ceejay wrote:
> thats the whole point - neither takes precedence, I use multiple
> values.
Oh, oh, oh. That makes a lot more sense. [Mark that the second
message I've replied to today where I misunderstood someone.]
I've given some thought to multi-tagging genres. I've certainly
done a few hundred artists that way, but have been reluctant
to learn of some unintended consequence and my wife isn't happy
with how much time I've spent tagging already (>20K tracks).
> But often I don't know - but I do feel like
> listening to something like... a symphony, or choral, or baroque, or
> piano. This system lets me do that.
Indeed. The thing I'm always afraid of is feeling like I want
to hear, say, some jazz and I miss seeing Jonas Hellborg or John
McGlaughlin thing because I sub-categorized it poorly. Using
multi-tags would work. OK, John Coltrane is 'jazz' with every
not he ever played...but maybe Sonny Sharrock isn't.
...but do you actually go through every piece by hand? Aren't
there Kronos Quartet albums, for example, that might need a
half-dozen different tags - in addition to "Classical" - on a
track-by-track basis? I see my OCD kicking in.
--
Chip Hart - Pediatric Solutions * Physician's Computer Company
chip @ pcc.com * 1 Main St. #7, Winooski, VT 05404
800-722-7708 * http://www.pcc.com/~chip
f.802-846-8178 * Pediatric Software Just Got Smarter.
Your Practice Just Got Healthier.
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
