Ed Zubrow:

>Commenting on Don Satz's stated intention of finally getting organized
>(It must be the turn of a millenium or something!), Richard Pennycuick
>pokes numerous holes in the alphabetical approach.  So, my questrion in
>turn to Richard (and others): what is a better way to store CD's and find
>what one is looking for?

The alphabetical approach may not be perfect but within its limitations,
it works.

Essentially, all I described is the method a library uses to organise
its fiction books.  Walter Meyer's suggestion of assigning a number to
each CD and ordering your collection by that number overcomes the problem
of making space for new acquisitions (to digress, I recently had a small
frisson of satisfaction when I bought my first Zemlinsky CD and simply put
it at the end of the bottom row).  However, Walter's is a two-stage system
and Murphy delights in finding ways to sabotage them.

For starters, you need to have your computer, or whatever you've used
to store the information, in the same room as your CDs, otherwise you're
going to wear out the carpet going backwards and forwards to the computer
to look up a number and have to replace it with the money you were going
to blow on the complete Hanssler Bach edition.  If you move the computer
into your listening room, then you're going to miss out on the Hanssler
set again because you'll need to buy another computer so the other members
of the family can spend even more money buying stuff from Internet dealers
or defaming you in chat rooms about the awful music you like.  If you use
some other method of storing your data, such as a book or loose-leaf
folder, then, as Don has already discovered, a leprechaun will spirit it
away.

To answer your question, Ed, I don't really think there is one.

Richard Pennycuick
[log in to unmask]