[X] Problem with multiple comment tags

I have a problem when I first write the tag "COMMENT CATALOG NUMBER", after the tag "COMMENT MUSICMATCH_MOOD" (can also be vice versa, doesn't matter).
In Mp3tag, both tags appear correct, but other software which read out the tags (i.e. FileTagSleuth) only show the first comment tag I've set. The 2nd is missing.

I would say that this not a comment field but a user-defined field that happens to feature the word comment.
So, if your other software cannot cope with user-defined fields, you will not have any luck.
You might want to have a look at the file with mp3diags to see if you have a COMM field or a TXXX field which indicates a user-defined field.

Edit: for field mappings you might want to have a look at the help:
http://help.mp3tag.de/main_tags.html

I prepared 2 testfiles which I attached here.

When you open them with mp3tag, they seem to look identical. But they aren't.

test.mp3 is created by tag&rename and the special comment tags are stored different. test2.mp3 i tagged with mp3tag trying to use the identical tags.

Possible to store the tags the same way with mp3tag as they are stored in test.mp3?

testfiles.zip (2.46 KB)

Have you checked the files with mp3diags?
That reveals that you have a priv atom in the file test.mp3. This frame seems to store the mood.
Mp3tag does not support priv atoms.
Otherwise, the comment fields are stored as COMM atoms.
So the failure to read or write priv atoms is no bug.

Using Mp3tag v2.69 I've copied the tags from your two test files into two new dummy test files.
Then I compared the binary content.

Mp3tag has copied all tag-fields, without the PRIV "Private frame", which is not supported by Mp3tag.

For my eyes, your first test file looks like if it has a second COMM frame, which is somewhat bad, because it misses the mark for the character encoding.
Mp3tag copied this second frame into correct fashion.

testfiles.v2.zip (2.89 KB)
DD.20150318.0901.CET

testfiles.v2.zip (2.89 KB)

Have you asked the developer(s) of the other software to investigate the issue, i.e., why they're not reading those comment frames?

Those fields are indeed comment fields. Every field starting with "COMMENT " that is stored in an ID3v2 tag uses the remainder of the field name as the comment description. In this case a COMM frame is created (atoms are the things that are stored in MP4 containers) where the description part of this frame is set to "CATALOG NUMBER".

This is not bad per se, since text encoding can also be set to 00 in ID3v2 frames where its then treated as ISO-8859-1.

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.