Project Files and Folder Organization

[Roncore]

Hello all!

I'm going through years and years of files and folders that are...somewhat organized, and I wanted to ask what your organization on your drives look like?

The majority of my projects really started back in 2006-2007 using Reaper, and most everything for the past 10+ years was Studio one. So the file/folder structure is different.

What I've always done is, on my recording drive, have the folder structure like this

Recording Drive/Artist/Song/ and then VARIOUS save points name like "2024-05-29 - Songname. This is all well, but I also record practices each week as well, and they all appear in the same folder, and I just add a (Practice) instead of a song name. I've not been sorting them by year or anything because of the date already in the folder or file name.

I know everybody does this different, and just looking to get some other ideas from other artists/producers/engineers.

[sonics]

Welcome!!!

I simply separate my own work from clients work, and then there are project folders within those. The only really important thing is backups.

I remove projects (to archive) yearly if they are no longer needed. I've no real revelations to share. Anyone else?

[Hugh Robjohns]

I think this depends on what you need to be able to do with the files.

Like you, I have folders for artists, and within them folders for specific projects (albums or gigs etc), and within them the physical raw tracks, then folders for the project files, production notes, photos of control settings etc etc. And each file is uniquely named and dated, with versions numbers where necessary.

I'd be inclined to keep your rehearsal recordings in separate Practice folders, either under each artists, or as a separate Rehearsal Folder with its own artist folder structure under it.

But there are no rules. All that matters is that the structure makes sense to you and allows you to find the stuff you want when you want it.

And then back it up three times to different drives/locations in different places! ... and keep the backups up to date!

[Drew Stephenson]

One minor piece of advice (probably for the wider audience than the OP):
when saving files using date as the differentiator, put the date at the end of the filename and in YYYYMMDD format.
I.e. Boring Song 20240530
This way if you sort by filename they will always be in order and you can jump straight to the end of the list for the most recent version.

This is probably all that's needed for personal stuff, for client stuff it's probably worth getting a bit more nerdy and adopting a major/minor version structure.
- First draft is v0.1* and new versions go up as v0.2 etc. with each change. These are your minor versions.
- When you're ready to send a first version to the client this becomes v1.0 (major version) and is your baseline.
- Subsequent changes are v1.1, 1.2, etc. until you're ready for your next client version that will be v2.0
- Carry on ad infinitum.
This way both you and the client are always clear which version you're talking about and you know exactly changes have and haven't been shared with the client.

* Use v0.01 if you're likely to have more than 9 iterations between major versions

[James Perrett]

I have folders for artists, and within them folders for specific projects (albums or gigs etc), and within them the physical raw tracks,

...

And then back it up three times to different drives/locations in different places! ... and keep the backups up to date!

My system is similar to Hugh's although, if I am working for a label or organisation, I tend to have the label name at the top level and then separate artist folders. On a large project I will also have separate sub-folders for different source types and also a separate sub-folder for the final output so I can just copy that folder to the client.

I'd agree that backups are essential and I run Syncback on my audio folder every day before I switch the computer off. I also make sure that I have at least one other backup before deleting any audio files - although I know that really I should have more than one other backup.

[porthoss78]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

https://www.recordingacademy.com/produc ... guidelines

Recommendations for delivery:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... 09_27_18_0

They also have a folder hierarchy and naming sheet and separate definitions:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... chy_naming
https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... efinitions

They were talking about updating these a year or so ago but it looks like they've not managed to do it yet.

I think this is probably overkill for 90% of people but there are some good practices in there, especially if you're likely to be sharing, or working on projects with other people involved.

[Drew Stephenson]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

[RichardT]

FWIW, my structure is

status > release type > year > n. release name > n. track name

So for example

Completed Releases > Singles > 2023 > 1. A Memory > 1. A Memory, Pt.1

I number project versions in a simple sequence as generated by the Cubase ‘save new version’ command, so for example ‘A Memory, Pt.1 08.cpr’. I find that’s more reliable than major version /minor version versioning.

As I only work on my own music, I use MacOS colour tags on each track folder to indicate the artist name.

I also use colour tags to indicate track statuses (this is handy because the track can appear both on a single and an album, one of which might be released, and the other not).

Statuses are: in score form only / started in Cubase / Good mix / mastered / released to streaming / demo.

[Hugh Robjohns]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

Their file hierarchy is, by luck, almost exactly the same as mine.

[RichardT]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

https://www.recordingacademy.com/produc ... guidelines

Recommendations for delivery:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... 09_27_18_0

They also have a folder hierarchy and naming sheet and separate definitions:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... chy_naming
https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... efinitions

They were talking about updating these a year or so ago but it looks like they've not managed to do it yet.

I think this is probably overkill for 90% of people but there are some good practices in there, especially if you're likely to be sharing, or working on projects with other people involved.

Thanks!

It’s a matter of personal preference, but for me that system has far too many subfolders, some of which will have perhaps one or two files in. For me that system makes it ungainly and hard to get an overview of what you’ve actually got.

I think (again personal preference only) it’s easier to keep more files together and to use a rigorous naming convention to indicate what they are - masters, pre-masters, mixes in progress etc.

[Roncore]

Awesome responses! This is mostly personal projects with several bands, and yes, I've got backups out the wazoo (onsite Unraid server, cloud, and offsite Synology, plus 2 other computers offsite). Backups are mandatory, luckily I'm a data hoarder so I have too many copies of everything.

Keep them coming, this is great to see how others organize their projects!

[porthoss78]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

Their file hierarchy is, by luck, almost exactly the same as mine.

No luck at all I'm sure, I'd expect nothing less from you, Hugh

Sonic Scoop interviewed the panel who put this guidance together a while ago and they showed some slides of what they were proposing to change the hierarchy too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCt7nhWueEQ

If you jump straight to 11 mins 22 seconds you can see the new Working Projects folder hierarchy and separate (I think) Delivery Projects folder hierarchy.

They do look pretty complex compared to the original folder hierarchy, which might explain why they haven't updated this on the web site yet as it's still being finessed.

[porthoss78]

If you wanted to go even further and deeper into it you could adapt the Recording Academy's Producers and Engineers Wing Technical Guidelines:

https://www.recordingacademy.com/produc ... guidelines

Recommendations for delivery:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... 09_27_18_0

They also have a folder hierarchy and naming sheet and separate definitions:

https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... chy_naming
https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static ... efinitions

They were talking about updating these a year or so ago but it looks like they've not managed to do it yet.

I think this is probably overkill for 90% of people but there are some good practices in there, especially if you're likely to be sharing, or working on projects with other people involved.

Thanks!

It’s a matter of personal preference, but for me that system has far too many subfolders, some of which will have perhaps one or two files in. For me that system makes it ungainly and hard to get an overview of what you’ve actually got.

I think (again personal preference only) it’s easier to keep more files together and to use a rigorous naming convention to indicate what they are - masters, pre-masters, mixes in progress etc.

Agree, most of my folders would be empty too as I tend to work on my own. I think it's designed for when you have multiple producers/mixers etc. working on big projects and trying to keep all the files in some sort of order so when you pass it on to the next team, they know where everything should be.

Probably worth keeping handy though, just in case Taylor Swift's team reaches out to some of us to help with her new album

[Hugh Robjohns]

I think it's entirely legitimate to tailor the structure to suit your own requirements.

For example, I don't have 'Client' or 'Project Producer' folders at all. In my structure the client level is usually the artist anyway, and the producer folder level is called SONG TITLE (which also removes the need for a Song Title subfolder in the Multitracks thread).

And I don't have a 'mixes' subfolder under the Multitracks folder -- all mixes go in the Final Mixes folder, along with any 'mastered' or deliverable versions.

In my case, the multitracks folder contains all the raw source files and all the work-in-progress files. Final Mixes is all that. And Project metadata is all the project files and EDLs, session notes, artwork, rigging documentation, setup photos etc etc.