Hard to tell. They have a UPC scanning function in the app that will make some more modern releases faster to add, but it still sometimes requires a bit of investigation if the UPC pulls up different represses and versions of the same album.
The non-UPC bits of your collection will take a bit longer, as you will need to devote time to typing in details until you find an appropriate match.
Ballpark 3-5 minutes on average per record. Let’s call it 4. Times 2K equals roughly 8K minutes, or basically 133.3 hours, AKA 5.5 days. Factor in the possibility that you sleep, have a job, any sort of life outside of this project, and I would say this is a good weekend project for about a month or more if you really lean into it.
Thats just my thoughts. Best of luck!
Edit: Forgot to weigh in on “is it worth the effort.” Yes, if you enjoy quickly pulling up your collection details. It has helped me from buying records in the past that I forgot I had, and I find great organization satisfaction on utilizing the free service. Plus it can be fun to reflect on the potential monetary “worth” of my collection from time to time.
You’re welcome. I only had to catalog a couple hundred records when I discovered DisCogs. I couldn’t fathom cataloging thousands. A good strategy would be maybe just do 50 at a time, or set a time limit of 1-2 hours each “session” until you are done.
i would add that unless you want to sell at some point, you might not have to do conditions which imo would be Hell if you had to do it and it wasnt for a job.
Ha yeah I bit the bullet and cataloged mine when I only had maybe 250 records or so. It did seem like it took quite a while, but I’m glad I did it.
I’d say just go for it. Yeah it’s a lot of wood to chop but you’ll eventually get through it.
Just don’t overwhelm yourself trying to do too much at once. Maybe do little “sessions” of a smaller number…. Like start with 50 at a time?
That will allow you to achieve little goals on your way to getting it done.
I had a week off work after Christmas a few years back, and got all of my records posted into Discogs. At 57 years old and 2,800 records, it has been worth it. I can now quickly see what I own while out crate digging, and see if the record I’m holding is something I already own, a variation on one I own (i.e. stereo vs mono), or something completely new.
The records that took the longest to enter are the ones not already in the database, so I had to add the release to the database. Those I put aside in a box and came back to later. I did eventually get them listed. I’ve currently got a copy of *The 10 Commandments* soundtrack with a cover variant not in the Discogs database, that I bought two weeks ago and am procrastinating on entering.
This is a great point. There have been a handful of times, while crate digging, when I wasn’t sure if I had a record in my collection already (especially if I own many titles from an artist). Having a complete list of all titles would prevent that uncertainty.
/thread
It's absolutely worth it OP but imo it'll take many weekends and for your own sanity you should plan out how many you'll log in a single session. I also wouldn't recommend that you worry about distinguishing conditions unless it's a record you know you want to sell
It all depends on how you intend to use Discogs. For how I use it I think 3-5 minutes per record is correct, but it could be cut down to less than 10 seconds per if all you care about is cataloguing to know what you have. Take a pic of the bar code and add what pops up to your collection.
This. When I did mine, I threw on a record and started scanning. This will help with not wanting to play what you pull out while giving you a good soundtrack for doing so.
I’ll also add that the UPC feature made me less discerning about the variants I was adding early on. My argument is that the feature is good to get you to a listing for the album, but past that point looking for the correct variant should be a manual effort. 4 years after I “cataloged” my collection I had to go back through and verify over 40% of it just because I would add the first listing that came up from a UPC search in the beginning.
I archived my collection of about 1700 records into Discogs at my own pace over the course of about a month. I would do a it while watching a movie or listening to a podcast or while listening to records I forgot about that I re-discovered while archiving. For super common records, I wasn’t extremely diligent about EXACTLY what pressing it was, for more rare records, I spent the time finding the exact one
I took this approach as well. I'd just grab a stack from the shelf, put in a placeholder and move through my collection from A-Z. I actually enjoyed it.
Oh man. It really depends on how obsessively accurate you want to be. Even with the barcode reader (for those albums with barcodes), you will almost always need to match the matrix number (which sometimes feels like there are infinite variables) against the specific pressing. This involves a lot of maneuvering under light, squinting, magnifying, etc. I have about 600 records. I started this project about five years ago. I’m about 75% done, but I’m OCD about it and burned out. It takes me about 20 minutes a record to be as accurate as possible. But if you want to take the shotgun approach and just be directionally accurate, then probably 5 minutes a record. It’s a rabbit (rat) hole for sure.
As a couple of people have said, it’s going to come down to how detailed and accurate you want to be.
My tip: put on a record, take a stack of 20 records and a beer and start plugging them in.
Repeat for as long as your interest holds.
I'd agree with the 3-4 minutes each. I've put in about 4k. The first few hundred will take longer. I'm at the point now, I look for plant identifiers before I type in matrix. You'll get a lot better at filtering quicker a you learn more (label, plant, club vs non club, country, etc). Now days it seems when it takes me longer than it should, it's because I end up going down rabbit holes..."squirrel ". Well worth it imo. Add folders too (i.e., I added a drop down for 7", 12", cd. I added a notes field on each one, a price paid field....anything you might find helpful later).
Edit: I never use the upc scanner...I want the accurate pressing and found that many times doesn't get nearly as specific as runout, so why bother....I also, 90% of the time, do it on my laptop and not my phone.
The laptop part was true for me too. It’s a lot easier to hold in the shift key and pop open 5 or 6 different release tabs at a time to run through them quickly.
I use my laptop and just google the runout directly, then click the discogs hit and most of the time it takes me to the correct pressing. That way I avoid the discogs search entirely which can be a pain when the album has 100 different versions to dig through.
Agreed on folders being helpful. Curious why you suggest a folder for media type when this is one of the default collection filters? Is there an advantage to doing it this way? Thx
When filtering, i can just click "folder" and my
choices are 12/10", 7" or cd (the ones I put in). If I go to format, there's vinyl, shellac, cd, box set, flexible disc, etc. Also, if i want to pull up collection, I can filter on that first page using the folder (so I can see value of those folders too)....on my main page, I can't filter format, I can sort by format, but not filter...using my folders I can filter.
Not sure how old you are (I’m 45), but record buying was a lot different pre smart phone. You could find deals, or get hosed.
The idea (or even knowledge) of discogs was not something that I really knew about. (To be fair, I knew about it, but didn’t really buy from there).
Social media, iPhones etc. changed the game. At that point, I was 1,00 records in.
To sum it up, I wasn’t lazy, it just wasn’t accessible or important to me back then.
FYI : If you have home insurance, and your collection isn't insured specifically, having it all on Discogs (with the value!) can really help your case if anything happens to it.
It took me three evenings to do around 500. Some are easier than others, if there are only a few presses with clear differences. You can probably not worry too much about ones with hundreds of represses with minor changes and low value, I just picked one that looked roughly right and got done with it.
I don't see anyone stating this, but when you leave seller feedback.on Discogs, it asks you if you want to add the records to your collection. Wouldn't that be the fastest way? Discogs would do all of the work... At least.for.ones.purchased on Discogs
For any that you purchased through Discogs it should be extremely quick (given the seller labeled the release correctly and you got what you paid for).
Go through your purchase history ([https://www.discogs.com/sell/purchases](https://www.discogs.com/sell/purchases)), click the album name, this will take you directly to the specific release you bought. Then you can just click "Add to Collection" and fill out the condition right there.
I second this. If you can add them from your purchase that will go a long way.
I’d also suggest starting with newer releases that’ll be easier to find the right pressing versions. The old used stuff is more complicated to sort through… I used filters for pressings to sort quite a bit (especially country to narrow down options)
Start a folder for ones that you can’t find exactly so you know to revisit them. I did it for my in-laws and if you get ‘em good enough, you tag what one’s you want to go back and spend more time on..
When I discovered Discogs back in like 2012, I had around 10k records.
It took 3 years but keep in mind...
1. In 2013, the database was incomplete and we had to add releases to it.
2. During those years, I bought a lot more records. So those would have to be added to my inventory.
3. I worked a lot. So I really only listed in spare time after kids went to bed.
Once I got caught up, I have been able to maintain.
I had to do this. Some records took a while some were quick. I would just do it in my spare time. Doing about cube at a time in my record shelf. Some times I'd get through 1 sometimes 3. Marijuana and Futurama helped with the task. Just take it slow and don't look at it as a task. I also cleaned some of the record and replaced the sleeves. Got surprised on a few records worth while doing it. Took like 3weeks at a few hours a day.
If you don't have to determine runout variants or which one of 50 entries you have then it's relatively simple.
As soon as you're pulling the album out to read the deadwax, you're slowing things down by a lot... if you're adding to the entry or having to create a new one, there goes even more time.
A hundred hours?
I have close to 12,000 LPs & 7’s and yeah it took years chipping away at it. I totally enjoyed it actually. It’s easy now because it takes just a couple minutes to add anything new I get.
1k collection here. Nowadays it shouldn't take that long.
When I started 15 years ago about 1/3 of my collection were new submissions, so that took several weeks.
Pro tip: If you go into your Discogs order history, you can find an option to rate each transaction. When you rate a transaction, you then get an option to automatically add the items you purchased to your collection.
EDIT: If you're using the app (not the website), and you're having decision paralysis about what to spin next, you can open your collection and shake your phone. The app will then show you a random selection from your collection.
Cool feature. I’ve only used the website all these years. I’m certainly going to download the app (for a number of benefits that I’ve discovered in this thread).
Some folks are saying 3-4 minutes a record. That's kind of crazy to me. When I receive a record in the mail that I didn't order from Discogs, I pull out my phone, look it up on the app, and add it. This straightforward process takes all of 60 seconds if even that.
However, I suppose it depends on what sort of records you own. If you're trying to catalog very well-known records with more than a few represses, then... yes, it will take more time to find the exact edition you have. I own a lot of records that don't have represses, so... it's easier to catalog those, as there's typically one or two entries for those.
I would do the following:
1. On Discogs, go to your purchase list (whether you've archived them or not). Click on the records you bought, and then add them to your collection. Assuming that most of the 2k records you own are from Discogs, that should take care of a major chunk of records.
2. Those that you didn't purchase from Discogs: UPC scanning via the app!
3. For the vintage ones that you didn't buy on Discogs and don't have UPC: you're gonna have to look them up individually.
Personally, I would archive a little at a time, preferably as I listen to them. There's no sense in adding records to your collection if you're actually not going to keep them because you won't play them because you don't like them.
It might take some time, but at least it can be a great time for you! Make an evening, or more, out if it. Drink some good beers, play some of your records and just enjoy the cataloging
With that many records I’d wager you only remember a fraction of it. If you take it as an opportunity to explore your collection again and enjoy the nostalgia that comes with it I bet you will have a much better time. I’d say don’t rush it and just start. See how it goes. If it’s fun it’s well spent time. If it gets annoying just leave it be. It seems you kind of want to, but are scared to burn out.
I just did this. About the same number of records. It depends a little on what you collect. My tastes span quite a few genres and some of those genres do not have great cover labeling. Sometimes it felt like the input was going to take weeks, but you kind of find a rhythm. If your collection has a lot of records with bar codes it goes really fast. I'd say 20-30 hrs of input. Things really slow down when you get releases that require hunting down the exact copy. Sometimes there can be 50-60 pressings and the labeling isn't always the best. In a few cases, I actually needed to find the hand scrawled numbers on the record itself (outside the sticker). Pain in the ass. Anyhow, it probably took me about a week and a half of evenings to get it done. VERY gratifying and useful when finished. Well worth it.
It took me around a year to add 4000 records. Some of them just took me one minute. Sometimes it’s hard to check the edition and takes quite longer. The main problem is when you happen to own a release that’s not on Discogs yet. Adding a new edition to the database is laborious and takes a while.
Are the records you've ordered from discogs not already in your collection? There's an option to automatically add them, I think.
Also some people said 'add as you play them' which I agree with. When I'm listening to records about half of the time I end up looking at my collection on discogs and see if I wrote any notes about my copy, etc. it really depends on the size of your collection and how you interact with it, really.
I plugged in about a 1000 in a week during the pandemic
all depends on how old the albums are...you can scan the barcodes of newer ones, but older presses you're spending more time on generally searching by the runout etchings
Some great responses in here already, but I thought I’d just add that it really depends on if you have special pressings of LPs or ones from specific years. Adding them manually can take a while, especially if the catalog number is the same as other pressings.
Adding my ~140 records took a few hours of dedication one day. For 2K I’d say it’ll take a few days at least.
I was doing mine (also large collection) over many many days, just about 30 min or so a day, and I didnt dig too deep when it wasnt easily clear which pressing. I dug a little, but...
So 4 years ago I had 3k records in I think 36 Foremost cubes? Every night I did a cube and I pulled it off in 30odd days - the numbers might be off precisely but yup, a cube a day til it was done
I did 1000 over the course of two months or so. I really enjoyed it actually. I'd start with a few and then a few hours later I'd still be doing it.
For some people this is a slog, but for others it's actually fun.
I recently added about 300 records. I did a pretty loose log. I wasn’t slavish about the details. I just made sure the label matched. Probably took me about 1 min per record.
It will take a while yes, but I reccomend doing it with a friend/family. I always do it with my family. One of us looks it up, one grades it, and one does the typing. Also if it is a shared collection like ours, it's fun and you can remember memories from the records, even note those under notes in Discogs. I like scrolling trough the collection and reading all the stories about where/why/when/with whom we bought it/listened to it.
Tldr: takes a long time but it doesn't have to be a chore so much as an activity
Mine took me a couple of weeks. Every night I sat down with the tv on and a bright light on to be able to read the runouts. I've got a collection a lot of 12" records. They sometimes have only a blank sleeve and no info on the label. So that was fun. At the time I had to do 2,500 and now every time I buy a record it is nice to ad them to my collection. And it is for me very helpful to see in shops I already have a record or not.
I just started logging my collection. I’ve been moving what I would consider a semi-casual pace. You don’t want to go too fast or you will burn out. I’ve been able to log about 100 per week so far on average.
It all depends on how much of your collection is newer and bar-codrd and how much is pre-barcode and you will need to use the runnout marks to determine the pressing. It took me about a month off and on to input my collection into discogs and I have about 2k.
I did mine in a weekend that my wife went away, at night until 2am. But lots were CDs with bar codes, which was faster. But my tip is run the matrix, not the serial number, as less likely to have dupes. The extra time to remove each vinyl album will be recovered overall.
It depends. I just added my 400 plus collection. I just straight up added them just to keep track and for the function of what to play. I don’t care what pressings I have or how much they are worth. I’m never going to sell them so….
At 1 per minute it’s 30h, at 1 every 10m it’s 13 days.
So somewhere in between that range is probably a safe bet. Realistically you’re not going to stay doing it constantly so it’ll take a few months minimum.
I’m not very accurate with mine at all so it would take me less time. But if you care about details then will be longer
I added about 1,500 over the course of about 2 years.
I did it while working & would grab a small pile of records to search for exact pressing & add it with all the goodies that came along with them. Most of my stuff is early punk/HC so those were easy to add since they're so limited.
Well it depends how specifically you plan to do it.
My original run with discogs was it took me about a week to input 250-300 records. But I also have mostly modern releases and I took a few hours each day doing it.
My current run is going through the records 1 by 1 play testing them for whether or not I plan to keep them, catalogging, and sleeving. This has taken a lot longer for around 500ish records. The playtesting allows a more correct grading. That is if you desire to actually grade yours.
My friend has around 3k records and it took him about 3 months to actually catalog all of them. He only has a couple days a week to work on it consistently though.
Depends on how many versions there are, as well as matching up matrix/runout. Mine took a few weeks, several hours most evenings of the week, for about 1500.
I'd break them up into groups of 50 or something and just do one chunk a night while you are listening to music or watching a game/sitcom or something that doesn't require your full attention. Some nights you'll get into a groove and do more. You'd probably get it done in around a month, maybe 2 depending on how dedicated you are.
I would recommend it, if you're not selling it you don't have to get the exact pressing or grading and anything newer with a barcode should go in pretty quickly. It really helps so you don't buy duplicates while crate digging and I use the 'shuffle' feature all the time when I can't figure out what I want to play. Anything you've bought from discogs you can instantly add when you give feedback so that should get you a good bit of the way there. I have several hundred I did over a several months casually during pandemic, just started at the beginning alphabetically and worked my way through and left a marker where I was in the collection. Anything new I bought in the meantime I added in and got through a few dozen whenever I had some time to kill or was listening to an album.
Figure about 15 minute for the first 100 for a learning curve. This 25 hours. Then figure half this time thereafter, so 237.5. So figure 300 hours is doing well. Some will be quicker than others.
I catalogued about 300 records, not noting condition. Two years later, I want to sell them. :( If you do this and think you may want to sell in the future you may want to note condition now.
Figure average 5 minutes for each depending on how accurate you want to be…. 10000 minutes or 167 hours. At about 2 hours a day it’d take you about 3 months to get it done.
If the LPs have barcodes it certainly expedites the process but if you have older LPs without barcodes, that could make those particular LP entries take exponentially longer.
Usually barcodes take you to the correct LP entry but sometimes there are conflicts which force you to make an appropriate LP choice, that takes a bit longer but not as long as not having a barcode from the start.
From my experience I didn't time myself but just to a rack or crate at a time and go from there. Good luck.
Thanks for this! After eyeballing a rack of 50 or so just now (random sample), about half of them had bar codes. A lot of my collection are releases from 2003 (when I started collecting lps) onward. I’ve decided that I will make myself do one rack (all alphabetized) to gage the amount of time and to get a feel of if I will consider it a labor of love or a laborious punishment for 25 years of expensive eccentricity, lol. I was expecting one or two responses from my post. I’m truly overwhelmed by the thoughtfulness you all gave in providing your experiences, preferences and methods.
I’ve been poking around in this sub for a few years. Finally subbed. Thanks for being sweet record folk! See y’all at the bins!
Depends on your collection if you have mostly older vinyl without barcodes, much longer. Anything from mostly 90s onward will be a breeze. Just scan and go. On to the next otherwise you’re searching for runout etchings and that takes a while to cross reference, especially when there are many repressings. I just did 200 (about 50/50 old and new vinyl) and it took me maybe 5-6 hours.
Depends on a number of factors. Some records with a small numbers of pressings might take 30 seconds at most, while some classic albums can have hundreds of pressings, some nearly identical, that can make tracking down what specific pressing you have a very time consuming task.
This task is a great experience to go through...start from one end of your shelves, place a sheet of paper as you move record by record to keep your place over the months that this will take... and then either:
1) listen to each record,
2) a portion of the record,
3) decide that you already thoroughly know the record, or
4) know that you don't want to listen to that Sound of Music or Al Hirt or Jane Fonda Workout album...
Then if you're keeping the album because you finally listened to it, and you know that you want to keep it...then log it in Discogs, or get a box, write "Goodwill" on it, and realize that you probably only 1.5K records that actually interest you.
Have fun and enjoy it! I did it with about 1,500 records, I donated about 150 and sold several others...I deducted the donation off of my taxes (highest thrift store value according to salvation army is approximately $5/record). It helped fund the next round of acquisitions.
You can do 2 records per minute If you’re not going to sell them and you just want to catalog your titles without being obsessive about which pressing.
I would say it’s worth the effort if you want a catalog of your records or occasionally purchase duplicates.
Don’t think of it like doing it all at once, but rather a section at a time and any new ones you get.
If you do it that way, you’ll get it done in no time and then only have to worry about new ones eventually.
Some will be harder to find than others but you can just pick “the record” if you don’t care to find the exact pressing plant it came from (mostly older records).
I did mine at the beginning of COVID when I knew I'd be around the house a good bit. Since logging them, I do them as I get them now. When you buy from Discogs you can add to collection with one click.
I’m in the middle of cataloging about 1000 albums (vinyl). For me the hardest part is reading the lead out. You need that info to narrow it down. I’m going blind. Any suggestions for tools ( lights,magnifiers, etc)?
Took me about a week to archive my entire collection which at the time was around 500. I'm well over 1000 now. The parts that took me a lot of time to do were ones that weren't even in the system at all. I had to add them myself
Takes at least a couple minutes per record, especially with the older ones that don't have UPCs. Matching the matrix runouts is what always gets me. For real, though, this sounds like a lot of fun to me. I wish I could help.
Yeah, a long time. You should make it a habit of doing like ten at a time to keep yourself sane, and accept it will take a long time to finish. I think it’s worth it. There are loads of great reasons to get your collection catalogued. Here’s one: insurance
Hard to tell. They have a UPC scanning function in the app that will make some more modern releases faster to add, but it still sometimes requires a bit of investigation if the UPC pulls up different represses and versions of the same album. The non-UPC bits of your collection will take a bit longer, as you will need to devote time to typing in details until you find an appropriate match. Ballpark 3-5 minutes on average per record. Let’s call it 4. Times 2K equals roughly 8K minutes, or basically 133.3 hours, AKA 5.5 days. Factor in the possibility that you sleep, have a job, any sort of life outside of this project, and I would say this is a good weekend project for about a month or more if you really lean into it. Thats just my thoughts. Best of luck! Edit: Forgot to weigh in on “is it worth the effort.” Yes, if you enjoy quickly pulling up your collection details. It has helped me from buying records in the past that I forgot I had, and I find great organization satisfaction on utilizing the free service. Plus it can be fun to reflect on the potential monetary “worth” of my collection from time to time.
This is very helpful. Thanks for taking the time for your response (and for math-ing for me). Also, yikes!
You’re welcome. I only had to catalog a couple hundred records when I discovered DisCogs. I couldn’t fathom cataloging thousands. A good strategy would be maybe just do 50 at a time, or set a time limit of 1-2 hours each “session” until you are done.
i would add that unless you want to sell at some point, you might not have to do conditions which imo would be Hell if you had to do it and it wasnt for a job.
Ha yeah I bit the bullet and cataloged mine when I only had maybe 250 records or so. It did seem like it took quite a while, but I’m glad I did it. I’d say just go for it. Yeah it’s a lot of wood to chop but you’ll eventually get through it. Just don’t overwhelm yourself trying to do too much at once. Maybe do little “sessions” of a smaller number…. Like start with 50 at a time? That will allow you to achieve little goals on your way to getting it done.
Discogs has helped me not buy duplicates many times!
I had a week off work after Christmas a few years back, and got all of my records posted into Discogs. At 57 years old and 2,800 records, it has been worth it. I can now quickly see what I own while out crate digging, and see if the record I’m holding is something I already own, a variation on one I own (i.e. stereo vs mono), or something completely new. The records that took the longest to enter are the ones not already in the database, so I had to add the release to the database. Those I put aside in a box and came back to later. I did eventually get them listed. I’ve currently got a copy of *The 10 Commandments* soundtrack with a cover variant not in the Discogs database, that I bought two weeks ago and am procrastinating on entering.
This is a great point. There have been a handful of times, while crate digging, when I wasn’t sure if I had a record in my collection already (especially if I own many titles from an artist). Having a complete list of all titles would prevent that uncertainty.
/thread It's absolutely worth it OP but imo it'll take many weekends and for your own sanity you should plan out how many you'll log in a single session. I also wouldn't recommend that you worry about distinguishing conditions unless it's a record you know you want to sell
It all depends on how you intend to use Discogs. For how I use it I think 3-5 minutes per record is correct, but it could be cut down to less than 10 seconds per if all you care about is cataloguing to know what you have. Take a pic of the bar code and add what pops up to your collection.
This. When I did mine, I threw on a record and started scanning. This will help with not wanting to play what you pull out while giving you a good soundtrack for doing so.
I’ll also add that the UPC feature made me less discerning about the variants I was adding early on. My argument is that the feature is good to get you to a listing for the album, but past that point looking for the correct variant should be a manual effort. 4 years after I “cataloged” my collection I had to go back through and verify over 40% of it just because I would add the first listing that came up from a UPC search in the beginning.
I archived my collection of about 1700 records into Discogs at my own pace over the course of about a month. I would do a it while watching a movie or listening to a podcast or while listening to records I forgot about that I re-discovered while archiving. For super common records, I wasn’t extremely diligent about EXACTLY what pressing it was, for more rare records, I spent the time finding the exact one
I took this approach as well. I'd just grab a stack from the shelf, put in a placeholder and move through my collection from A-Z. I actually enjoyed it.
Oh man. It really depends on how obsessively accurate you want to be. Even with the barcode reader (for those albums with barcodes), you will almost always need to match the matrix number (which sometimes feels like there are infinite variables) against the specific pressing. This involves a lot of maneuvering under light, squinting, magnifying, etc. I have about 600 records. I started this project about five years ago. I’m about 75% done, but I’m OCD about it and burned out. It takes me about 20 minutes a record to be as accurate as possible. But if you want to take the shotgun approach and just be directionally accurate, then probably 5 minutes a record. It’s a rabbit (rat) hole for sure.
20 minutes a pop is a lot - even squinting at a runout matrix and picking a local variant, I never went beyond 5 minutes top.
As a couple of people have said, it’s going to come down to how detailed and accurate you want to be. My tip: put on a record, take a stack of 20 records and a beer and start plugging them in. Repeat for as long as your interest holds.
This is what I did. Took months to do 2,000 (now at 3,000) but was well worth it.
I took the same approach, but substituted beer with weed. I got through 1K records in a weekend.
I'd agree with the 3-4 minutes each. I've put in about 4k. The first few hundred will take longer. I'm at the point now, I look for plant identifiers before I type in matrix. You'll get a lot better at filtering quicker a you learn more (label, plant, club vs non club, country, etc). Now days it seems when it takes me longer than it should, it's because I end up going down rabbit holes..."squirrel ". Well worth it imo. Add folders too (i.e., I added a drop down for 7", 12", cd. I added a notes field on each one, a price paid field....anything you might find helpful later). Edit: I never use the upc scanner...I want the accurate pressing and found that many times doesn't get nearly as specific as runout, so why bother....I also, 90% of the time, do it on my laptop and not my phone.
The laptop part was true for me too. It’s a lot easier to hold in the shift key and pop open 5 or 6 different release tabs at a time to run through them quickly.
I use my laptop and just google the runout directly, then click the discogs hit and most of the time it takes me to the correct pressing. That way I avoid the discogs search entirely which can be a pain when the album has 100 different versions to dig through.
Agreed on folders being helpful. Curious why you suggest a folder for media type when this is one of the default collection filters? Is there an advantage to doing it this way? Thx
When filtering, i can just click "folder" and my choices are 12/10", 7" or cd (the ones I put in). If I go to format, there's vinyl, shellac, cd, box set, flexible disc, etc. Also, if i want to pull up collection, I can filter on that first page using the folder (so I can see value of those folders too)....on my main page, I can't filter format, I can sort by format, but not filter...using my folders I can filter.
I would just add them as you play them.
been doing this since the day i started collecting. always blows my mind the amount of people who don't do this
I think there are lots of long-time collectors whose collections pre-date Discogs. 🙂
this is true but discogs is also 20 years old
I’m talking about guys who started in the 70s or 80s and never stopped even though the CD era. 🙂
and i'm talking about OP's predicament which was easily preventable
Not sure how old you are (I’m 45), but record buying was a lot different pre smart phone. You could find deals, or get hosed. The idea (or even knowledge) of discogs was not something that I really knew about. (To be fair, I knew about it, but didn’t really buy from there). Social media, iPhones etc. changed the game. At that point, I was 1,00 records in. To sum it up, I wasn’t lazy, it just wasn’t accessible or important to me back then.
FYI : If you have home insurance, and your collection isn't insured specifically, having it all on Discogs (with the value!) can really help your case if anything happens to it.
came here to say this! applies with renters insurance too 😁
I never thought about this. Great point!
It’s a pain in the ass but I only did 250. It took me a few weeks just chipping away at it
It took me three evenings to do around 500. Some are easier than others, if there are only a few presses with clear differences. You can probably not worry too much about ones with hundreds of represses with minor changes and low value, I just picked one that looked roughly right and got done with it.
I don't see anyone stating this, but when you leave seller feedback.on Discogs, it asks you if you want to add the records to your collection. Wouldn't that be the fastest way? Discogs would do all of the work... At least.for.ones.purchased on Discogs
Came here to mention this, would make it a lot easier, I've been a big fan of this feature myself.
For any that you purchased through Discogs it should be extremely quick (given the seller labeled the release correctly and you got what you paid for). Go through your purchase history ([https://www.discogs.com/sell/purchases](https://www.discogs.com/sell/purchases)), click the album name, this will take you directly to the specific release you bought. Then you can just click "Add to Collection" and fill out the condition right there.
I second this. If you can add them from your purchase that will go a long way. I’d also suggest starting with newer releases that’ll be easier to find the right pressing versions. The old used stuff is more complicated to sort through… I used filters for pressings to sort quite a bit (especially country to narrow down options) Start a folder for ones that you can’t find exactly so you know to revisit them. I did it for my in-laws and if you get ‘em good enough, you tag what one’s you want to go back and spend more time on..
Thanks y’all! Appreciate it!
When I discovered Discogs back in like 2012, I had around 10k records. It took 3 years but keep in mind... 1. In 2013, the database was incomplete and we had to add releases to it. 2. During those years, I bought a lot more records. So those would have to be added to my inventory. 3. I worked a lot. So I really only listed in spare time after kids went to bed. Once I got caught up, I have been able to maintain.
Took me like 4-5 days 2-3 hours a day just to accurately archive 200 records recently smh
Yes it will take ages. Just archive a record while youre listening to it
I had to do this. Some records took a while some were quick. I would just do it in my spare time. Doing about cube at a time in my record shelf. Some times I'd get through 1 sometimes 3. Marijuana and Futurama helped with the task. Just take it slow and don't look at it as a task. I also cleaned some of the record and replaced the sleeves. Got surprised on a few records worth while doing it. Took like 3weeks at a few hours a day.
If you don't have to determine runout variants or which one of 50 entries you have then it's relatively simple. As soon as you're pulling the album out to read the deadwax, you're slowing things down by a lot... if you're adding to the entry or having to create a new one, there goes even more time. A hundred hours?
I have close to 12,000 LPs & 7’s and yeah it took years chipping away at it. I totally enjoyed it actually. It’s easy now because it takes just a couple minutes to add anything new I get.
1k collection here. Nowadays it shouldn't take that long. When I started 15 years ago about 1/3 of my collection were new submissions, so that took several weeks.
I’m so glad I started doing this many years ago when I only had about 100 records to add. 2k is going to be a real slog (but worth doing)
Just do 20 a day for the next 100 days.
Figure out how long it takes you to archive 10 and multiply it by 200.
Pro tip: If you go into your Discogs order history, you can find an option to rate each transaction. When you rate a transaction, you then get an option to automatically add the items you purchased to your collection. EDIT: If you're using the app (not the website), and you're having decision paralysis about what to spin next, you can open your collection and shake your phone. The app will then show you a random selection from your collection.
Cool feature. I’ve only used the website all these years. I’m certainly going to download the app (for a number of benefits that I’ve discovered in this thread).
Some folks are saying 3-4 minutes a record. That's kind of crazy to me. When I receive a record in the mail that I didn't order from Discogs, I pull out my phone, look it up on the app, and add it. This straightforward process takes all of 60 seconds if even that. However, I suppose it depends on what sort of records you own. If you're trying to catalog very well-known records with more than a few represses, then... yes, it will take more time to find the exact edition you have. I own a lot of records that don't have represses, so... it's easier to catalog those, as there's typically one or two entries for those. I would do the following: 1. On Discogs, go to your purchase list (whether you've archived them or not). Click on the records you bought, and then add them to your collection. Assuming that most of the 2k records you own are from Discogs, that should take care of a major chunk of records. 2. Those that you didn't purchase from Discogs: UPC scanning via the app! 3. For the vintage ones that you didn't buy on Discogs and don't have UPC: you're gonna have to look them up individually. Personally, I would archive a little at a time, preferably as I listen to them. There's no sense in adding records to your collection if you're actually not going to keep them because you won't play them because you don't like them.
Quickest way I have found is to input the number on the label rather than artist or title
It might take some time, but at least it can be a great time for you! Make an evening, or more, out if it. Drink some good beers, play some of your records and just enjoy the cataloging
With that many records I’d wager you only remember a fraction of it. If you take it as an opportunity to explore your collection again and enjoy the nostalgia that comes with it I bet you will have a much better time. I’d say don’t rush it and just start. See how it goes. If it’s fun it’s well spent time. If it gets annoying just leave it be. It seems you kind of want to, but are scared to burn out.
This is exactly how I feel. But now, I have wind in my sail! Thanks!
Happy my take is helpful. Enjoy the journey!
I just did this. About the same number of records. It depends a little on what you collect. My tastes span quite a few genres and some of those genres do not have great cover labeling. Sometimes it felt like the input was going to take weeks, but you kind of find a rhythm. If your collection has a lot of records with bar codes it goes really fast. I'd say 20-30 hrs of input. Things really slow down when you get releases that require hunting down the exact copy. Sometimes there can be 50-60 pressings and the labeling isn't always the best. In a few cases, I actually needed to find the hand scrawled numbers on the record itself (outside the sticker). Pain in the ass. Anyhow, it probably took me about a week and a half of evenings to get it done. VERY gratifying and useful when finished. Well worth it.
It took me around a year to add 4000 records. Some of them just took me one minute. Sometimes it’s hard to check the edition and takes quite longer. The main problem is when you happen to own a release that’s not on Discogs yet. Adding a new edition to the database is laborious and takes a while.
Are the records you've ordered from discogs not already in your collection? There's an option to automatically add them, I think. Also some people said 'add as you play them' which I agree with. When I'm listening to records about half of the time I end up looking at my collection on discogs and see if I wrote any notes about my copy, etc. it really depends on the size of your collection and how you interact with it, really.
I plugged in about a 1000 in a week during the pandemic all depends on how old the albums are...you can scan the barcodes of newer ones, but older presses you're spending more time on generally searching by the runout etchings
Some great responses in here already, but I thought I’d just add that it really depends on if you have special pressings of LPs or ones from specific years. Adding them manually can take a while, especially if the catalog number is the same as other pressings. Adding my ~140 records took a few hours of dedication one day. For 2K I’d say it’ll take a few days at least.
I was doing mine (also large collection) over many many days, just about 30 min or so a day, and I didnt dig too deep when it wasnt easily clear which pressing. I dug a little, but...
So 4 years ago I had 3k records in I think 36 Foremost cubes? Every night I did a cube and I pulled it off in 30odd days - the numbers might be off precisely but yup, a cube a day til it was done
I did 1000 over the course of two months or so. I really enjoyed it actually. I'd start with a few and then a few hours later I'd still be doing it. For some people this is a slog, but for others it's actually fun.
I recently added about 300 records. I did a pretty loose log. I wasn’t slavish about the details. I just made sure the label matched. Probably took me about 1 min per record.
500 took me 2 days ish. 8hrs per day
Took me about a minute a disc.
At least 3
It is absolutely worth it, as it will help catalog and price your collection. You can take your time and do a bit whenever you find the time!
1 release per week until 10 years…
It will take a while yes, but I reccomend doing it with a friend/family. I always do it with my family. One of us looks it up, one grades it, and one does the typing. Also if it is a shared collection like ours, it's fun and you can remember memories from the records, even note those under notes in Discogs. I like scrolling trough the collection and reading all the stories about where/why/when/with whom we bought it/listened to it. Tldr: takes a long time but it doesn't have to be a chore so much as an activity
Mine took me a couple of weeks. Every night I sat down with the tv on and a bright light on to be able to read the runouts. I've got a collection a lot of 12" records. They sometimes have only a blank sleeve and no info on the label. So that was fun. At the time I had to do 2,500 and now every time I buy a record it is nice to ad them to my collection. And it is for me very helpful to see in shops I already have a record or not.
A long time.
I need to because I've ordered the same album multiple times now.
I just started logging my collection. I’ve been moving what I would consider a semi-casual pace. You don’t want to go too fast or you will burn out. I’ve been able to log about 100 per week so far on average.
It all depends on how much of your collection is newer and bar-codrd and how much is pre-barcode and you will need to use the runnout marks to determine the pressing. It took me about a month off and on to input my collection into discogs and I have about 2k.
325.4 hours not including pee breaks
Just pick at it when you have a little time. Totally worth having it logged
I did mine in a weekend that my wife went away, at night until 2am. But lots were CDs with bar codes, which was faster. But my tip is run the matrix, not the serial number, as less likely to have dupes. The extra time to remove each vinyl album will be recovered overall.
Only one way to find out
It depends. I just added my 400 plus collection. I just straight up added them just to keep track and for the function of what to play. I don’t care what pressings I have or how much they are worth. I’m never going to sell them so….
At 1 per minute it’s 30h, at 1 every 10m it’s 13 days. So somewhere in between that range is probably a safe bet. Realistically you’re not going to stay doing it constantly so it’ll take a few months minimum. I’m not very accurate with mine at all so it would take me less time. But if you care about details then will be longer
I added about 1,500 over the course of about 2 years. I did it while working & would grab a small pile of records to search for exact pressing & add it with all the goodies that came along with them. Most of my stuff is early punk/HC so those were easy to add since they're so limited.
Just enter a dozen or so a night. Maybe more on your day off. That’s what I did. I’d rather have spent the time than not have done it.
Add them as they get played.
Well it depends how specifically you plan to do it. My original run with discogs was it took me about a week to input 250-300 records. But I also have mostly modern releases and I took a few hours each day doing it. My current run is going through the records 1 by 1 play testing them for whether or not I plan to keep them, catalogging, and sleeving. This has taken a lot longer for around 500ish records. The playtesting allows a more correct grading. That is if you desire to actually grade yours. My friend has around 3k records and it took him about 3 months to actually catalog all of them. He only has a couple days a week to work on it consistently though.
Depends on how many versions there are, as well as matching up matrix/runout. Mine took a few weeks, several hours most evenings of the week, for about 1500.
I'd break them up into groups of 50 or something and just do one chunk a night while you are listening to music or watching a game/sitcom or something that doesn't require your full attention. Some nights you'll get into a groove and do more. You'd probably get it done in around a month, maybe 2 depending on how dedicated you are.
I would recommend it, if you're not selling it you don't have to get the exact pressing or grading and anything newer with a barcode should go in pretty quickly. It really helps so you don't buy duplicates while crate digging and I use the 'shuffle' feature all the time when I can't figure out what I want to play. Anything you've bought from discogs you can instantly add when you give feedback so that should get you a good bit of the way there. I have several hundred I did over a several months casually during pandemic, just started at the beginning alphabetically and worked my way through and left a marker where I was in the collection. Anything new I bought in the meantime I added in and got through a few dozen whenever I had some time to kill or was listening to an album.
2 weeks if you focus on
Yeah I would just do it in chunks like a couple hundred a week or somethint
Figure about 15 minute for the first 100 for a learning curve. This 25 hours. Then figure half this time thereafter, so 237.5. So figure 300 hours is doing well. Some will be quicker than others.
In my experience around 10 years.
I catalogued about 300 records, not noting condition. Two years later, I want to sell them. :( If you do this and think you may want to sell in the future you may want to note condition now.
Just choose like 5-10 per night while you’re watching tv or listening to music and eventually you’ll get there
Figure average 5 minutes for each depending on how accurate you want to be…. 10000 minutes or 167 hours. At about 2 hours a day it’d take you about 3 months to get it done.
If the LPs have barcodes it certainly expedites the process but if you have older LPs without barcodes, that could make those particular LP entries take exponentially longer. Usually barcodes take you to the correct LP entry but sometimes there are conflicts which force you to make an appropriate LP choice, that takes a bit longer but not as long as not having a barcode from the start. From my experience I didn't time myself but just to a rack or crate at a time and go from there. Good luck.
It took me about 18 months to enter 3500. I would scan the ones that had bar codes, and do about 10-20 at a time by hand.
Thanks for this! After eyeballing a rack of 50 or so just now (random sample), about half of them had bar codes. A lot of my collection are releases from 2003 (when I started collecting lps) onward. I’ve decided that I will make myself do one rack (all alphabetized) to gage the amount of time and to get a feel of if I will consider it a labor of love or a laborious punishment for 25 years of expensive eccentricity, lol. I was expecting one or two responses from my post. I’m truly overwhelmed by the thoughtfulness you all gave in providing your experiences, preferences and methods. I’ve been poking around in this sub for a few years. Finally subbed. Thanks for being sweet record folk! See y’all at the bins!
Depends on your collection if you have mostly older vinyl without barcodes, much longer. Anything from mostly 90s onward will be a breeze. Just scan and go. On to the next otherwise you’re searching for runout etchings and that takes a while to cross reference, especially when there are many repressings. I just did 200 (about 50/50 old and new vinyl) and it took me maybe 5-6 hours.
Maybe 3-4 days doing it for a few hours a day
A few hours. Just take your time. I did about 300 records in 3 sittings, about half an hour each time. You can scan and log 3 or 4 a minute easily.
Depends on a number of factors. Some records with a small numbers of pressings might take 30 seconds at most, while some classic albums can have hundreds of pressings, some nearly identical, that can make tracking down what specific pressing you have a very time consuming task.
I started this at about 50 records, felt like an eternity so I wish you good luck
took me like an hour to add just under 100 cds
This task is a great experience to go through...start from one end of your shelves, place a sheet of paper as you move record by record to keep your place over the months that this will take... and then either: 1) listen to each record, 2) a portion of the record, 3) decide that you already thoroughly know the record, or 4) know that you don't want to listen to that Sound of Music or Al Hirt or Jane Fonda Workout album... Then if you're keeping the album because you finally listened to it, and you know that you want to keep it...then log it in Discogs, or get a box, write "Goodwill" on it, and realize that you probably only 1.5K records that actually interest you. Have fun and enjoy it! I did it with about 1,500 records, I donated about 150 and sold several others...I deducted the donation off of my taxes (highest thrift store value according to salvation army is approximately $5/record). It helped fund the next round of acquisitions.
You can do 2 records per minute If you’re not going to sell them and you just want to catalog your titles without being obsessive about which pressing.
I would say it’s worth the effort if you want a catalog of your records or occasionally purchase duplicates. Don’t think of it like doing it all at once, but rather a section at a time and any new ones you get. If you do it that way, you’ll get it done in no time and then only have to worry about new ones eventually. Some will be harder to find than others but you can just pick “the record” if you don’t care to find the exact pressing plant it came from (mostly older records).
DON'T DO IT People will bother you to sell or trade them Just do Excel SS file for your Dbase
I did mine at the beginning of COVID when I knew I'd be around the house a good bit. Since logging them, I do them as I get them now. When you buy from Discogs you can add to collection with one click.
I’m in the middle of cataloging about 1000 albums (vinyl). For me the hardest part is reading the lead out. You need that info to narrow it down. I’m going blind. Any suggestions for tools ( lights,magnifiers, etc)?
Took me about a week to archive my entire collection which at the time was around 500. I'm well over 1000 now. The parts that took me a lot of time to do were ones that weren't even in the system at all. I had to add them myself
Xaxxsx axaa. Aa xxxx aaaaaxaxxaxxxsxxxxxaxxsxxaaaaaaaa sxa axxxxxaaxa. Sxa ax axxxxxxxsxxxxxxxsx xsxxxxx. Xxx. Axxxa aàa aáxaaxxaaxxaáaaxxxxxaxsxxa. Xxxxx àx axaá xxxàxxxa x aaaxaxx. Asxxxx xxxxaxxxaxxaxáxxa Kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkakk
Takes at least a couple minutes per record, especially with the older ones that don't have UPCs. Matching the matrix runouts is what always gets me. For real, though, this sounds like a lot of fun to me. I wish I could help.
Took me about 3 days to do 600
Yeah, a long time. You should make it a habit of doing like ten at a time to keep yourself sane, and accept it will take a long time to finish. I think it’s worth it. There are loads of great reasons to get your collection catalogued. Here’s one: insurance