# Multiple genres

**URL:** https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791
**Category:** General Discussion
**Created:** [September 10, 2010, 5:11pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791 "2010-09-10T17:11:27Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![gautxori\_yuyu](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@gautxori\_yuyu](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/gautxori_yuyu)
#### Post date: [September 10, 2010, 5:11pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791/1 "2010-09-10T17:11:27Z")

</div>

Why is it that MP3Tag defines several genres as different TCON tags?

ID3v2.3 states clearly that several genres should be defined into a unique TCON tag, starting the field definition with a '(', and separating each genre with parenthesis, such as '(Pop)(Rock)'...

TFYH.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![ptrk.mj](https://community.mp3tag.de/user_avatar/community.mp3tag.de/ptrk.mj/32/300_2.png) [@ptrk.mj](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ptrk.mj)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2010, 5:03pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791/2 "2010-09-11T17:03:43Z")

</div>

It's one of several areas where Mp3tag does not follow strictly the specification by [ID3.org](http://ID3.org).

I doubt anybody follows that particular one you mentioned.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![gautxori\_yuyu](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/g/ebca7d/32.png) [@gautxori\_yuyu](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/gautxori_yuyu)
#### Post date: [September 12, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791/3 "2010-09-12T15:38:47Z")

</div>

So? Should we say MP3Tag is ID3v2.3 compliant? ![:angry:](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/1X/ebadaff04ae073d3d1cb3e2f4c6acf132380e5a5.gif ":angry:")

What i mentioned is what ID3 states in rev. 2.3. And, "from time to time", foobar2000 does keep it (it depends on how "non-conformantly" the ID3 tags were written).

Making MP3Tag an strict ID3-compliant tagger would be a big step for human race. Perhaps others would try to follow ![<_<](https://community.mp3tag.de/uploads/default/original/1X/5996dbb474c88b8f9fc49f09dc3858d081055a2d.gif "<\_<")

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![ptrk.mj](https://community.mp3tag.de/user_avatar/community.mp3tag.de/ptrk.mj/32/300_2.png) [@ptrk.mj](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/ptrk.mj)
#### Post date: [September 12, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791/4 "2010-09-12T16:35:50Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> What i mentioned is what ID3 states in rev. 2.3

Yes, I know what you're referring.

> [@](#):
>
> And, "from time to time", foobar2000 does keep it (it depends on how "non-conformantly" the ID3 tags were written)

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. You mean that when foobar is set to "ID3v2 writer compatibilty mode" (i.e. writing ID3v2.3 tags instead of -2.4) it writes TCON frame in a way specified in official guideline - [ID3v2.3.0](http://www.id3.org/id3v2.3.0#head-05145d86196104464db40d63035e402ee3c504e7)? I doubt it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![egd](https://community.mp3tag.de/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/e/3da27b/32.png) [@egd](https://community.mp3tag.de/u/egd)
#### Post date: [September 15, 2010, 1:49am UTC](https://community.mp3tag.de/t/multiple-genres/10791/5 "2010-09-15T01:49:06Z")

</div>

> [@gautxori\_yuyu](#):
>
> Making MP3Tag an strict ID3-compliant tagger would be a big step for human race.

Yep, I can just see the social benefits flowing from that single change. Humanity will be freed of all its ills...