record storage - SORT ORDER

how do you put your records / CDs on the shelf?
for example, focus on Saint...

OPTION 1 -
all issues of a given record, one after the other? like this? -
- 1984 Warriors of the Son
- 2001 Warriors of the Son
- 2004 Warriors of the Son
- 2014 Warriors of the Son
​- 1986 Time's End
- 2002 Time's End​
​- 2011 Time's End
- 1988 Too Late For Living
- etc.

OR

OPTION 2 -
all issues of a given record interspersed with the rest of the discography? like this?
- 1984 Warriors of the Son
- 1986 Time's End
- 1988 Too Late For Living
- 1997 Saint
- 1999 The Perfect Life
- 2001 Warriors of the Son
- 2002 Time's End​
- 2004 In The Battle
- 2004 Warriors of the Son
- 2005 Live '05
​- 2011 Time's End
- 2014 Warriors of the Son
​
​OR

OPTION 3
- something else?


I'm having trouble telling if the way I'm asking this makes sense so let me know if not...​

All versions of the same album are shelved within the discography by the date the album was first released. So Option 1 for me.

I don't do multiple pressings/copies of the same album so that isn't an issue for me.

I arrange everything alphabetically by band/artist name; and then by release year. It's the least hassle.

Fat Freddy wrote:

I don't do multiple pressings/copies of the same album so that isn't an issue for me.

I arrange everything alphabetically by band/artist name; and then by release year. It's the least hassle.

That's me also.

I have very few multiple copies, hell I have a hard time buying just one copy of an album I may want let alone multiple copies of the same CD

The ones that drive me nuts are the "puzzle piece" series that make a picture with the spines lined up. The Maiden reissues, for example, which form the cover of Killers. But I also have an original pressing of Number of the Beast, which sounds better than the reissue, so I'm always warring over putting it next to the reissue, which disrupts the picture, or putting it next to the set, disrupting the discog. There's no winning.

On another note, anyone have that Maiden set? Mine doesn't match up at all. Ed looks all choppy. Methinks buying them piecemeal rather than the set may have something to do with it.

If I happen to have multiple copies, I use Option 1. Seeing as how the original release is the root release.

corplhicks wrote:

The ones that drive me nuts are the "puzzle piece" series that make a picture with the spines lined up. The Maiden reissues, for example, which form the cover of Killers. But I also have an original pressing of Number of the Beast, which sounds better than the reissue,  so I'm always warring over putting it next to the reissue, which disrupts the picture, or putting it next to the set, disrupting the discog. There's no winning.

On another note, anyone have that Maiden set? Mine doesn't match up at all. Ed looks all choppy. Methinks buying them piecemeal rather than the set may have something to do with it.

When I had the reissues before trading them off (and keeping my originals) it didn't really line up properly to make the cover of the S/T. The same goes for my Saxon and U.D.O. sets. Since I bought them piece meal, the eagle logo and Udo's face don't really look right. This is why I held off on the Savatage reissues.

Oh, to answer the OP, I don't do multiple pressings, but in the rare case I have double dipped a CD to get a bonus track one or something it just goes after it. I go alpha and then chrono with the newest on the let and the oldest to the right.

Somewhat related to the "sorting" topic:

This morning I was helping my wife cut & organize the grocery coupons from this past Sunday's paper. She was clippin'em and handing 'em to me in little stacks which I then divided up according to the "categories" in her coupon file box (i.e. canned goods, paper goods, frozen, etc., etc.) and I started filing them away in their proper slots.

Suddenly she sez to me "No, no, you're doing it wrong!" and I sez "What? These are frozen, they go in frozen. Those are canned, they go in canned. What's the problem?" and she sez that once they're divided up by category, she files the coupons in each sub-category IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER within their little sub-section in the file box. It was at this point that I said "You're f**king kidding me, right?"

...she sez "What? It makes perfect sense! Just as much sense as your system for organizing your CDs!"

...to which I replied, "My CDs are in alphabetical order by the artist name. That's it. I don't have my CDs divided up into fifty-seven sub-categories and THEN each of THOSE are alphabetized too! That would just be f**king stupid."

I have a feeling that I'm sleeping on the couch tonight.

I was thinking about one aspect of organization the other day:

Where do you dudes put hits/best of/rarities compilations?

Do you put them in chronological order from when the compilation was released or after the studio albums? I have done both ways, bc I often can't remember what year a comp was released.

ZombieHavoc wrote:

I was thinking about one aspect of organization the other day:

Where do you dudes put hits/best of/rarities compilations?

Do you put them in chronological order from when the compilation was released or after the studio albums? I have done both ways, bc I often can't remember what year a comp was released.

Chronologically for me. I only buy comps if they have exclusive material though.

I slot Greatest Hits comps in according to the year of release like everything else.

On a somewhat related note, I dunno if anybody else does this but I put tribute albums at the end of the section of band being tributed.

Fat Freddy wrote:

On a somewhat related note, I dunno if anybody else does this but I put tribute albums at the end of the section of band being tributed.

Stuff like that would go in the comp/various artists sections for me....though the stickers on CDs like that often say "File under ____________" so maybe you are doing it right!

Fat Freddy wrote:

I slot Greatest Hits comps in according to the year of release like everything else.

On a somewhat related note, I dunno if anybody else does this but I put tribute albums at the end of the section of band being tributed.

I do the same with both greatest hits and tributes.


For compilations of various artists (e.g. the Metal Massacre series) I file those by the name of the compilation. So Metal Massacre 1-14 are in the "M" section and Lead Weight is in the "L" section.

For artists that have names that are numbers (e.g. 220 Volt) I file them preceding the "A" section in numerical order by leading digit. So 220 Volt comes before 3 Inches of Blood.

corplhicks wrote:

On another note, anyone have that Maiden set? Mine doesn't match up at all. Ed looks all choppy. Methinks buying them piecemeal rather than the set may have something to do with it.

Yeah, they messed those up and they don't line up. Doesn't matter how you bought them. I think you also have to put one disc upside down or something.

GH's or Best of... are placed chronologically while tributes have their own section. I now have to large wall mounted racks (40W X 72H) that hold about 900 each and still have my smaller freestanding racks (300 each) where all the OST's, Tributes, and Various Comps each get a shelf. Any digi pack stuff gets it's own freestanding rack that holds about 400. I tried putting the digi stuff in with the jewel cases but it looked weird.

Lari wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

On another note, anyone have that Maiden set? Mine doesn't match up at all. Ed looks all choppy. Methinks buying them piecemeal rather than the set may have something to do with it.

Yeah, they messed those up and they don't line up. Doesn't matter how you bought them. I think you also have to put one disc upside down or something.

That's why I traded 'em off.

Comps go in alphabetically. Besides the Metal Massacre series I only have one other I can think of (Thrash Patrol).

007 wrote:

Comps go in alphabetically. Besides the Metal Massacre series I only have one other I can think of (Thrash Patrol).

I love Thrash Patrol!

the sentinel wrote:

I tried putting the digi stuff in with the jewel cases but it looked weird.

Down with digis!

I will really go out of my way to obtain versions not in digipak, if at all possible. I will forego bonus tracks, extra discs, etc (I won't sacrifice sound quality to avoid a digi though). I'll pay extra for out of print or whatever copies that are in jewel cases vs digi (within reason, not if it's like $50 vs $10 or something).

One thing that really annoys me is CD packaging that is taller than normal. It doesn't fit in my CD rack. One example is Springsteen's "Wrecking Ball" album (the version with two extra tracks). I ordered it, so I didn't know there was a difference in packaging. The regular version is in similar cardboard packaging, but regular CD height, while the bonus-track version is like an inch taller (maybe not that much, but still too tall to fit on my CD shelf).

Keep stuff in standard jewel cases, please.

Oh, I totally agree. I tried to wait out stuff a few years back, but my collector's OCD kicked in and I couldn't do it. The stuff that's in the "taller than normal" packaging I store on a small bookcase that has my box sets and any autographed booklets.

Yeah that digi dung drives me Dukakis. My Ltd Ed of Annihilator's Feast is huge and screws with any hopes of tidiness on that shelf.

the sentinel wrote:

Lari wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

On another note, anyone have that Maiden set? Mine doesn't match up at all. Ed looks all choppy. Methinks buying them piecemeal rather than the set may have something to do with it.

Yeah, they messed those up and they don't line up. Doesn't matter how you bought them. I think you also have to put one disc upside down or something.

That's why I traded 'em off.

Good to know I'm not alone. At least the Priest albums line up nice (even if they do sound like crap).

When the spines are uniform it makes it easy to spot stuff and orient yourself with the racks. I always liked when a band was with the same record company for a long time as everything looks uniform. This holds true of cassettes as well. I like that my UFO and Schenker reissues all have he same style spine with the little picture on top.

the sentinel wrote:

When the spines are uniform it makes it easy to spot stuff and orient yourself with the racks. I always liked when a band was with the same record company for a long time as everything looks uniform. This holds true of cassettes as well. I like that my UFO and Schenker reissues all have he same style spine with the little picture on top.

YES.

I said this a while back but I love those old Atlantic releases. My shelves are organized by genre but before I would have all those "red on white" spines lined up regardless of appropriate band groupings. Plain? Yes. Dated? Absolutely. Crude? Don't be absurd.