Timothy Stockman wrote: > Tagging and database issues aside, there's also the question of how do > you organize the directory structure on the disk. With popular music, > you can easily use a variant of the Artist/Album/Track hierarchy. With > classical, the only thing that seems certain to me is that whatever > directory structure I choose, at some level there should be the > "directory per album" structure. This is useful to eliminate > dupication of "per album" objects such as cover jpegs and booklet PDFs, > and it is probably best to allow certain low-level disk management > procedures to happen without the benefit of the tag-constructed > database. Of course, on a day-to-day basis, this directory structure > will be "hidden" because the player will access things through the > database constructed by the file scanner fron the tags. > > Right now, the directory heirarchy I'm using for classical is maybe not > the best: > > Peformer (Soloist - Orchestra - Conductor) [directory] > Album (Label - LabelNo) [sub-directory] > Work (Composer - Name-of-Work) [sub-directory] > Movement (Number. Name-of-Movement-or-Tempo) [file]
I tried putting works in separate directories, but ended up going back to just using one dir. per disc. Anything else was just too confusing. It doesn't make any difference to SC as long as the tags are correct. R. _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
