currently use. I would not start with it today:

Genres:

Classical
Classical Vocal
Early Music
Guitar and Lute

Within each category a concatenation of composer and principal performer in the artist field. I have several rules for dealing with multi composer albums, which I won't go into because they are too peculiar, and I haven't always been consistent about them.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

jegreenwood said:


> Physical discs (rarely used anymore)
> 
> Non-vocal
> Opera
> ...


 Have you or any other posters used Roon to try and organize a digital collection?


----------



## Agamemnon (May 1, 2017)

I have stored my CD collection by composer in chronological order (of the birth date of the composer) because I have a historical mind: I like to look at the development of music from the Baroque to Contemporary and it would seem to be crazy to put Barber next to Bach or Beethoven next to Bartok.

But it is a mistake. I can not easily find CD's because when e.g. I want to grab a disk by Mahler and find a disk by Puccini I have to look up who of the two was born earlier to know if I have to look to the right or to the left from Puccini to find Mahler...

I am gonna reorder my collection soon...


----------



## Joe B (Aug 10, 2017)

Agamemnon said:


> I have stored my CD collection by composer in chronological order (of the birth date of the composer) because I have a historical mind: I like to look at the development of music from the Baroque to Contemporary and it would seem to be crazy to put Barber next to Bach or Beethoven next to Bartok.
> 
> But it is a mistake. I can not easily find CD's because when e.g. I want to grab a disk by Mahler and find a disk by Puccini I have to look up who of the two was born earlier to know if I have to look to the right or to the left from Puccini to find Mahler...
> 
> I am gonna reorder my collection soon...


Have fun when you do. When I broke out certain genres this summer in my CD re-organization, I had a blast checking out every CD in my collection. It's kinda cool to see everything that you've taken years (decades) to collect.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Agamemnon said:


> I have stored my CD collection by composer in chronological order (of the birth date of the composer) because I have a historical mind: I like to look at the development of music from the Baroque to Contemporary and it would seem to be crazy to put Barber next to Bach or Beethoven next to Bartok.
> 
> But it is a mistake. I can not easily find CD's because when e.g. I want to grab a disk by Mahler and find a disk by Puccini I have to look up who of the two was born earlier to know if I have to look to the right or to the left from Puccini to find Mahler...
> 
> I am gonna reorder my collection soon...


I have a friend who had all his opera recording in years of composing, it's a hell to quickly find something, he admitted it himself and now he has chanced everything just like you.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Seven main sections:
Symphonies
Concerti
Other Orchestral
Keyboard
Chamber
Opera
Other Vocal

Alphabetical by composer of "main work" within each section. 
Alphabetical by type within each composer (quartets, quintets, pianot trio, etc.). 
Collections including numerous composers at the end of each genre,


----------



## GraemeG (Jun 30, 2009)

Physical discs only; don't own digital music. Given I hate the sound of these terrible little earphones - I want to hear stuff through decent-sized, decent-sounding speakers - what's the point of compressing files onto a computer? CDs are relatively compact, after all.

Anyway: alphabetical by composer, then multi-composer single-artist collections (like all these brick CD blocks of Richter, or Oistrakh), finally the multi-composer, multi-artist sets in no particular order (and there are only a few discs like that).
But it's only 1000 CDs all up, so it's never too hard to find anything; except in those big box sets.
cheers,
Graeme


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Mine are by composer alphabetically, a separate section for recitals “under artist alphabetically” I use a free program “Music Collection” which saves time as you just load CD into your PC and it retrieves details from the www, however there is the odd one that you have to fill out manually, I have never found a system that is 100% foolproof, I still get frustrated when I cant find a particular CD.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Agamemnon said:


> I have stored my CD collection by composer in chronological order (of the birth date of the composer) because I have a historical mind: I like to look at the development of music from the Baroque to Contemporary and it would seem to be crazy to put Barber next to Bach or Beethoven next to Bartok.
> 
> But it is a mistake. I can not easily find CD's because when e.g. I want to grab a disk by Mahler and find a disk by Puccini I have to look up who of the two was born earlier to know if I have to look to the right or to the left from Puccini to find Mahler...
> 
> I am gonna reorder my collection soon...


If it's a composer by whom I only have one or two discs, it may take me a half minute to find it, but for a major composer like Mahler (e.g.) I can find the section immediately. I then have to look for (or sometimes to decide upon) the recording I want.

At least, that's how it was before I when to computer based audio. Now I am contemplating packing up most of my CDs in storage cases to recover some space in my apartment.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Triplets said:


> Have you or any other posters used Roon to try and organize a digital collection?


When I looked at Roon a while back, there were a number of reports that it didn't work for classical. That may have changed. But it would have to integrate with my computer software. I think JRiver and Roon are competitive not complementary.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

It seems everyone just about has this one nailed, for their own purposes.

Ideally, I arrange by composer, alphabetically (as it seems many here do). The first disc currently on my CD shelf is a Herald CD titled "12th-Century Chant: Abelard: hymns & sequences for Heloise". Abelard, of course, is the composer, and he sits before a Lee Actor Violin Concerto, an Athena Adamopoulos chamber music collection, and a couple of John Adams discs. 

I'm doing okay for a couple of feet till I hit a couple of discs with "American" in their titles: "American Contrasts" featuring James DePreist conducting Benjamin Lees, Vincent Persichetti, and Michael Daugherty, and "American Orchestral Music", a long time favorite 2-CD set on VOXBOX featuring Virgil Thomson, Ned Rorem, William Schuman, Howard Hanson, Gunther Schuller, and Edward Macdowell.... 

Which brings up the most problematical situation I face in cataloguing on the shelves: those compilation discs not named for a composer. But I tend to place them alphabetically and hope I can find the thing I want when I want it if I want it.

Discs with two (or more) composers listed on the spine I tend to file after the first name listed. (Such a disc on the first shelf is a Chandos CD featuring Albeniz: Iberia and Falla: 3-Cornered Hat. Albeniz is listed first, so the disc gets shelved with the "A"s. But in a number of circumstances I've placed the disc with the second or third composer, in those cases where the second or third listed composer is much more well known. In such cases I'm likely to have many more discs by the composer, and it is quite possible that I acquired the disc precisely for the more familiar composer's piece. One of the first such filings on my "A" shelf is a Musica Svecia disc featuring (by order on the spine) Atterburg/Kallstenius/Lindberg, which I filed under Atterburg, coincidentally an "A" listing, moreso because of my familiarity with Atterburg's music (I have several Atterburg disc) and my lesser familiarity with the other two composers (though I have of late picked up several Lindberg pieces, filed under "L"). 

In a similar filing I find a Russian Disc CD featuring Artyomov • Baley • Silvestrov • Ives. Though Charles Ives is most familiar to me, the work featured, the "Fourth of July", I can access from a number of Ives discs on the "I" shelf. I filed this Russian Disc under Artyomov, the second most familiar name largely because I have a couple of other Artyomov discs and the work featured, a Concert for 13 Winds, Piano and Percussion, is a substantial piece. The Virko Baley (the only work I have of that composer) is a Violin Concerto, and the Valentin Silvestrov is the Postludium for Piano and Orchestrsa. So, this is an example of a disc that can pretty well end up burying some fine works unless you are really aware they are there to be heard. As I type this I am reminded that I should visit that Baley Violin Concerto No. 1 (dating to 1987) and the Silvestrov Postludium (1985), as they escape my current memory.

Of course, if you have several thousand discs (as I do) much is destined to become buried in the mess (including yourself at times!). But I do find the alphabetical to work best for my purposes, even if it is not always ideal.

Within the rankings of a composer I tend to list symphonies together (numerically), followed by piano, violin, cello, and then "other" concerti, followed by orchestral works, followed by chamber music (string quartets together, trios together, etc), followed by solo instrument followed by choral works. Of course, exceptions are rife, as when a symphony and a choral work share the same disc. The symphony will generally get the nod.

But there remains a lot of fun involved in the cataloguing, too. So look forward to that.

I've used the online Discogs cataloguing system to file my titled via the computer. Discogs allows for folders of various catagories, which makes cataloguing almost as precise as you wish it to be. It got to the point where I was not aware of what I had and had a number of times purchased things I already had, so the Discogs catalog allows me to check: do I have this already?

I have folders for each major era (Renaissance, Baroque, Classical-18th century, Romantic-19th century, 20th and 21st centuries). But I also keep several major composers in separate folders, such as Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart (of which three composers I have much much too much). I've combined a couple of composers into single folders: Shostakovich and Prokofiev is one, Schubert/Bruckner/Mahler is another. And Discogs allows for my pop/rock/punk and jazz collections to be sorted out nicely, as well.

Between Discogs and my alphabetical shelving system, I do pretty well finding and keeping track of items.

But problems do arise. 

Still, what would life be without problems?


----------

