# Taking My Music Collection Digital: Can You Help?



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

Hello Everyone,

*WARNING LONG POST...*

I am being forced to take my music collection digital onto my computer and into "the cloud". The reasons why are legion so I will explain at the moment.

I am not great with computers and this is the first time I've attempted to do this. Like many a Talk Classical user I'm sure I have thousands of CDs and that is not hyperbole.

Now I believe I have purchased the right tools...

I have about 12 terabytes "TB" of storage it's actually 24 TB but one of my friends has configured it in such a way that there is a certain amount of redundancy should one of the drives fail.

I currently use a program called dBpoweramp to rip my CDs, I use the "AIFF." file format as I want lossless uncompressed files but need iTunes/iPod compatibility which rules out "FLAC".

I have a Acronova "Nimbie" USB Plus NB21- BR which is a external disc drive that can hold 100 CD/DVDs/Blu-rays at any one time and can be continuously loaded from the top while ripping. Once it is finished with one CD it ejects it from the bottom. This allows me to set dBpoweramp to batch convert the CDs and leave it running while I work or I'm out etc.

*My main issue occurs when you try to rip CD box sets. I may be wrong but it appears to me that on occasion some of the discs are compilations or in some way different from the original recording.

They are either missing or have extra tracks which causes the "ripping" application (it doesn't matter what I use) to either fail to recognize the disc or to recognize the disc as part of the box set in question.*

I have found both the du Pré & Rostropovich "Complete EMI Recordings" particularly hard to organize for the above reason.

Both the sets above contain less than 30 discs, if the box set contains 80 + discs then searching though each disc if they are all generically labelled as part of same set I imagine could be come rather laborious.

I am dreading ripping my "Arthur Rubinstein: The Complete Album Collection" which has 144 discs in total... 

The obvious solution would be to manually enter the album info from the back of CD case/slip but with thousands of CDs that would take some time.

What do you do when it comes to box sets and can you can help in anyway? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I would also love to know how you organize your iTunes library? I am locked into iTunes as my partner is strictly a Mac user.

Screenshots welcome!!! :tiphat:

Kind Regards,

Fox


----------



## Posie (Aug 18, 2013)

Is it possible for you to have more than one iTunes account? That might make it easier.

If not, do you have Windows Media Player?

Does your computer have room for 24 terabytes of music?


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

Thank you for replying Marinasabina I am not sure why one would need another iTunes account perhaps you could explain? As far as I know you can have more than one you would need another email address but you can only log into one account at a time.

I think you perhaps mean to have more than one iTunes library and I also know that is possible although I don't know how one would go about setting that up and what that involves once you have more than one. 

I know my original post was rather long and perhaps unclear. It is not the size of the collection and thus the resulting size of the iTunes library that would follow the causes me concern. It is the proper "tagging" and identifying of music particularly when the automated systems for retrieving CD information fail. Thank you again for your time. :tiphat:

Fox


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I would rip using Assunder and playback with VLC media player.


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

Thanks Florestan for taking the time to comment. I am quite happy with the software I have at the moment. dBpoweramp has "accurate rip" I am not actually sure but I think it calibrates for your disc drive and then checks your ripped tracks bit for bit against it's database to insure that they are perfect copies. I am not 100% sure but I don't think Asunder does this I also think it's for Linux and I would require software for either Windows or Mac OS X. 

Fox


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

There are several internet based disc meta-databases, I generally don't feel that any (even the commercial ones like Grace note) are completely perfect, I usually have of ad and correct information to about 1 disc in 3, often worse when it's multi disc sets, remember that I had to edit the meta data on almost all disc's when I ripped the big Toscanini RCA box, but then, I'm quite an#l about what info and how it should be tagged to my files! (If You are on a Windoze system, You can use something like MP3tag to better adjust the tags!)

/ptr


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

Thank you very much Ptr I will look into MP3tag. The software I mention dBpoweramp itself looks up several online databases for album information it uses AllMusicGuide, GD3. MusicBrainz, Freedb and TrackType.

It only fails to pick up certain box sets and very recent releases it's also capable of getting good rips of damaged CDs it's worth a look although it's not free. It has just been updated though and comes with a standalone music converter as well.

Best Wishes,

Fox


----------



## Posie (Aug 18, 2013)

I definitely don't envy your dilemma. Is there a specific reason why you have to digitize your entire music collection?


----------



## ptr (Jan 22, 2013)

Thanks for reminding me to upgrade dbPoweramp, I've used for years and it is my main ripper, so I'm well aware of the short comings of those internet meta data dB's!

I've tried to help update and fix error's with fx FreeDB, but often get rejected because the persons that do their peer review ain't as an#l as I am...  ... So I stopped!

/ptr


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Welcome to the world of ripping Classical CDs. You have discovered the main problem. Computer programs don't work well for Organizing Classical Music. They make a hash out of Artist, Composer, etc. As you have discovered, the problem is aggravated by the reissuing endemic to Classical recordings, which leads to meta data confusion.
I have to re type the data in order to make sense of it. Batch downloads are therefore not feasible.
There are programs which are supposed to beat iTunes. I tried a couple of them on a trial basis and was disappointed.
If you need to quickly computerize your collection, it may be worth hiring someone to do it for you. I would choose someone with a basic knowledge of Classical Music


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

marinasabina said:


> I definitely don't envy your dilemma. Is there a specific reason why you have to digitize your entire music collection?


There are quite a few reasons one being my partner hates the amount of space my recordings take up. My health is poor so being able to search though my entire collection while sitting comfortably would be a quality of life improvement rather than delving deep into the catacombs.

Oh and one of our neighbours blew up their house not exactly sure how a gas fire was involved though. We actually live far away from anyone else but they are still our "neighbours" and it made me think what if that happened to our home or if our house was flooded or burgled etc.

This way I can keep duplicate hard drives offsite most likely in a security deposit box at the bank as I already have one of those and I will also use "cloud" storage.



ptr said:


> Thanks for reminding me to upgrade dbPoweramp, I've used for years and it is my main ripper, so I'm well aware of the short comings of those internet meta data dB's!
> 
> I've tried to help update and fix error's with fx FreeDB, but often get rejected because the persons that do their peer review ain't as an#l as I am...  ... So I stopped!
> 
> /ptr


No problem sorry if I was a bit pushy I just thought if you knew all that you sounded like the kind of person that would use dB turns out I was right. 



Triplets said:


> Welcome to the world of ripping Classical CDs. You have discovered the main problem. Computer programs don't work well for Organizing Classical Music. They make a hash out of Artist, Composer, etc. As you have discovered, the problem is aggravated by the reissuing endemic to Classical recordings, which leads to meta data confusion.
> I have to re type the data in order to make sense of it. Batch downloads are therefore not feasible.
> There are programs which are supposed to beat iTunes. I tried a couple of them on a trial basis and was disappointed.
> If you need to quickly computerize your collection, it may be worth hiring someone to do it for you. I would choose someone with a basic knowledge of Classical Music


Thank you very much for your comment it has made me feel a lot better well less alone. I thought it was just me but it appears not. I have tried other programs I had some success with Foobar2000 but having both Windows and OS X machines at home meant iTunes won out in the end.

It never occurred to me to hire someone to do it and I would consider it but it's not that much of a problem really. I just think it is so awkward that it must put your "average joe" classical listener off ever organising their classical music properly.

I can get a remarkable amount done in a short space of time it is now 23:43 and since midday I have copied and sorted 123.5 GB of music. Bare in mind I am using AIFF. files so they are considerably larger than mp3/acc. or even FLAC/Apple Lossless a standard 80 minute album is around 750 MB.

I was just hoping someone had devised a way of doing something with iTunes or something else to make things easier even if it was just folder structure...

Thank you all for your comments! I tip my hat to you all. :tiphat:

Best Wishes,

Fox :tiphat:


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

If you are retired, and have time to put into this, I recommend carefully retyping the meta data, and not doing batch loads. You will appreciate it later when you are able to more easily locate the discs that you want in itunes. tell your partner that you are working on the issue but perhaps showing them the thread here will make them more understanding.


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

@Triplets thanks once more for taking the time to reply I appreciate it. I am not retired but I guess for the most part I work for myself so I am slightly more flexible than most. 

I understand what you are saying about the batch loads but if I am doing a batch load I check the meta data is correct before ripping. It doesn't just rip the tracks as 01-Tack etc. However I see the downside of batch ripping and only use it when I now I can trust the meta data. 

Kind Regards,

Fox


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

OK, good luck, and any helpful discoveries that you make, feel free to share!


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

I just rip into iTunes and don't correct the Gracenote tracks... into ALAC and then upload to the cloud.

Honestly that is why I prefer to buy from iTunes... no ripping no issues no name problems. Just heaven and it's easy.


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

I may post this elsewhere as to draw more attention to it but I thought it was a good way to end this thread. The following information can be found in it's original forum "here".

_All credit belongs to *Brian Abbott* of brianabbott.net._

*Organizing your iTunes Library:*

Classical music in iTunes is a disaster. The track and album information that is downloaded with your album is an inconsistent nightmare, and leaves one with few options for creating a variety of rich playlists-which is almost exclusively how I listen to my music.
To remedy this, I have a system which overhauls the existing track and album data, and appends those data with rich metadata so that I can create a variety of smart playlists. Here is my recipe.

*Tidy Track Data and Add Metadata:*

*1. Fix Album Composer*

Unlike many people, I keep the composer of the work in the Composer field (many people move it to the Artist field). I make sure I choose one consistent way to spell the composer's name (Dvořák or Dvorak? you decide and stick with one-personally I prefer the "řá" spelling), then I change it to a [last name], [first name] format. And, I don't include the dates of birth and death, we have Wikipedia for that. Once you have a composer in your library, subsequent entries will autocomplete.

*2. Add composer to sort fields*

I put the composer, in the same [last name], [first name] format, in the Sort Artist and Sort Album Artist fields. This bunches the works of one composer together, but will not break up multi-composer albums. If you identify your albums by the artist more than the composer, don't do this step.

*3 Fix Album Artist*

There are two fields here: Artist and Album Artist which, as you might imagine, represent each track and the entire album, respectively. For the Artist field, I tend to put the conductor and orchestra first, when applicable, and follow it with any highlighted artists along with their reason for being highlighted. Each artist is separated by a semi-colon. So, for example:

_
Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic
Fritz Reiner, Chicago Symphony; Sidney Harth, Violin
Alfred Brendel, Piano
Stanislaw Wislocki, Warsaw National Philharmonic Orchestra; Sviatoslav Richter, Piano

_
For the Album Artist, I typically put the most important artist first, without any instruments or voices. If the album is known for the pianist, then he or she will go first. If the album is best known for the conductor, then he will appear first (why are there no female conductors?). I still join the conductor and his orchestra with a comma, and separate other artists with a semi-colon. For example:

_
Leonard Bernstein, New York Philharmonic
Fritz Reiner, Chicago Symphony; Sidney Harth (the piece is better known for Reiner's work)
Alfred Brendel
Sviatoslav Richter; Stanislaw Wislocki, Warsaw National Philharmonic Orchestra
_

Now, I know what you're asking, what about those albums that have different artists for different pieces on the album. Well, I personally hate when albums have an Album Artist of Various Artists, but sometimes it is unavoidable, particularly on compilation albums. However, if there are only two different artists, I will join them together in the Album Artist field, thereby rescuing it from the various artists section. The alternative is to break up multi-artist albums so that they appear as different albums, but taken to its extreme-compilation albums-this system breaks down. I vote to keep the original album together.

*4. Add Metadata*

The Comments field can take a format-free string of characters, so I populate this field with an assortment of metadata that describe the piece. These include, in this order:


*A* - The Musical Period - Renaissance, Baroque, Classical, Romantic, 20th Century, or Modern.

*B* - The Musical Form - Symphony, Sonata, Concerto, Prelude, Rhapsody, Tone Poem, Fugue, etc. If you don't know the form, then put Form?

*C* - The Ensemble - Solo, Duet, Trio, Quartet, Quintet, up to Nonet, and Orchestra.

*D* - Highlighted Instruments - Violin for a violin concerto, Strings for a string quartet, or Winds for Mozart's Serenade #10 for Wind Instruments. You get the idea. Instruments can either be listed as a broad category, like Keyboard, Strings, Winds, Voice, or they can be listed individually, like Harpsichord, Cello, Oboe, etc.

*E* - The Album Date - if you feel the need, the original date that appears on the album. Often the release date, which I include as Rel2007, or the recording date, which I write as Rec1965. I don't pursue these dates, I only copy the date from the Year field here, just to have a record of when the album was released.

*F* - Date Uncertainty - if you don't know the date of the composition, which, as you'll see next, I put in the Year field, I place a Date? at the end of the Comments field.

_*5.  Fix the Year*_

I like putting the year the work was composed in the Year field. This is a nice way to put pieces in context with one another, and composers in historical context. This is why I copy the date to the Comments field, as described in 4f above.

*6.  Fix the track Name field.*

Typically, the track names, populated by the Gracenote database, are inconsistent not only across albums but even, at times, within albums. I fix all of this by using a standard field format, which makes the tracks more readable and easier to sort by. For most works, I use a format like this:

*[composer]: [work] in [key], [Op. #]/[number] '[known by name]' - #. [movement name]*

For example:


Bach: Brandenburg Concerto #2 in F Major, BWV 1047 - 3. Allegro Assai
Beethoven: Piano Sonata #5 in C Minor, Op. 10/1 - 1. Allegro molto e con brio
Mozart: Symphony #36 in C Major, K. 425 'Linz' - 3. Menuetto
Albéniz: Iberia Suite, Book III - 1. El Albaicin
Chopin: Mazurka #45 in G Minor, Op. 67/2 - Cantabile
R. Strauss: Also Sprach Zarathustra, Op. 30
Glass: Akhnaten, Act I: Year 1 of Akhenaten's Reign in Thebes, Scene 3 - The Window of Appearances
Mozart: Don Giovanni, Act II, Scene 15 - Finale: Don Giovanni, A Cenar Teco

_Strictly speaking, I should have listed the Brandenburg Concerto as Bach: Concerto #2 in F Major for Orchestra, BWV 1047 'Brandenburg' - ..., but some rules are meant to be broken when it makes sense to do so._

*Some additional guidelines:*

For Opera and other larger works, I use roman numerals for Acts or Books, like the examples above/


I never use "No." for number, I use the more economical "#" instead.
Everything begins with caps except the "in"s and "for"s, etc.
I always use a hyphen between sharp and flat notes, in the format: [note]-[Sharp | Flat] [Major | Minor]. For example B-Flat Minor.
I always put a Major or Minor in the work (Major is often left out).
I like to use numbers for the movements, instead of the traditional Roman numerals. Numbers are easier to read.
Most tracks are listed with the primary instrument first, but others warrant the order reversed. For example:



Schubert: String Quartet #14 in D Minor, D. 810 'Death and the Maiden' - 2. Andante con Moto
Rachmaninov: Piano Concerto #2 in C Minor, Op. 18 - I. Moderato
Mozart: Serenade #10 in B-Flat Major for 13 Wind Instruments, K. 361 'Gran Partita' - II. Menuetto



*7.  Fix the Grouping Field.*


The Grouping field allows you to associate the many tracks that make up one piece into a group. I use a format that's similar to the track name, but I remove a few items and rearrange the order a bit. I remove the composer and any individual movement information. Then, I try to begin the piece with the musical form, like Symphony, Concerto, Sonata, etc. which necessitates moving the instrument (if present) to the end kicked off by a "for." Some corresponding examples:

_
Brandenburg Concerto #2 in F Major, BWV 1047
Sonata #5 in C Minor for Piano, Op. 10/1
Symphony #36 in C Major, K. 425 'Linz'
Iberia Suite
Akhnaten
Don Giovanni, K. 527
Quartet #14 in D Minor for Strings, D. 810 'Death and the Maiden'
Concerto #2 in C Minor for Piano, Op. 18
_

Again, the Brandenburg Concerto is known more by that name, so it gets a pass.

Starting with the musical form makes it easy to see the pieces when sorted by group in the Column Browser's Grouping column-you are using the Column Browser, right?

*8. Rate Your Tracks*

By giving your tracks a rating, particularly for those tracks you like, you will separate the wheat from the chaff. Spend the extra time to at least rate those tracks that are neutral (3-star), tracks that you like (4-star), and tracks that you love (5-star).

*Creating Smart Playlists*

Once you have all the metadata in place, you can then begin to create a multitude of smart playlists that cull these data. Here is how I organize my Classical playlists. First, make a playlist folder called Classical, then put these folders inside it.


*Composers*

These can be smart lists to pull one composer's work out, or, what I find more enjoyable are dumb playlists populated with one composers work one piece at a time. Say you have Bach's Trio sonatas, Cello Suites, Brandenburg Concertos, and his Violin Concertos. Make a normal playlist called Bach Mix which takes one piece from the Trio Sonatas, then one from the Cello Suite, then a Brandenburg Concerto, then a Violin Concerto. Repeat the process until you exhaust the album's tracks and you have a nice little mix.

*
Ensemble
*

Create a smart playlist that culls data in the Comments field (4c above). You can have one list for Solo, one for Duet, Trio, Quartet, etc., up to Orchestra. (Yes, I know Solo does not an ensemble make, but it makes sense in this context.)

*
Forms
*

Smart playlists for the musical forms present in your library (4b above).


*Instruments*


You can make smart playlists for various instruments (Violin, Piano, Cello, etc.). You can also make broad playlists that source the individual instruments playlists, but also collect data for Strings, Keyboard, or Winds. For example, if you set up playlists for Violin, Viola, Cello, Guitar, Harp, Lute, and Mandolin, you could then make a Strings playlist that takes items from all those playlists, and takes i*t*ems that have Strings in their metadata.

*Periods*

For me, this is the most important set of playlists because I like to listen to my music by period. One for each in 4a above. I also attach dates to these lists, like Baroque (1600-1760) but you can do what you like.

*Popular*

Using the ratings and the play count, you can construct smart playlists that bring out the best of your collection. You can have compound lists that use, say, the Romantic playlist and only skim off the 5-star-rated tracks, giving you the best of Romantic period. You can do the same for a particular composer, for an ensemble, an instrument, a musical form, or a tempo (defined next). I use special characters for the 5-star playlists and the 4- plus 5-star playlists. Five-star playlists get a filled-in heart symbol, while 4- plus 5-star lists get a hollow heart symbol. Use Edit > Special Characters to choose a symbol you like.

*Tempo*

Using the basic tempo markings, you can sort your collection by tempo. This relies on the tempo appearing in the track name, which for many pre-20th century pieces is a given. For more modern pieces, tempo indicators may not be present. You can make smart playlists for Adagio, Allegro, Vivace, and Presto, to name a few, then listen to tracks with a slower tempo, or lively, vivacious tracks.

Beyond this, any combination of these is feasible. If you want 5-star, solo string pieces, you can make that list. If you want all keyboard sonatas, you can make that too. Say you want all C Major works, or all C Major, 5-star, string works-all easy to make with smart playlists. You can easily find all Scherzos, or all duet sonatas. The possibilities are endless.

*The End*​
*All credit belongs to Brian Abbott of brianabbott.net*.

*Contact Brian Abbot:* Here


I hope you find this useful and I may repost it somewhere else as it's on topic in future.

Kind Regards,

Fox :tiphat:


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Fox, I suspect you're doomed to designing a tagging system that fit your needs and assigning it, album by album, to your collection. You'll need a program for mass tagging, of course, which you probably already have (I use Foobar).

The important part, as I'm sure you know, is the tagging system itself. How do you plan too look things up and to sort? Keeping your needs simple will make things easier.


----------



## Fox (Feb 20, 2015)

KenOC said:


> Fox, I suspect you're doomed to designing a tagging system that fit your needs and assigning it, album by album, to your collection. You'll need a program for mass tagging, of course, which you probably already have (I use Foobar).
> 
> The important part, as I'm sure you know, is the tagging system itself. How do you plan too look things up and to sort? Keeping your needs simple will make things easier.


Hi Ken thanks for your time I suspect your right although I am going to use Mr. Abbott's method as a template. I liked Foobar200 and may switch back to it once I have more knowledge of how it works.

I basically want it to look like iTunes but I could never get it to function that way. I found the Foobar forum quite hostile to a novice with very little computer experience. If you don't mind could use reply or send me a PM with some details for example what components and or skins you use if any?

As for looking up meta data I have two bits of Software dBpoweramp and iTunes that automatically fetch data. I then compare this to the album listing on the iTunes store and Amazon.co.uk and .com if available. I then check with the Artists website again if available and then finally as most of my media is physical discs I check the back cover, booklet and or notes.

Kind Regards,

Fox


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Fox said:


> Hi Ken thanks for your time I suspect your right although I am going to use Mr. Abbott's method as a template. I liked Foobar200 and may switch back to it once I have more knowledge of how it works.
> 
> I basically want it to look like iTunes but I could never get it to function that way. I found the Foobar forum quite hostile to a novice with very little computer experience. If you don't mind could use reply or send me a PM with some details for example what components and or skins you use if any?
> 
> ...


I admire you so much Fox. I wish that I wasn't too lazy to retag everything properly.


----------

