ISRC Vs Tunecore ID

[huejahfink]

I "undid" it by thumbing it back up again. No permanent scars

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by huejahfink

I "undid" it by thumbing it back up again. No permanent scars

Thanks!

[ksandvik]

Originally Posted by Jeff Price

@ksandvik

How can it be a standard if its not used by any digital music distributor, PRO, SoundExchange or publisher to track music sales?

But lets go back to the concept, you would like IFPI - parent organization to the RIAA and Music Canada, organizations that have been traditionally hostile to artists - to be in charge of creating a central database that issues ID tracking numbers to every artist in the world?

Well, the database part is not a bad idea, but I do not want IFPI in charge of it in any manner.

As a point in case, if the ISRC system works, how is it that signed artists have to audit labels to get accurate accounting information?

The answer, because no third party entity on the planet uses ISRCs to track sales.

The ISRC system clearly does not work. It needs to be replaced. And those that adhere to it are perpetuating a flawed system that works against the goal, not for it.

Jeff

OK, let' start a new international standard where the first letters are unique for each country, second pair is unique per label in the country and the last numbers are a combination of two-number year and up to 99999 releases per year. And the unique identifiers are handled by local registration authorities. OK?

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I love it, my finger missed the reply button on the iPad and hit the thumbs down button and it can't be undone.

Anyhow, do the ISRCs come up on files Apple encoded?

Some purchsed Apple iTunes plus AAC's come with the label followed by the ISRC code already added to the ID3 tag, although I've never seen it added to the correct field on an iTunes purchased album.

[walter88]

Old thread I know, but just to expand on what Table Of Tone has said about iTunes not using the ID3 ISRC field, it appears that at least some of the other retailers are not using the designated ISRC field either. Amazon and Google Music put the ISRC code in the files, but as with iTunes, not in the ISRC field. I had to open the files in a hex editor to even find the codes. How can this possibly be good for any sort of universal usage of ISRC in the future, and why should a ME add an ISRC to the ISRC field if nobody else does? (if the studio is even allowed to make the MP3 or AAC).. At least with DDP and CDR Master, everyone was restricted to the same fields, but there seems to be no standardized usage at all with files. There must be a reason why the retailers won't use the correct field, but I can't imagine what their reason is.

[Bob Olhsson]

Does anybody think these corporations really want to help artists get paid?

Yes, it's an uphill battle but the idea is for us to just give up which is exactly why we shouldn't!

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Does anybody think these corporations really want to help artists get paid?

Yes, it's an uphill battle but the idea is for us to just give up which is exactly why we shouldn't!

It is indeed an uphill battle but you are absolutely right because so many artists know nothing about the PPL or ISRC until I advise them to get a registrant code, prior to mastering.

We are the messengers these days for sure!

[Hoochie Mama]

Debbie downer here. Sorry, but these companies and their codes are totally useless.

Why? In terms of content makers/owners, it's because the majority of people in this world live outside the little box of rules these competitive organizations have created. We or they or us (majority of people in this world) wouldn't meet the mandatory qualifications required anyway, so we're talking to a wall here. Seriously. The "rules" only (intentionally) apply to certain regions (you know who you are) and only to those individuals that willingly submit to them. Even the stores don't mind them.. why should the consumer then? Whats more is that if you go to the east and/or south east, establish yourself, then try to get an ISRC or ID. Nope. Hell, try to even get some basic info. much less a personal response from either establishment! Good luck with your little codes pal. They make money off of us yet do absolutely nothing to enforce royalty payments to us, the content owners. Get real, and then we'll talk.

[Bob Olhsson]

Consumer? Follow the rules? We're talking about the simplest of ownership identification. I suppose it doesn't matter for hobbyists or folks who'd rather whine about the majors than get their business together.

Anybody seeking to actually earn a living from recordings is insane to not obtain a free id in many countries or pay $75 once for a lifetime id in the U.S.

[rogerbrain]

Originally Posted by Hoochie Mama

Debbie downer here. Sorry, but these companies and their codes are totally useless.

Why? In terms of content makers/owners, it's because the majority of people in this world live outside the little box of rules these competitive organizations have created. We or they or us (majority of people in this world) wouldn't meet the mandatory qualifications required anyway, so we're talking to a wall here. Seriously. The "rules" only (intentionally) apply to certain regions (you know who you are) and only to those individuals that willingly submit to them. Even the stores don't mind them.. why should the consumer then? Whats more is that if you go to the east and/or south east, establish yourself, then try to get an ISRC or ID. Nope. Hell, try to even get some basic info. much less a personal response from either establishment! Good luck with your little codes pal. They make money off of us yet do absolutely nothing to enforce royalty payments to us, the content owners. Get real, and then we'll talk.

wow, I thought I knew who I was ... not sure now

[pjessop]

Hi, Paul Jessop here. I appear a long way up the thread and have been away enjoying the peace and quiet. I run the International ISRC Agency (as well as the US Agency). I hope this means I know how these systems work, what they can do and what they cannot do.

I was asked to comment on ISRC not appearing in MP3s as ID3 tags even though there is now a mechanism to carry an ISRC in a BWAV file (thanks to the great work by Barry Grint at MPG). I think these address two different objectives.

The master BWAV file carries the assigned ISRC to make sure that it is not used in the wrong project by mistake and that the correct ISRC is delivered with the recording when it is sent to online services etc.

The consumer MP3 (and AAC etc) has already gone through these quality assurance processes and while it might be useful for a media player to have access to the track's ISRC to look up more information in services like Discogs, it's not a showstopper if it doesn't. The important thing is that the ISRC was delivered (in an out of band electronic message) to the online service and will be reported back to the owner (direct or via a distributor) so that the owner knows what tracks sold (or were streamed) and in what quantity so it can fulfil its own obligations to pay artists etc. That does not depend on the ISRC being in the coded music file the consumer received.

There is one "use case" I am aware of. When micro-webcasters purchase track for streaming from an online service they need to be able to find the ISRC if they are to report it to the licensor. For that reason in particular I am trying to get the online services to include the ISRC in downloads. I'm not sure that they are particularly motivated though.

Much water has passed under the bridge since I was last here. We have been working very hard to create a registry for ISRCs. This won't distribute royalties or enforce payment from bad actors, but it will mean that when you get a royalty statement quoting a particular track with its ISRC, you can be sure that both you and the reporting entity are referring to the same track.

As always I'm happy to assist with queries either here or via the isrc@ifpi.org mailbox.

Paul

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by pjessop

...The master BWAV file carries the assigned ISRC to make sure that it is not used in the wrong project by mistake and that the correct ISRC is delivered with the recording when it is sent to online services etc.

Paul, how do we encode an ISRC in a master BWAV file? I'm not aware of any software that can read or write this meta-data.

[walter88]

Originally Posted by pjessop

The consumer MP3 (and AAC etc) has already gone through these quality assurance processes and while it might be useful for a media player to have access to the track's ISRC to look up more information in services like Discogs, it's not a showstopper if it doesn't.

Thanks for the explanation Paul. I'll quit complaining about the empty ISRC field. Worst case you can open the file in a hex editor, search for "isrc", and find the code, because it is in there in all the cases I tried (Amazon, Google, and iTunes), even though it's not in the right field. But I still don't understand why they can't put it in the right field if they've got the code (which they do, because they're putting it elsewhere in the file).

[walter88]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Paul, how do we encode an ISRC in a master BWAV file? I'm not aware of any software that can read or write this meta-data.

Bob, I've just tried BWFMetaEdit, and it does appear to have an ISRC field, which if saved, is readable correctly by Media Monkey. Not sure if this is the correct space defined by EBU, but maybe somebody else could confirm that. The strange thing is the program hasn't been updated since 2-24-12, which means this would have been available for over a year, and there's no mention of ISRC in their changelog.

[pjessop]

Bob: I've made an enquiry to the people who did the work on this and will report back.

Walter88: The "right" place for an ISRC in an MP3 is the in the "TSRC" tag. Is that not where you have found it? It's a while since I did any digging on test purchases with a hex editor!

[jamesp]

Originally Posted by pjessop

The consumer MP3 (and AAC etc) has already gone through these quality assurance processes and while it might be useful for a media player to have access to the track's ISRC to look up more information in services like Discogs, it's not a showstopper if it doesn't.

Judging from what I hear on BBC national radio in the UK, some of those consumer files are being used for things that could generate substantial income for the performers/writers so I think that it is misguided to ignore the issue in consumer files. I'm sure that these files are also used extensively on smaller stations and internet radio.

James.

[walter88]

Originally Posted by pjessop

Walter88: The "right" place for an ISRC in an MP3 is the in the "TSRC" tag. Is that not where you have found it? It's a while since I did any digging on test purchases with a hex editor!

Paul:
Yes that was my original complaint: The ISRC codes are in the MP3 and AAC files, but not in the correct field. But it just occurred to me why that might be (this is just speculation, but it makes sense to me): The record companies or retailers have probably been putting the codes in the files all along, since before the ISRC tag was added to ID3. Because they originally didn't have an ISRC field to put it in, they put it in their own filespace or custom field, and that practice has continued to this day. That's my guess anyway.

They might just need a little encouragement to change over their systems to put the code in the real ISRC field.

Regarding the hex editor, it's actually pretty easy to see the ISRC code with a hex editor (like HxD). Just make a copy of the AAC or MP3 file, open the copy in HxD, and search for ISRC. The space they've put the ISRC code in is always near the word ISRC, like ClientID="isrc" in the case of Amazon and Google. For iTunes AAC files, I can't tell what field is being used, but the ISRC code is in there, near the word ISRC.

[PapiBlack]

I'm doing some research on distribution and was leaning toward Tunecore but this thread left a pretty bad taste in my mouth. Maybe it's because of things like this the company replaced the CEO.

In light of this thread, which service would you guys recommend to clients?

Is there any truth to the claim that some services might pay differently for identical sales/spins?