Tag problem in Tag & Rename after Replay Gain

[Tigerman]

I'm collecting the Whitburn collection and have many files tagged using Tag & Rename 3.3.5 with %4_%6[%co] - %1 - %2 [%t] as mask.
This results in (i.e.) 1972_218[45] - Grass Roots, The - Glory Bound [2.35].flac
I have the source (in this case a 45 single) in the conductor tag.

I used DBpoweramp 2.2 beta to add replay gain to my flac-files. After adding the Replay Gain value the conductor tag in Tag & Rename is empty while it's still filled in DBpoweramp (rightclick edit ID-tag).
When I add the conductor tag again in T&R, then it has a the same value twice when I use rightclick Edit ID-tag.

I don't know which (DBpoweramp or T&R 3.3.5) has a small bug, but since the author of T&R never responded to my questions or remarks I try here first

Edit: just noticed that the same happens with the comments

[Spoon]

For FLAC comments are stored internally as Description, conductor is stored as Performer, these are correct for FLAC, it looks like T&R have not read the flac tagging specs.

[Tigerman]

Hello Spoon,

Thank you for the quick answer, but I don't comprehend your answer.

Is the conductor tag moved to performer tag by the Replay Gain DSP of DBpoweramp (and comment to description)?

If I use DBpoweramp to convert an ape-file to flac all the tags stay intact (also in T&R). So why is Replay Gain moving things?

I also downloaded and tried a few other taggers (mp3tag 2.38 from mp3tag.de, mp3tag 5 from Maniactools and Mediamonkey). None of them can read the comment tag made by DBpoweramp (don't know if the conductor tag can be read because most of them don't see that one).
With all three the comments made by T&R are visable and disappear after the addition of Replay Gain by DBpoweramp.

Can you please elaborate?

[LtData]

See here for further explanation of the "Performer" and "Description": http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?t=12591

[Tigerman]

I believe you when you say that you are following the specs but...

I've tried Foobar, Winamp, MP3tag 2.38, MP3 tag 5, MediaMonkey, T&R. They all have a tag called "comment", which is the same in every single one of them. According the posting LtData pointed to, I should ask all those developers why they are pointing to the wrong field. That's something somebody else has to do.
I'm not Don Quichote

I also discovered that I was wrong that only the Replay Gain was changing the tags. It's DBpoweramp V12's flac codec (I'm sure you already knew that but I didn't ).
Because it's sticking to the spec's (maybe a bit to rigid??), it's pretty useless to me.
I went back to v11.5. That one is not messing with my tags and transforms the ape-comment and ape-conductor to flac-comment and flac-conductor respectively.

[Spoon]

In R11.5 we have always mapped comment to description in flac, since the first flac encoder.

It is a question of mapping and standards, take ape the year is stored as YEAR, yet in flac it is DATE, now the aforementioned programs will map that correctly, so why not the others?

[Tigerman]

Hello Spoon,

In R11.5 we have always mapped comment to description in flac, since the first flac encoder.

Don't know what the difference is but after a conversion from ape to flac by DBP 11.5, the other programs can read the comment and conductor tag
They can't after using DBP 12.2 with latest flac encoder.

It is a question of mapping and standards, take ape the year is stored as YEAR, yet in flac it is DATE, now the aforementioned programs will map that correctly, so why not the others?

You're right: they should! But they don't! And because they all (at least I couldn't find a player or Tagger that does it correctly) map comment to comment why go against the flow. It makes DBpoweramp incompatible with all others.

[LtData]

I think Spoon will always go with the standards instead of going with how other programs do things. For comparisons sake of what can result from this, see IE and web standards.

[Spoon]

There is another one:

ORGANIZATION
Name of the organization producing the track (i.e. the 'record label')

foobar will write out 'label' instead. I mentioned this to peter about 1 year ago, he said he would fix hte mappings, but fb no longer seems to be developed.

There is another current thread asking why we are storing multiple artists as:

ARTIST=artist1
ARTIST=artist2

becuse that is the standard, media monkey will not read the 2nd artist...

[Tigerman]

It seems that most other developers can't read then.
I'll send an email to the T&R develloper but I'm afraid it won't help much. Seems I'll have to stick with DBP 11.5

Remains just one question:

In R11.5 we have always mapped comment to description in flac, since the first flac encoder.

Do you know why the comment tag, written by DBP 11.5, can be read by Winamp and T&R and those written by DBP 12.2 cannot?

[Spoon]

Open notepad and drop a flac file crated by both program versions onto it, flac tags are at the front of the file and you should be able to manually read the tags, it should both be description=

[Tigerman]

Hello Spoon,

Converted an ape-file:

With DBP11.5 with flac codec 5.3 it reads:

fLaC "  Ü e
Ä@ð OqH¼²Ï—A*blooper*<Žmâ�ßÚ”

reference libFLAC 1.1.2 20050205
Date=1957 Artist=Bill Hayes Genre=Whitburn Pop Title=Wringle Wrangle Comment=Cruiser 45 Rip Album=ABC-Paramount 45-9785 TrackNumber=227 ENSEMBLE=Bill Hayes ENCODEDBY=Cruiser CONDUCTOR=45� '

With DBP12.1 with Flac release 7 it reads:

fLaC "  ¾ t
Ä@ð OqH¼²Ï—A*blooper*<Žmâ�ßÚ”
 reference libFLAC 1.1.4 20070213
Date=1957 Artist=Bill Hayes Genre=Whitburn Pop Title=Wringle Wrangle Description=Cruiser 45 Rip Album=ABC-Paramount 45-9785 TRACKNUMBER=227 ENSEMBLE=Bill Hayes ENCODEDBY=Cruiser Performer=45� *blooper*

[Tigerman]

I think we have to put the 'blame' at Xiph.org too. http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html


Under Implications

Individual 'vendors' may use non-standard field names within reason.

Nice standard....

[Tigerman]

In R11.5 we have always mapped comment to description in flac, since the first flac encoder.

Well it seems you are not planning to explain why 11.5 are leaving the comment- and conductor tag alone although you claim it maps comment to description.

Sure would like to know why you changed it...

Maybe it's an idea to leave the tags and field names as is when converting and copy them to the standard? It uses a bit more padding, but it leaves the comments visible in other music players and most taggers.

[Spoon]

Next update we will add options.