Maintaining a Digital Music Collection

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2424 of them)

I'm too far behind to play catch-up, though I'd love a week to do it, but I've found hitting get info and adding the artwork there is the only way to do it, especially to multiple tracks. If I just drag it to the window it never works right.

dan selzer, Friday, 5 March 2010 00:46 (fourteen years ago) link

you have to make sure your bottom left artwork window is on Selected and not Now playing when adding artwork that way. click the artwork window title bar to swap between the two and be sure Selected is showing.

brotherlovesdub, Friday, 5 March 2010 00:55 (fourteen years ago) link

You should also try "restoring" the software on your iPod, assuming you haven't already.

yeah, I've tried that before to no avail. I've noticed this issue intermittently across two different ipods. sometimes if delete the files from my library, rename the folder they're in, and add them back to the ituens library, that does the trick. *siiiigh*

original bgm, Friday, 5 March 2010 16:39 (fourteen years ago) link

anyway, this bug really shouldn't matter much from a logical standpoint (as others have pointed out)... but I can be ridiculously detail-oriented sometimes and these types of things bother me way more than they should. oh, well.

original bgm, Friday, 5 March 2010 16:41 (fourteen years ago) link

Took me a full calendar to year to rip...how many CDs would it have been. Let me think here...something like 4000 to 5000, I guess. Then there were the CDRs and etc. etc.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 5 March 2010 16:44 (fourteen years ago) link

It was about six months for me. I never did get any real writing done while doing it, takes too much focus to remember to keep the CDs flowing regularly. I did read and post plenty in ilx though...

Fastnbulbous, Friday, 5 March 2010 18:36 (fourteen years ago) link

I just started ripping the "D" section of the CDRs, gonna have to wait until I have another hard drive to rip the 1500 CDs and god knows how many burns from vinyl.

sleeve, Friday, 5 March 2010 20:39 (fourteen years ago) link

the curse of having too much music. one remedy, a music blog project. listening to the stuff in a different order, from a different angle. it works wonders.

alex in mainhattan, Friday, 5 March 2010 22:18 (fourteen years ago) link

Maura wrote that, btw. off to read it now

ksh, Wednesday, 10 March 2010 21:09 (fourteen years ago) link

Nice article.

I just wish he hadn't adopted the "ilxor" moniker (ilxor), Wednesday, 10 March 2010 21:14 (fourteen years ago) link

Extremely nice.

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 10 March 2010 21:39 (fourteen years ago) link

Well-written as usual!

ksh, Wednesday, 10 March 2010 21:40 (fourteen years ago) link

I don't add artwork because the majority of my mp3 files are from torrent sites; fucks up the seeding

Happened to me as well at first. Just add the artwork to the copy on your iPod, not the copy on your hard drive.

anagram, Wednesday, 10 March 2010 21:52 (fourteen years ago) link

I liked that Paste Magazine article, but as with everything, a new paradigm can be a positive or a negative. Personally I'm finding lots of stuff in my own collection that I hadn't pulled out in years, and I've got playlists that help that process along. Sure, old favorites can be easy to gravitate towards but all it takes it another click or turn of the wheel and, hey, I haven't heard that in a while!

Gerald McBoing-Boing, Wednesday, 10 March 2010 22:34 (fourteen years ago) link

three weeks pass...

It's inevitable, the question is what's the downside of cloud-based streaming of your music collection:

1) Sound quality will be further reduced
2) Not everything you own would be available via the cloud
3) You can't organize your music (e.g. singles) the way you might want to
4) You won't always be in a situation where you can access the wireless web

I don't know if any of these will be true but they're the first that come to mind.

Gerald McBoing-Boing, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:37 (fourteen years ago) link

1) right now the sound quality of streaming audio generally seems to be sub-CD, but that will inevitably change, and soon
2) this is a point i've ignored in the past, but it's definitely true. streaming from iTunes will not replace listening to music in other ways, especially for music nerds
3) i doubt this is true. can't you create Spotify playlists? i'm sure there'll be a way to organize the songs/albums you want to stream in a bunch of ways
4) Spotify mobile app already lets you listen to songs offline -- no doubt, iTunes will follow

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:42 (fourteen years ago) link

no idea how a pricing scheme for an iTunes streaming service would work, but if it were a flat, monthly fee to listen to as much music as i wanted to, as long as the price wasn't too high, i'd be in. still can't imagine this'll be a good thing for a lot of artists, especially if they'll get paid per song streamed.

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:44 (fourteen years ago) link

i think most artists realize by now that they only way to get paid is by touring/playing shows

Mr. Que, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:48 (fourteen years ago) link

you're totally right, but i also think there's a solid chance that mass adoption of a streaming service could mean that musicians will make even less from people listening to their records than the pittance a lot of them make now

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:51 (fourteen years ago) link

warner bros. already rebuffed spotify's invitation to add the label's catalog to a US streaming service. fwiw, emusic is apparently considering adding a streaming service, too. no idea how they'll try to do it, but i have serious doubts about whether such a service can succeed.

Daniel, Esq., Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:55 (fourteen years ago) link

this is another one of those things where whatever's left of the music industry is going to do all it can to maintain whatever small amount of control they still have over their product, even though it's pretty much inevitable that most of their shit will be streaming someday, in some form, from some service

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:56 (fourteen years ago) link

Spotify also has zero traction in the US, since it's not available here. iTunes is huge

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 19:57 (fourteen years ago) link

if it's cheaper than rhapsody and i don't have to use itunes it might be cool. or is it only gonna stream what you put there in the first place?

give me a break Crunchie (tremendoid), Sunday, 4 April 2010 20:53 (fourteen years ago) link

knowing Apple, any iTunes streaming functionality will be strictly controlled by them. you'll probably be able to stream via iTunes, your browser, and your iPad/iPod/iPhone, at least at the beginning. the possibility of their being, say, an Android app that would let you stream iTunes content probably won't happen anytime soon, if ever

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 21:01 (fourteen years ago) link

it seems like the model for an iTunes streaming service will be that you'll buy tracks and albums as you have in the past, except instead of the program downloading local copies of that content to your computer, one-time only, you'll be able to stream it from iTunes at any computer you type your credentials into. this solves the problem of the user having to manage all those files, but it also locks you into iTunes, assuming that there is no way for you to keep a permanent, local copy of your files

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 21:05 (fourteen years ago) link

ideally, i'd like to pay one flat fee to listen to as much music as i wanted to, but i don't see this happening anytime soon, and, as i said upthread, i can only imagine that, monetarily, that'd make the current situation even worse for some artists

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 21:07 (fourteen years ago) link

> i'd like to pay one flat fee to listen to as much music as i wanted to, but i don't see this happening anytime soon

it's already here, has been for a while. i work for uk based company who supply music for vodafone uk, sweden, norway, vodacom SA, telenor, sky songs..., all of which, i believe, are subscription-based, unlimited streaming services, albeit with platform / region limitations. (i could be wrong, am tech side, not marketing. sky songs, looking at the website, appears to be £5 a month). i get to use it at work and, in answer to the points above 1) quality is ok. it's not cd quality but then people are happy enough to BUY things that aren't cd quality and 2) it doesn't have everything i own available (far from it) but it also has a shedload of good things that i don't own and 4) tracks are cached so you still have things to listen to if network goes down, but there is drm and you do lose things when your subscription lapses (i think some services give you a monthly quota of non-drmed tracks that you can keep)

koogs, Sunday, 4 April 2010 21:35 (fourteen years ago) link

(nothing in the US though)

koogs, Sunday, 4 April 2010 21:37 (fourteen years ago) link

I think you're right about sound quality, though there will always be a segment of us (myself included) that doesn't want to settle for less than we already get from ripping our own CDs and an iPod headphone out (which many feel is compromised to begin with).

Additionally, I suppose the appeal of such a service depends on how you listen to music in the first place. If you're not tied to your own collection, and/or can find most of what you want to listen to from a streaming service, then you're all set. But I suspect for the people like ILMers, it won't suffice. The obvious solution is a hybrid device, one that has on-board storage for your own music and can stream from a dedicated service.

Gerald McBoing-Boing, Sunday, 4 April 2010 22:26 (fourteen years ago) link

The obvious solution is a hybrid device, one that has on-board storage for your own music and can stream from a dedicated service.

OTM

ksh, Sunday, 4 April 2010 22:33 (fourteen years ago) link

ie a mobile phone.

koogs, Monday, 5 April 2010 09:44 (fourteen years ago) link

re: reduced sound quality, i kind of assume everything will go lossless eventually, right? i can't see record companies getting bent out of shape about it when most consumers of digital music files don't care about the difference between 192 & lossless anyway.

hobbes, Monday, 5 April 2010 09:50 (fourteen years ago) link

i'm actually seeing more lossless digital music for sale - boomkat have done flacs for ages but now bleep and several other dj-centric sites have started selling wavs* (all at a premium and, laughably, often more expensive than buying the actual cds but...)

but streaming services, yes, will always be lossy because of the bandwidth issues. some of the phones use he-aac v2 which has very listenable sound in *tiny* filesizes, 24kbps or so. but is patent encumbered and requires a licence.

* new autechre available as 24bit wavs ie better than cd quality

koogs, Monday, 5 April 2010 10:01 (fourteen years ago) link

re: reduced sound quality, i kind of assume everything will go lossless eventually, right? i can't see record companies getting bent out of shape about it when most consumers of digital music files don't care about the difference between 192 & lossless anyway.

― hobbes, Monday, April 5, 2010 5:50 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark

wait, why? I don't get the logic

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 10:09 (fourteen years ago) link

For most people, sound quality isn't as big of an issue. As long as it sounds OK, it's fine.

Jeff, Monday, 5 April 2010 12:51 (fourteen years ago) link

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I just wish he hadn't adopted the "ilxor" moniker (ilxor), Monday, 5 April 2010 13:16 (fourteen years ago) link

ie a mobile phone.

Haha, yes of course, I should've mentioned that but I just don't think of mobile phones as having sufficient fidelity. But that's my problem. You all are right, "sounds OK" is sufficient for 95% of the population - I mean, iPod earbuds are godawful to me but most people are fine with them. I'll just crawl back into my log cabin...

Gerald McBoing-Boing, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:25 (fourteen years ago) link

it's not even the earbuds - most music is being played back on computers and ipods both of which have shitty line out jacks. you wouldn't be able to tell a FLAC from a 128kbps using what most people have these days.

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:27 (fourteen years ago) link

I know it's been talked about before (probably on this thread!) but what's the best solution to the lineout jack problem? For instance, I have my MacMini chugging along well enough otherwise, so what can be done with it?

Ned Raggett, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:31 (fourteen years ago) link

get an external DAC - they are (relatively) expensive but if you want to use your computer as a source for your stereo system they're a worthwhile investment. I splurged and got an iBasso one with two DACs, one for each channel:

http://ibasso.com/en/products/show.asp?ID=44

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:33 (fourteen years ago) link

ie a mobile phone.

― koogs, Monday, April 5, 2010 4:44 AM (6 hours ago)

yeah, at least when they're out and about, everyone will be listening to music on something like an iPhone soon enough

ksh, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:33 (fourteen years ago) link

Perhaps that's true regarding computer/latop speakers but the iPod headphone out isn't so terrible. I can certainly tell the different between 128 and 192+ when lower bitrate tracks pop up on shuffle. But then I've also been to so many concerts that, frankly, I can't tell the different between high-bit VBR and WAV anymore.

Ned - the best solution for lineout -> headphone is a headphone amp.

Gerald McBoing-Boing, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:34 (fourteen years ago) link

to expand a little...an external DAC moves the digital-to-analog signal conversion outside of your computer. the inside your computer is very noisy elecronically speaking - lots of electromagnetic radiation &c. as a test, try plugging in a pair of earbuds into your computer and turning the volume all the way up - that hissing you hear is all the interference.

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:36 (fourteen years ago) link

All good, dyao, will consider it! (Gerald -- don't need a headphone amp, this is for actual speaker listening.)

Ned Raggett, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:40 (fourteen years ago) link

IIRC the mac mini has an optical out line built into its headphone jack - a cheaper solution would be to connect that to your receiver (if your receiver takes optical, that is!)

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:41 (fourteen years ago) link

also sorry to get all headphone nerdy but a good headphone amp can serve as a decent pre-amp if you already have a power amp

ain't no thang but a chicken ㅋ (dyao), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:43 (fourteen years ago) link

I was actually planning on updating my receiver anyway -- might do that first. (Given the placement of everything in the apartment there are a couple of things I'd want to consider there...)

Ned Raggett, Monday, 5 April 2010 16:45 (fourteen years ago) link

really want to invest in an high-performance soundcard now but also thinking about one of these Brennan JB7 jobs:

http://media.audiojunkies.com/brennan-cambridge-jb7-jukebox-digital-music-player-home-mp3-player-cd.jpg

anyone have any experience with these? advantages are the quickness/ease of use, detachment from PC...um, it has a clock...

mdskltr (blueski), Monday, 5 April 2010 16:53 (fourteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.