RobbH wrote: > Gentlemen (meaning primarily PasTim and dolodobendan): > > These things matter. A lot. To a very few of us. Among that small group > of "us," opinions vary and disagreements are inevitable. Like academic > infighting, one of the reasons disputes can be so bitter is that the > stakes are so small. > > I do not have a degree in Physics, much to my regret. What I have is > nearly thirty years of experience as music director of a radio station > that played mainly classical music. At the start, that is. Over the > course of those thirty years, the percentage of time devoted to music > decreased to less than half. > > Managing the library was always a struggle. I tried various software > solutions early on, and finally wrote my own in Filemaker. That solution > gave me most of the information I needed, with the exception of a good > way to distinguish between complete works and excerpts, which seemed to > be a universal problem. My solution was also so clunky that entering new > recordings was hopelessly complicated and severely slowed down expansion > of the library. > > There are legends in classical radio of people who started working on > their own music management software and were, for all practical > purposes, never heard from again. I mean that figuratively, of course. > They still came to the office every day, but they were never known to do > any productive work on anything but their software project, which was > never completed. > > I was almost one of those guys. I suppose I WAS one for a while, but I > gave up and went back to my real work with what I had, limitations and > all. > > I have a fair amount of classical music in my library, and I feel your > pain. But I'm willing to be content with the limited tools that are > available within LMS for managing classical music. I use the sort of > workarounds that you have rejected. And there are good reasons for > rejecting them. When the title field is absurdly long, because you're > trying to combine some representation of composer, title, catalog > number, and subdivision (if any), all in one field, it's ugly and often > unmanageable. And some important information is still missing. > > I'm willing to live with the ugliness and unmanageability, as long as it > doesn't get in the way of my enjoyment of the music. That's not to say > that you should live with it or that it wouldn't detract from your > enjoyment. But I would like to encourage you to consider the nature of > that rabbit hole before you plunge back down into it. Especially, please > try to calculate your chances of achieving what you will consider > success and scale your dreams accordingly. > > I do wish you both (and anyone else struggling with this) the best of > luck. I hope you will find a way to achieve something that satisfies > you. But please try to remember that it's very unlikely that your > solution will satisfy anyone else. Opinions vary. Priorities differ. I > hope you can enjoy your life and the wonderful music at your command, > even with the necessary compromises.
Thanks for that. As for your lack of degrees in physics: Music director of a radio station sounds much more fun! :) QLMS 8.2@2.21 x64 (digimaster) with perl 5.30.1 / QNAP 469L QTS 4.3.4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ dolodobendan's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=67663 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=106488 _______________________________________________ Squeezecenter mailing list Squeezecenter@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/squeezecenter
