Skip to main content
Topic: ID3v2 tags (Read 11116 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ID3v2 tags

Reply #25
it seems that fb0.9 is ignoring the ORIGALBUM field too 
So my final words to this: 0.9 should support EVERY ID3v2 field supported in 0.83

sometimes i am getting even negative tracknumbers (like -49, -50, etc.), while every other program shows them correctly. but i am still somehow prevented to switch back to the good old 0.83. Hope these issues will be fixed in 0.91 soon...

ID3v2 tags

Reply #26
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but does this mean that 0.9 doesnt display any "custom" tag fields done in id3v2.3? If I for instane write MYRANDOMTAG=something, into an id3-tag in 0.83 it won't be read by 0.9?

ID3v2 tags

Reply #27
i don't know what do you exactly mean by 'custom field', but for example the 'PUBLISHER' and 'BAND' fields are supported (are they 'custom' ?), both written in v2.3, while the 'ORIGALBUM' and 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS' are not (v2.3).

On the other hand the 'LYRICS' field works fine, unfortunately my favourite tagger (MediaTagger - mediatagger.zde.cz, the  project seems to be discontuniued  ) writes into 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS', and a lot of my mp3s burned on cd's have the lyrics stored unsynced

ID3v2 tags

Reply #28
i don't know what do you exactly mean by 'custom field', but for example the 'PUBLISHER' and 'BAND' fields are supported (are they 'custom' ?), both written in v2.3, while the 'ORIGALBUM' and 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS' are not (v2.3).

On the other hand the 'LYRICS' field works fine, unfortunately my favourite tagger (MediaTagger - mediatagger.zde.cz, the  project seems to be discontuniued  ) writes into 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS', and a lot of my mp3s burned on cd's have the lyrics stored unsynced


By Cusomt i mean that you can add any field you want to the tag in 0.83, calling the field whatever you want, so I wondered of theese custom-fields are read by 0.9

ID3v2 tags

Reply #29
such custom fields are problematic with a lot of other programs too, so i doubt foobar will support them perfectly, although it's possible, i haven't tried it

btw. is the 'LYRICS' field supported by f2k an ID3 standard? i just took a look into the v2.4 spec, and there were two kind of lyrics fields: synced and unsynced
So is this the case: foobar supports a custom, non-standard field 'LYRICS', but doesn't the standard 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS' ?

i just experienced that the unsycned field is where the taggers usually write lyrics to, so i don't see a reason why to ignore it in foo and force people to store they lyrics in an other, not widely supported way

ID3v2 tags

Reply #30
Have a look there for the official tags http://www.id3.org/id3v2.4.0-frames.txt read point 4
I'm not sure they are all supported by foobar but the dev seem quite picky about being standard compliant (no offense meant), so I guess they are.

ID3v2 tags

Reply #31
such custom fields are problematic with a lot of other programs too, so i doubt foobar will support them perfectly, although it's possible, i haven't tried it

btw. is the 'LYRICS' field supported by f2k an ID3 standard? i just took a look into the v2.4 spec, and there were two kind of lyrics fields: synced and unsynced
So is this the case: foobar supports a custom, non-standard field 'LYRICS', but doesn't the standard 'UNSYNCEDLYRICS' ?

i just experienced that the unsycned field is where the taggers usually write lyrics to, so i don't see a reason why to ignore it in foo and force people to store they lyrics in an other, not widely supported way


Well, 0.83 seem to support any custom fields(?) so hopefully .9 does to, even if its id3v2.3

ID3v2 tags

Reply #32
Custom ID3v2 fields are TXXX frames and foobar 0.9 also supports these.


ID3v2 tags

Reply #34
Just realized that UNSYNCEDLYRICS are back in v0.9.1  . Hail to the Great One who put this back !!!
Now foobar v0.9 seems to give me the same as 0.8.3 did (although i haven't tested everything yet  )
tibike's very happy now...

ID3v2 tags

Reply #35
Yeah, but still no support for example INVOLVEDPEOPLE.

ID3v2 tags

Reply #36
i could only check fields that my mp3's contain, so it's possible that some of them are still missing. but now at least there's a hope that the developers (Peter) are listening to our complains and what is not working today can work tomorrow.
Now as i see these fields were not left out intentionally but maybe because their implemetation takes more work than it is worth (for the developers). but i may be wrong on this 

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019