On Nov 8, 2009, at 8:23 AM, Phil Meyer wrote: >>> (And, yeah, I agree with you... id3 tags in flacs is just plain >>> strange.) >> >> I would tend to agree but it's not that strange if you think about >> the >> history of FLAC. FLAC did not support a way to embed images until >> version 1.1.3 (Nov 2006), so before that your only option if you >> wanted to embed cover art was to use ID3 tags. So that may be why >> many people have ID3 tags in their FLAC files. >> > I wasn't aware of this embedded artwork issue. Has SbS always read > FLAC+ID3 tags then?
Yeah I think it always has. > I just fell foul of this new behaviour again, BTW. I was playing a > FLAC song, looked at Song Info page, and it reported: > > Comment: Track 4 / Track 4 / Track 4 / Track 4 > > I opened Mp3Tag for this file, and there wasn't a comment tag. Then > I realised there were id3 tags present too, so I deleted them. I > couldn't see the id3 tags, as most editors only show the FLAC tags. > I think when I ripped this album, EAC was probably writing the track > number to comment tags. Not sure why the scanner would have read > the comment tag four times though. You must have the same comment 4 times, maybe 3 in ID3v2 and 1 in ID3v1. Send me the file if you think it might be a bug. I do want to fix the case where the same comment is in ID3v2 and ID3v1 and not duplicate it, but having duplicate ID3v2 comments is not something that should be fixed. _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
