headers
Peter Siciliano | 25 Sep 2012 00:24
Favicon

Beatport ID3v2.4 tag support

Hello ID3 community,

Over the past year we at Beatport have been working to support as many ID3v2.4 frames as we could and populate them with accurate data.
We have updated our ingestion system for new files and retagged our old files to supply all frames and tags consistently.

I am excited to announce that as of today we are delivering all of our track MP3s and AIF with IDv2.4 tags containing the following frames:
UFID Beatport ID
TSRC ISRC (international standard recording code)
APIC $03 Cover Art [Cover (front)]
APIC $11 Beatport Waveform image (brightly colored fish)
TIT2 Trackname (Mixname) [Original filename]
TPE1 Artist [Lead performer(s)/Soloist(s)]
TPE4 Remixer [Interpreted, remixed, or otherwise modified by]
TALB Album / Release [Album/Movie/Show title]
TPUB Label [File owner/licensee]
TDRC Year (Published on Beatport)
TDOR Date (Original release)
TDRL Date (Published on Beatport)
TFLT File Type
TENC Encoded by
WOAF Beatport track detail page URL
WPUB Beatport label detail page URL
TCON Genre
TKEY Key (initial)
TBPM BPM (Beats per minute)
TRCK Track Number [Track number/Position in set]
COMM Comment
TIT1 Grouping (iTunes) - So iTunes can see Label

We are building solutions to support the following additional frames very shortly:
OWNE Date (Purchased)
TPOS Part of a set
USLT Lyrics (plain text / not timestamped)

We have made the decision to knowingly support v2.4 even though certain applications (such as Windows Media Player) do not.
With our customers being DJs using the latest tools, applications and technologies this is not an issue as DJ solutions all understand the need for (and support) "on file" tagging with ID3v2.4.

In the coming months we will be looking to expand the offering of frames not currently supported by version 2.4 and suggest approximately 20 additional frames for a possible version 2.5 frame set.
I hope to see the ID3 community continue to grow and evolve the format.

If any out there need additional information regarding the tags that Beatport is currently supporting, or would like to know more about what we will be supporting in the future, please let me know.

Thanks,
++
Peter Siciliano | CTO
Beatport | Play with music
-----------------------------------------------
2399 Blake Street Suite 170
Denver, Colorado USA 80205
tel:    +1.720.932.9103
fax:   +1.720.932.9104

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Evgueni Naverniouk | 14 Aug 2012 03:37
Picon
Gravatar

Standards for remix types and multiple remixers

Dear ID3,

I'd like to properly tag remix artist and types and I'm wondering if anyone has created a standard for this yet. I found the TPE4 field which is helpful, but it's certainly not enough.

How should I deal with:

1) Storing the "type" of remix.

John Smith - Diddy (Abe Lincoln Remix)
John Smith - Diddy (Abe Lincoln Dub)
John Smith - Diddy (Abe Lincoln's Super Awesome 1929 Mix)

Where would the "Remix" vs "Dub" go? Ideally it would be something like this:

%TPE1% = John Smith
%TIT2% = Diddy
%TPE4% = Abe Lincoln
%???% = Super Awesome 1929 Mix


2) Storing multiple mix artists?

John Smith - Diddy (Abe Lincoln & Mr. Waldo Remix)

Where would Mr. Waldo go? I don't want to put him into %TPE4% because then I won't be able to keep the artists separate, but I don't see a way to add a second %TPE4% value. Ideally it would be something like this:

%TPE1% = John Smith
%TIT2% = Diddy
%TPE4% = Abe Lincoln
%TPE4% = Mr. Waldo
%???% = Remix


3) Collaborations

John Smith vs. Abe Lincoln - Diddy (Mr. Waldo Remix)

How do I split up the original artist value? Ideally it would be something like this:

%TPE1% = John Smith
%TPE1% = Abe Lincoln
%TIT2% = Diddy
%TPE4% = Mr. Waldo
%???% = Remix


Does ID3v2.4 support multiple values of the same field? If not -- what is the correct solution to these conditions?

Thanks for your help.

Evgueni Naverniouk
www.naverniouk.com
(604) 720-8549
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Peter Siciliano | 1 May 2012 18:00
Favicon

ID3 - Is this community still active?

Hi ID3 Mailing list,

Is this community still active?

We are about to heavily utilize ID3v2.4 for a project currently in Alpha and would like to know if others still review and moderate this format.

I would also like to propose reviewing the v2.4 documentation to clean up some language now that time as dictated more clarity to some tag descriptions and irrelevance to others.

I will be pointing vendors and suppliers to this documentation in the coming months and would like it to be as simple as possible to understand how to use tags effectively.

++
Peter Siciliano | CTO
Beatport | Play with music
-----------------------------------------------
2399 Blake Street Suite 170
Denver, Colorado USA 80205
tel:    +1.720.932.9103
fax:   +1.720.932.9104
direct:  +1.303.565.2690

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Conrad J. Sabatier | 21 Apr 2012 11:55
Picon
Gravatar

id3v2 (the app): a question re: tag data formatting

I've recently begun experimenting with doing a little coding in C to
manipulate ID3 tags, and have come across something that surprised me.

Briefly, the code I've written so far just parses the ID3 tag and spits
out the raw data from each frame.  What's surprising to me is that the
actual data in many frames contains leading zeroes.  I'm just wondering
why this is.  I've used the id3v2 program to tag most of my files.

Can anyone offer any insight into this?  Is this an expected/required
behavior, or possibly a bug in the id3v2 implementation?

Thanks!

--

-- 
Conrad J. Sabatier
conrads <at> cox.net
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Pushkar Pradhan | 15 Mar 2012 03:22
Picon

Support for ID3 v2.4

Hello,
I was looking at id3v2 to generate ID3 v2.4 tags. I looked at the ldd output and saw that it uses libid3-3.8.so which only produces ID3 v2.3 tags and this library is not maintained anymore.
Any plans of supporting 2.4?
Does anyone know of a ID3 v2.4 library?
--
pushkar

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ben Allison | 6 Mar 2012 23:00
Favicon
Gravatar

Multiple Values proposal

I know we had this conversation a little while ago, but here's another
suggestion.  I'm not sure if we discussed this one or not.

Vorbis comments (as well as APEv2 and FLAC which uses a very similar
scheme) supports multiple values by having a key repeated more than once
in the tag.

Could we not do something similar with ID3v2?  If you want multiple
artists, for example, just create multiple TPE1 frames.

We could increment the versions to v2.31 and v2.41 to signify the change. 
The main questions are:
1) Would any major existing implementations completely fail or return a
parsing error when encountering duplicate frames
2) Would any major existing implementations do anything strange, like use
the last-encountered frame rather than the first-encountered frame, as the
value.

For a variety of reasons, this feels like a superior alternative to
NULL-delimited strings.

Thoughts?
-Ben Allison
Nullsoft, Inc.
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Moraru Lilian | 14 Jan 2012 16:32
Picon
Favicon

How about a new frame "Favorite song" or "Love it"

I am using the Clementine music player and there is a "Love" button, I've never used it until yesterday. I thought that it's time to start selecting songs from my 50 GB songs collection for my 8 GB iPod and I thought that the "Love" button should be just perfect for this job, tagging with "Love it" just the songs which are really great but when I pressed it, it was a Last.fm feature...
So, how about a new frame called something like "Love it", "Favorite song" or "I like it"? Sometimes you want to listen just for the songs that you love a lot.
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Steven B. Tuttle | 24 Dec 2011 16:13
Picon

Marry Christmas Everyone



--
Steven B. Tuttle
901.574.0059
USA
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Dan O'Neill | 15 Dec 2011 03:59
Favicon

Re: Contact information for Eric Kemp

Hi All,

Appreciate the feedback and support as always. Generally when I am approached regarding the history of tagging is related to an NPE [1] type of issue. I figure that if someone here has prior art references, good!

The story from Jud was a good read and therefore a nice outcome.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

Best to all,

dano

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-practicing_entity

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Steven Saffer | 28 Oct 2011 23:43

Problem with definitions of TPUB and TCOP, and the lack of a separate field for "Record Label"

Hi,

Please see below e-mail I sent to Dan O'Neill, who has requested I send it to the list.

There are two issues, namely with the definitions of the TCOP field and the TPUB field, but the more urgent issue is with the definition of the TPUB field:

Definition of the TPUB field as "Label or Publisher" is problematic. There needs to be a specific field for the label – see below for explanation.

Thanks,

Steven

Steven Saffer B.E.Sc (EE), MBA
President
Abbeywood Records
t: +1 416 441-9578
f: +1 416 391-2646
c: +1 416 301-0700
________________________

Dear Dan,

Thanks for the prompt reply. I'm pleased to be on the list, especially
since I have been involved in other standards groups, as a developer at
the audio company TC Electronic, and an executive at TC Applied
Technologies (http://tctechnologies.tc). Now running a record label, we
have noticed that many of our partners are now asking for tagged mp3s of
our catalog. I started digging into the spec as a result of uncovering
differences in how these fields have been interpreted by developers of
tagging apps, specifically MusicBrainz Picard and MP3Tag.

As relates to TPUB, the issues I am seeing seem to be as a result of the
very loose definition of the TPUB field ("either label OR publisher"), and
also as a result of the lack of specifics around the TCOP field. Picard
interprets and displays the TPUB field as the name of the label, whereas
MP3Tag (and other tagging apps) display it as "Publisher".

These differences will have a significant impact on the enforcing of
copyright and the payment of royalties to artists, labels and publishers,
specifically as relates to the reporting of usage to performing rights
(and other) societies. For example, when an MP3 is submitted to an
internet radio station that decides to use the included metadata to report
to Soundexchange (the organization that collects money on behalf of
featured performers), the label information is used. If the name of the
publisher is used, there is a risk that the label will not see these
royalties. There needs to be a separate field for the label name.

A distinction needs to be made between the sound recording copyright owner
(could be the same as the label but in case the content is licensed, that will not be
the case), and the copyright in the composition (the publisher), and
perhaps an additional field is necessary, as well as a clearer description
of what these fields should contain. Although the description in the spec
as relates to the TCOP field would seem to suggest that the name of the
sound recording copyright owner is included in this field, it is not
clearly defined and may be misunderstood by developers. Another source of
confusion is that it is not clear whether the application should prefix
the copyright field with the (C) symbol when displaying the information,
or the person tagging should include the (C) symbol. It is also unclear
whether the year should be included in the field itself when the recording
is tagged, or this field will be prefixed with the data in the 'year'
field when the metadata is displayed, or it will be displayed in the field
heading in the app.

As relates to the TPUB field, the label may be the same as the publisher,
but typically they are different. As we see broader adoption of the
standard and use of the metadata by the music industry, these are issues
that should be dealt with now.

Let me know if there is anything else you need, and if there are any
upcoming meetings where this issue might be discussed.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Steven

Steven Saffer B.E.Sc (EE), MBA
President
Abbeywood Records
t: +1 416 441-9578
f: +1 416 391-2646
c: +1 416 301-0700

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Steven B. Tuttle | 22 Sep 2011 19:24
Picon

ID3v2.4.0 Adding a "DISK" tag

Dear Sir or Mam
   Can we have a Disk Number added to the tag ?
Some Albums contain two or more disks such as "Pink Floyd The Wall" has two disks.
So there for can we have a Disk Number added to the Tag please.
1 being the default value because most albums contain 1 Disk


Thank You in advance for considering this request.

--
Steven B. Tuttle
901.574.0059 USA

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane