Record/CD organization

Weren't "P J Harvey" considered a band at one point?  Like, when they released "Rid of Me?"  But now "P J Harvey" just refers to the woman, right?  "Let England Shake" was released by a solo artist not a band?

Brian

File it under H.

Tangible media is dead.

The real title of this thread should: Algorithm Question

Brian_Wallace wrote:

Weren't "P J Harvey" considered a band at one point?  Like, when they released "Rid of Me?"  But now "P J Harvey" just refers to the woman, right?  "Let England Shake" was released by a solo artist not a band?

Brian

You should only own "Rid of Me" era PJ Harvery so this is a silly question.

vansmack wrote:
Tangible media is dead.

The real title of this thread should: Algorithm Question

Man you are living in the past.

vansmack wrote:
Tangible media is dead.

The real title of this thread should: Algorithm Question

I know all about algorithms.  Along with Springsteen and Rolling Stone magazine, the bane of my existence:

Now, I wouldn't be caught dead owning Beatles records, but I guess this is the Unified Field Theory question of record organization:

Which comes first?  "Abbey Road" or "Let It Be?"

AND (Corollary!) if you put "Let It Be" before "Abbey Road" aren't you a hypocrite if you organize pre-album singles before the associated albums.  i.e., if you put "Roar" before "Prism?"

Brian

P.S.  Also, do you put compilations at the end of all studio albums OR after the era they were a compilation of?  Do you put "The Best of Radiohead" before "In Rainbows" or after?

Release Date before Recording Date.

Singles after LP's, in order of release.

Compilations slotted in the collection, ignoring the release date.  For example, U2's Best of 1980-90 slotted after Rattle and Hum and before Auchtung Baby, despite coming out after Pop.

anybody see that new mcdonalds commercial?

its 30 seconds of vinyl fetishism…somebody around their house going through their record stacks, sorting through a crate while chomping some food…

as a collector of vinyl its interesting to me how only 5 years ago i had to answer questions about why i bought vinyl…people looked at me like i was crazy…

unfortunately its made it a lot harder to find quality vinyl. few people are dumping it anymore although the other day i had an amazing 200+ record haul…but it had been a while… the deals these days are in CDs.. people are dumping them like people dumped LPs in the 80s/90s… will they regret it? certainly many people who got rid of their LPs have…


anyways the highlight of this haul was probably finally after all these years finding a copy of john cale's paris 1919 in excellent shape (they all were.. the entire lot was in amazing shape) for $1…I know its not that rare but I've never seen a copy I think…. other highlights where a rare hawkwind record, a few cluster records, a few robert wyatt records, the entire the sound discography, the original beggars banquet frightening world of the fall, the first new order 12" original pressing, the Opal record, the luxury condos compilation with yo la tengo on it (yeah atomic!), etc…..


physical media is dead to the sheeple but its really a personal choice and there will always be people who enjoy it..its just a subculture. is all…

Sounds like an awesome haul. I have not found that many in a long time. For me lately its like wading through shit to find a small diamond.

First of all, vansmack's theory is inconsistent.  Only compilations are organized by when they were recorded?  No.  You have to be consistent across the board.  How else can you pinpoint the exact moment when Weezer or Oasis started to suck?  "Applause" comes before "ARTPOP" if "Hatful of Hollow" comes before "The Queen is Dead."

The best part of people dumping their CD collections is that if the person was a real fan you can get almost an entire artist's catalog (including some boots) for like, $15-$20.

Brian

hutch wrote:
anybody see that new mcdonalds commercial?

its 30 seconds of vinyl fetishism…somebody around their house going through their record stacks, sorting through a crate while chomping some food…

as a collector of vinyl its interesting to me how only 5 years ago i had to answer questions about why i bought vinyl…people looked at me like i was crazy…

unfortunately its made it a lot harder to find quality vinyl. few people are dumping it anymore although the other day i had an amazing 200+ record haul…but it had been a while… the deals these days are in CDs.. people are dumping them like people dumped LPs in the 80s/90s… will they regret it? certainly many people who got rid of their LPs have…


anyways the highlight of this haul was probably finally after all these years finding a copy of john cale's paris 1919 in excellent shape (they all were.. the entire lot was in amazing shape) for $1…I know its not that rare but I've never seen a copy I think…. other highlights where a rare hawkwind record, a few cluster records, a few robert wyatt records, the entire the sound discography, the original beggars banquet frightening world of the fall, the first new order 12" original pressing, the Opal record, the luxury condos compilation with yo la tengo on it (yeah atomic!), etc…..


physical media is dead to the sheeple but its really a personal choice and there will always be people who enjoy it..its just a subculture. is all…

I saw that commercial the other night, and then thought "I wouldn't let anyone eating some nasty big mac anywhere near my precious record collection."  I think they were playing vinyl on one of those retro-looking orange crosley turntables that are made of the crappiest plastic known to man and will destroy your collection.  Ok, so I'm a curmudgeon.

BTW, I go by release date.

Congratulations on that fine treasure trove - the key is to not look too excited.  I never tell anyone, but the VA counties west of PW are full of vinyl gold.

There was a McD's ad a few years ago that featured a few "collectors": one vinyl, one concert ticket and a third I don't remember. The music was sorta fake Radiohead; the vinyl collector was a college-age girl with giant headphones and shitty vinyl handling skill. She was touching the grooves and dropping the disc into the sleeve instead of sliding it. The vinyl had the Capitol rainbow circle, thus strengthening the Radiohead allusion. The kid's "collection" was all at 45 degree angles, thus guaranteeing warpage, and was actually mostly cardboard, as evidenced by the beige color cast. But it was all so kewl….

Brian_Wallace wrote:

vansmack wrote:
Tangible media is dead.

The real title of this thread should: Algorithm Question

I know all about algorithms.  Along with Springsteen and Rolling Stone magazine, the bane of my existence:

Now, I wouldn't be caught dead owning Beatles records, but I guess this is the Unified Field Theory question of record organization:

Which comes first?  "Abbey Road" or "Let It Be?"

AND (Corollary!) if you put "Let It Be" before "Abbey Road" aren't you a hypocrite if you organize pre-album singles before the associated albums.  i.e., if you put "Roar" before "Prism?"

Brian

P.S.  Also, do you put compilations at the end of all studio albums OR after the era they were a compilation of?  Do you put "The Best of Radiohead" before "In Rainbows" or after?

Trick question as no one would own a copy of in rainbows

The only Radiohead albums I own are The Bends, and a copy of Thom Yorke's solo album, which I got for 25 cents when Tower Records was going out of business.

The Bends is the only one I listen to.

The concept of owning music is a dying breed.  Licensing is where is the future lies…

That being said, I no longer own a single CD that I doesn't have an autograph on it. 

I no longer own a single tape (8 or 24 track).

And I foolishly own 15,000 albums because some day I'll be "nostalgic."

I do license 6 million+ tracks and augment them with about 8 thousand MP3s that aren't available via license.

I don't want to sound like Neil Young here, but mp3's sound like shit.

If you're satisfied with listening to music that sounds as loud and shitty as the Red Hot Chili Peppers or Muse for the rest of your life then I have nothing to say to you.  Rampant technology has won your heart.  Smart phones will always be an infinite progression for you.  You'll never be satsifed.

Brian

what is the point of all of this.  oh yeah, i know

vansmack wrote:
The concept of owning music is a dying breed.  Licensing is where is the future lies…

you have never owned music.  you have always bought a license.  just so happened that until recently, buying a license and owning a physical copy were tied together.

Good point,  although I was referring to foregoing certain other options when you own the tangible media,  like transferring to other media types and devices,  in contrast to the new licensing models.  It's essentially sacrificing flexibility for access.  And at the current reduced costs,  I've never had access to more music at such a low price.