Hi Sanity Clause,
As this is an open newsgroup you're welcome to join the discussion.
In fact the whole discussion is about functionality. Everything that is
non-functional is superfluous, and everything that is superfluous is
moved aside, or thrown away.
For the file-naming scheme I follow the standard track listing that can
be seen on CD and LP labels and album covers. These track listings don't
repeatedly mention the artists' name and album title, but only the track
number and the track title. Everything else is superfluous.
Summing up, a good file-naming scheme consists of a one or two digit
track-number, a separator, the track-title and the file extension.
Example: 01 My Song.flac. Separators come in variations: " - " or ". " or
" ", but there is no standard for it.
Kind regards,
Natasha
On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 23:21:55 +0000, Sanity Clause wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 10:30:05 +0000, Natasha wrote:
>
>> Thanks 4 the post, but what a terrible file naming scheme. Everything
>> at the left side of the track number is unnecessary and even unwanted,
>> for it makes the track titles unreadable. Besides it is a lot of work
>> to reformat all these bloody file names.
>> Please ask your ripper to change this behaviour.
>>
>> Kind regards!
>>
>> Natasha :-)
>
> Natasha, hope you dont mind me jumping in here. Im too struggled with
> all sorts of schemes and spent many long hours setting them sraight.
>
> I did find that Easytag worked out the best as far as "automating" the
> process. Now what took many minutes only takes a few seconds... < 60
>
> It used to be only a linux proggie, but now I see that its also windows
> capable. Might be worth a look at.
>
> Again, I apologise if I stepped on toes.
>
> Sanity Clause
|
|