# ID3v2.3/ID3v2.4 tag-size differences/derivation

**URL:** https://community.mp3tag.de/t/id3v2-3-id3v2-4-tag-size-differences-derivation/46681
**Category:** Support
**Created:** [October 9, 2019, 1:42pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/id3v2-3-id3v2-4-tag-size-differences-derivation/46681 "2019-10-09T13:42:23Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![DerpGuy](https://community.mp3tag.de/user_avatar/community.mp3tag.de/derpguy/32/6884_2.png) [@DerpGuy](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/DerpGuy)
#### Post date: [October 9, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/id3v2-3-id3v2-4-tag-size-differences-derivation/46681/3 "2019-10-09T17:33:23Z")

</div>

I've read about it there: [Anzeige der Tag-Größe (%\_tag\_size%)](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/anzeige-der-tag-grosse-tag-size/3622)  
According to this, mp3-files with existing tags that should be preserved need to be rewritten as a whole to remove the padding/unnecessary space.  
Yet my described behaviour only relates to 'cleared' mp3-files _without_ any tag-data included, so the tag-container will be created and written 'from scratch'. If 'padding' would be the cause, why not avoid it for the initial tag-creation process (as far as possible)?

Thus is it feasible to tell the program to create the ID3v2.3-tag with only the string-data from the first filled tag-field and add every other remaining tag-data afterwards?

---

_[View the full topic](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/id3v2-3-id3v2-4-tag-size-differences-derivation/46681)._