Suffering of a record and data collector

[Inigo]

That's it.
My classical records are now stored in the main shelf by types (piano, organ, instrumental, orchestra, vocal) and within each group, by record number, but mixing labels, which makes a unique number series within each group.
With popular records, these I store by my own sequential numbers, because still I want to pick a bunch out of the shelves to play a lot of mixed records. I hate playing a dozen records by the same artist, I prefer the mixture and surprises. Nevertheless, some special things are stored apart.
Each one, in the end, arrives to the organisation that suits his playing uses and comfort the most.

[vintagetenor]

drh, I understand your system but to my way of thinking, it unnecessarily complicates the process. Since the records already have catalog numbers, there's no need to assign additional numbers to them for purposes of organization.

I believe that storing records in album books is not an efficient way to do so. Using individual sleeves for each disc enables me to easily add or remove any record (organized by label and catalog number) very easily. I admit that this method of organization would be a nightmare if I were to store records in albums. Doing so would make it necessary to continually move records in order to make new ones fit.

[Inigo]

Now that I buy records in very small quantities, I could return to that system of label and number. Or the mixed labels type, sorting only by numbers. This last favours the issue of taking a bunch from the shelf at any random place to play, yet having more chances that the music styles are mixed for fun. In my case, a perfect label+number order would bring a bunch likely from the same artists, so more boring in this case. I've bought many records of certain artists...
I changed to the assigned chronological numbers system, chronological by purchase order, just when I was buying records frequently. This made adding new records easier (simply new records go to the end of the row) without having to shuffle all the collection to make room for new records inserted here and there in their right place by label+number. Despite this, I kept the record number system for classical records, so anyway I had to shuffle these and make room when new records arrived.
Anyway, I never get rid of this task. I'm now in the process of thinning my collection, being more selective towards the kind of music the records contain. Any records I play that are not very good to my tastes, I store apart, in a 'for future sale or trade' storage place. No more keeping records because of their rarity, or specially beautiful labels, or discographically interesting, if the music in them didn't sound very good to my ears. So from time to time, I have to re-shuffle the remaining records to fill the voids in the shelves.
Never quiet. Always touching 78s... That's part of the charm, isn't it? They're beautiful objects too...

[CarlosV]

I commiserate with Iñigo. I rarely find the disc I am looking for in my record library. While sifting through, say, the Paul Robeson shelf, I find one that I forgot I had, and pick it for listening instead of the one I originally intended. Dance bands are particularly complicated: either too many of a single one, like about 1000 Paul Whiteman records, or too many unknown and obscure bands. Nevertheless I like my system most of the time, gives me the sound of surprise - unless when I am desperately searching for that particular record that is so important and nice that I stowed it away in a place I forgot about.

[gunnarthefeisty]

I ought to do this database stuff. I've got about 200 and have them organized by label and serial number.

[drh]

I ought to do this database stuff. I've got about 200 and have them organized by label and serial number.

If you have any idea of creating and maintaining a catalogue, the time to do it is now, before you have too many records. Let the collection get too far ahead of you, and you'll be years trying to catch up--or else just give up in frustration. Of course, once you do get the catalogue done, you will forever more be its slave: let it get out of date, and you might as well not have it.

[gunnarthefeisty]

I ought to do this database stuff. I've got about 200 and have them organized by label and serial number.

If you have any idea of creating and maintaining a catalogue, the time to do it is now, before you have too many records. Let the collection get too far ahead of you, and you'll be years trying to catch up--or else just give up in frustration. Of course, once you do get the catalogue done, you will forever more be its slave: let it get out of date, and you might as well not have it.

Trust me, I plan to. I've been going through my loose records (Free stuff that I needed to listen to before keeping/tossing). I also re-sorted them all, and finally got all my Victor records sorted, so I think it's time to start.