Music Sorting Question

[Vince, Pt. II]

I am a bit...meticulous when it comes to sorting my music. I like to have my CDs arranged "just so," alphabetical by artist, of course.

That being said, a friend of mine who is the same way came to me with a question that I was not entirely certain of my answer for...where would you slot Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros?

Initially, the answer seems obvious - sort by Sharpe, the last name - kind of like Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers going under P. However, Edward Sharpe is not in the band, nor is he a real person; Sharpe is a figment of the lead singer's imagination. Because of this, my inclination is to put them under E, since the name of the band is NOT a person, but simply the name of the band.

Both ways don't particularly sit well with me - where would you sort Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros, and why?

[Butter]

E. It is a band name, as you said, not an actual guy's name (although I am sure there is a guy out there named Edward Sharpe), so start with the first letter of the band.

[Julio Riddols]

I'd do it by M for Magnetic Zeros. They'll probably drop the Edward Sharpe thing at some point anyway because the name is so damned cumbersome. This is just a guess, I have no inside info.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Sort it the same way you would Pink Floyd or Lynyrd Skynrd. Same situation, just fewer words.

[QuikSand]

Next to this guy (http://www.amazon.com/Man-Called/dp/B000001DUR)

[fantom1979]

What is this CD thing you speak of? Doesn't Itunes just sort it for you automatically? :)

[sabotai]

Put yourself in the situation where you are looking for the CD. Think "I really want my Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros CD". Where does your mind go to first, E or S?

I'd probably still sort it by S, since, even though it's a fake name, it's still a first name and a last name, and my initial inclination is to look for something by the last name if both names are the first two words of a band name.

[Ksyrup]

Sort by E. It's the band name, not a person's name. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers goes under T. Tom Petty's solo stuff is under P.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I've had a similar debate with myself regarding Sheila E.

Previously I had filed her under "E," as her last name is Escovedo & "E." is simply an initial. However for the last few years I have filed her under "S," as "Sheila E." just seems right as opposed to "E., Sheila."

[QuikSand]

I've had a similar debate with myself regarding Sheila E.

Another option would be to simply destroy all such material. Both problems, catalog-related and embarrassment-driven, solved.

[cuervo72]

Sort by E. It's the band name, not a person's name. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers goes under T. Tom Petty's solo stuff is under P.

Along these lines though, where do you put Smokey Robinson and the Miracles vs The Miracles? Do you separate the material with Smokey from the rest of the material? Same goes for The Supremes with/without Diana Ross (Eric Burdon and the Animals vs The Animals, etc).

[Izulde]

Along these lines though, where do you put Smokey Robinson and the Miracles vs The Miracles? Do you separate the material with Smokey from the rest of the material? Same goes for The Supremes with/without Diana Ross (Eric Burdon and the Animals vs The Animals, etc).


M for Miracles and S for Supremes, A for Animals is where I'd shelf the Big Name+.

Reason being is because it's the core name of the band is the same and the big name/not big name is simply part of that band's musical evolution.

Which brings me to a question of my own: For those who are *really* strict, do you organize multi-CD bands' works by alphabetical order or chronological?

My own inclination would be chronological.

[Izulde]

dola,

I have my library in my parents' house organized by general subject and non-alphabetical author grouping (though I do keep all the books by the same author together) right now, but since I'm doing a major cleaning this summer, I might more strictly do author alphabetization and chronological ordering of same author works.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Another option would be to simply destroy all such material. Both problems, catalog-related and embarrassment-driven, solved.

I would never suggest something as such to him. Whatever I may think of the quality of the music he listens to (don't know it, actually) it could be all that is holding him on this side of sanity. Without it, who knows... he could actually snap and seek out those who are seemingly critical of him and/or his musical tastes and destroy their music collections!

Better to let him listen to whatever he wishes and simply offer advice as to cataloging his collection. It could save us all.

[sabotai]

Which brings me to a question of my own: For those who are *really* strict, do you organize multi-CD bands' works by alphabetical order or chronological?

Chronological.

[QuikSand]

I would never suggest something as such to him. Whatever I may think of the quality of the music he listens to (don't know it, actually) it could be all that is holding him on this side of sanity. Without it, who knows... he could actually snap and seek out those who are seemingly critical of him and/or his musical tastes and destroy their music collections!

Better to let him listen to whatever he wishes and simply offer advice as to cataloging his collection. It could save us all.

Good advice, thanks.

[JimboJ]

Sort by E. It's the band name, not a person's name. Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers goes under T. Tom Petty's solo stuff is under P.

Really, you would split up Tom Petty under two different letters? That just seems wrong. I would put Tom Petty and Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers under P so its all together.

I always think about how the CDs would be arranged in a music store (the few that are left anyway). How many people would think to look under T for Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers? Or who would look under B for Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band?

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Good advice, thanks.

Just trying to help us all, my friend. Just trying to help us all...

[cartman]

Little known fact:

QuikSand buys two copies of all of Billy Joel's works, filing one under 'B' and the other under 'J'.

[Mota]

I sort it by my favorite acts. The top of my library has all my favorite bands' CD's in chronological order. I move bands up and down shelves as I get more into them or tired of them.

It quickly falls out of order, but I do always try and keep the full band catalogs together at least.

[corbes]

No offense you all, but, yikes.

[Ksyrup]

Really, you would split up Tom Petty under two different letters? That just seems wrong. I would put Tom Petty and Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers under P so its all together.

I always think about how the CDs would be arranged in a music store (the few that are left anyway). How many people would think to look under T for Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers? Or who would look under B for Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band?

Yes, I do. And I don't follow what CD stores do - they usually misspelled Megadeth, so WTF do they know? Their system is to make it easy for idiots to find stuff to buy, not the same purpose for my categorization.

Definitely arrange same-artist CDs in chronological order. Especially fun when you've got about 750 bootlegs, too!

[path12]

No offense you all, but, yikes.

Dude, you're never gonna make it past College Benchwarmer with that kind of thinking. These debates are post count gold.

[path12]

Oh, and by the way, S for Sharpe for me.

Corbes, see what I did there?

[M GO BLUE!!!]

You could always order them by catalog number. Options would include whether by label, then code, or just by numbers alone.

That would make it interesting...

[corbes]

Corbes, see what I did there?

I don't think it counts twice unless you dola the second post?

[Ksyrup]

You could always order them by catalog number. Options would include whether by label, then code, or just by numbers alone.

That would make it interesting...

The point is to make it somewhat easy to locate a particular CD, though, is it not? That wouldn't be so easy. Especially these days, when you've got bands on multiple labels or going out on their own.