On 2010-11-27 02:47, Heikki Ketoharju wrote: I have my samples in a directory structure that makes sense. I'm previewing directly from renoise (which is what I use 99% of the time) and it handles formats, samplerates and all that. I agree that tagging could be handy, but I don't see myself tagging what I already have lying around anytime soon... atte@vestbjerg:~$ locate .wav | grep .wav$ | wc -l 17186 atte@vestbjerg:~$ locate .flac | grep .flac$ | wc -l 48907 Like with photos I really don't like to depend on anything software to lay the logic for me. A good directory structure will make sense in any software, including your backup... -- Atte http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk

H> I haven't seen any other sample manager programs for Linux, but I H> think I'm not the only one who uses samples and wants to manage H> them (and preview them and maybe sort them with tags also). I miss such a general sound database-tool, and have been wanting to put something together for a while, perhaps based on emacs' org-mode. Something like what f-spot does for photos: keep pointers to diskfiles, hierarchical systems of tags, presenting all sorts of specialized collections of sounds with arbitrary combinations of tags. Managing files and regions in files, exporting regionlists, collections, organizing, copying, linking files, creating diskfiles out of extracts... Obviously adapted to work with sound, giving easy access to listening. Storing waveform-overviews/spectrograms etc. would be great, but perhaps not very important if the sound-object can easily be handled by arbitrary external apps? To work well with recordings and sound it would need to handle 'regions' of some sort (ie start and duration) in a diskfile. I often make and use recordings where lots of things happen inside the same take, and isolating sounds in different files is seldom a relevant approach. In my work, the categories (what would constitute a 'tag') would soon become rather abstract i guess... -anders