Multiple types of pieces 1 of them applies to
I often get pieces from IMSLP that are more than 1 type. This causes confusion because after the composer sorting, in each composer's folder I have it sorted by the type of piece so that octets are separate from fugues which are separate from symphonies etc.
When I do a piece that is multiple types like the Toccata and Fugue in D minor by Bach how should I go about saving it? Should I save it in 1 folder and copy it to the other folders with other types or what?
Comments
Yours is not really a 'MuseScore' question; but if you are running Windows, and require a *very large* number of duplicate files, instead of copying the same file multiple times into different folders, why not create a 'shortcut' which will 'point to' the location where the music file actually resides. This way, you save disk space, as the 'shortcut' consumes mere bytes and not kilobytes as a full score would need.
Perhaps other operating systems can do similar.
Regards.
I think the answer is to reconsider your storage scheme. It makes no sense to store files according to criteria that you know can contain duplicates. Instead, store based on something unchanging and unique, but use a database to track the scores according to other criteria like "type". This is how professional photographers store images - in folders based simply on date, but with a database of keywords and other tags to allow them to organize the images on other criteria.
In reply to I think the answer is to by Marc Sabatella
My Storage Scheme is this:
Type of music(Classical, Country, etc.) -> Period of time(Baroque, Romantic, Modern, etc.) -> Composer's last name -> Composers with that last name -> Types of pieces(Symphonies, Sonatas, Fugues, etc.) -> Sub-types(Piano concertos, Orchestral suites, etc.)
In reply to My Storage Scheme by Caters
Right, and what I'm saying is, this type of scheme pretty much guarantees problems like you describe. Tons of pieces will potentially have duplication. Like any piece that could possibly fit into two major types (elements of both classical and country, for example), or into two periods (is late Beethoven Classical or Romantic?), what about a piece with two composers, and the issue you posted about: a piece that is both a Sonata and a Fugue, etc. These are exactly the things you would be much better off tracking in a database, where the duplication wouldn't cause any problems.
In reply to Right, and what I'm saying by Marc Sabatella
I consider Beethoven a classical period composer. I have never heard of a piece of classical music with 2 composers.
In reply to I consider Beethoven a by Caters
WHat about the Bach/Gounod Ave Maria?
Surely you must have heard of that??
In reply to I consider Beethoven a by Caters
Since you listed genres other than classical, I assumed you were not restricting consideration to classical. Even so, and regardless of whether you happen to consider even late Beethoven works to be "classical" rather than "romantic", the point is, you will eventually find cases where there is overlap / duplication. As indeed ypu already have. In sich cases, you can either just arbitrarily decide to put the file in one place or other - and then hope you can remember your decision years later when looking for the piece - or you can do as suggested, use database ststem with tags as is commonly done by millions of others facing the same issues with their own filing systems. Doesn't really matter to me, but that's my advice.
In reply to I consider Beethoven a by Caters
Fugue in G Minor (Cat Fugue) — Domenico Scarlatti (and Pulcinella, his cat).
In reply to Right, and what I'm saying by Marc Sabatella
I use Calibre to catalogue my eBooks. I've also, as it happens, used it to store and sort music in PDF form. Its underlying directory structure is not what I would have chosen (it creates a separate directory for each author in a Firstname_Surname arrangement with subdirectories for each book) but it works because the front-end allows you to assign tags and other metadata to the book (and music, although it wasn't designed with that in mind).
I, too, have lots of directories and subdirectories but it is getting to be a bit of a mess. I can still find my way around (just) but that's mainly because I have a limited range of music.
There are databases for people with collections (of objects) and specific ones for music. Maybe worth trying a few out? You can even still keep your music in the original directories whilst you experiment.
BTW is Glass's "Einstein on the Beach" an opera or is that being charitable?
In reply to I use Calibre to catalogue my by underquark
I mentioned professional photographers as having to deal with this problem daily, and in my experience, the best tools in this area that I have seen are ones developed with photographers in mind. I use ACDSee; Lightroom is probably the most popular choice these days. Either is probably overkill, but the basic idea is this: store your files in ways that make sense for them *as files* (that only just so happen to represent 'scores" by "composers" in particular "styles") and then use some form of tags stored in the database to store the metadata about the content of those file (eg, the "name" of the score, the "composer", the "style", etc). It's a sound and proven strategy for dealing with large numbers of files. Not the only one, but the one in most common use. There is even a well-known term for this field of study: "Digital Asset Management" (DAM). The "bible" of this field is "The DAM Book" by Peter Krogh, although again, it's total overkill for the problem at hand.