Is it worthwhile to add ISRCs to recordings on a CD, or is this considered a low importance edit and unnecessary? This would spawn 10 to 20 separate edits per CD.
I don’t think the number of edits really matters. Adding performers to recordings creates even more edits and is worthwhile.
I don’t bother adding ISRCs from CDs because I don’t know any easy way to do it from a TOC/CUE or rip log file, and because I think I read somewhere that there isn’t much error correction so the ISRCs from a CD are often incorrect. I might be wrong about the error part though.
1 Like
I spend a lot of time adding streaming re-releases of CDs. Often, one of the most time-consuming steps is tracking down the CD version in MB, particularly when it has a different barcode. ISRCs make that much easier. Likewise for merging recordings from compilations.
Whether it’s worth your time is another question.
2 Likes
I pretty much gave up on adding ISRCs. I was told several years ago that there’s a lot of inconsistency and error in ISRCs being applied, which results in incorrect ISRCs, or multiple ISRCs on the same recording, etc. All that error just makes it useless, as far as I’m concerned.
1 Like
Alright, I will add them to one album and see how it goes. Yes, they can sometimes be bogus, taken from the previous track or with erroneous letters. I wonder if EAC sampled them from the very start of a track instead of the middle, and didn’t compare multiple readings.
I’ve not figured out realationships. I do extensive tagging in my collection, but doing it inside a database with a web interface is intimidating and time consuming.
I do add them from my CDs. I have always used EAC cuesheet + kepstin’s magicisrc userscript (https://magicisrc.kepstin.ca/). BTW, I might have been lucky with my drives but I have used several different ones over the years and never spotted any strange ISRC readings other than all zeros which are obvioulsy false.
4 Likes
ISRC are stored on an entirely separate subcode.
3 Likes
Also see Python ISRCSubmit
5 Likes
But the subcode is spread throughout the entire data area and also contains data items related to time position, pre-emphasis and data mode. You could read from any point in it.
What if there are multiple ISRCs for a recording? Often a WEB release will get new ISRCs when reissuing old content, and the primary ISRC is unknown.
It can also be tricky to say of two tracks are really the same recording without a time consuming comparison. It can be a new recording, new mix, include vocals or not.
It is true that ISRCs are not applied flawlessly and I wouldn’t rely on ISRC alone to identify a recording. But to give that some context: neither are acoustIDs or even the track title for that matter. I consider ISRCs a useful tool, to be used in combination with other lines of evidence.
4 Likes
Then there are multiple ISRCs for that recording 
It can happen on CD releases as well. Especially with compilations labels sometimes don’t bother getting the proper ISRCs for each recording and just assign new ones. Especially if a compilation with previously released recordings contains ISRCs with consecutive numbers it’s clear they just assigned new ones.
To be fair, that’s not always happening. They can also get the original ISRC. But yes, as written before labels or artists sometimes just don’t care.
3 Likes
In my experience, the ISRC is often more useful than the track title. To be fair, the track title alone is almost useless in classical music.
3 Likes
IMO it’s very important and useful.
Please try to submit them all at once, and not track by track. With python isrcsubmit, for instance.
And please come back and add an edit note telling from which release you extracted them.
1 Like
You can paste the whole cue sheet here and this tool will parse ISRCs for you. Or any kind of text data where you have ISRCs listed line by line for this matter
4 Likes
What are the guidelines for referencing an existing recording on another album (compilation) as opposed to creating a new recording when adding an album? An existing recording often already has metadata about writers. Adding a work relationship to show writers to new, duplicate recordings is a lot of work.
I have uncertainty about the recordings actually being identical without performing a thorough comparison. Do we go strictly by ISRC, which can be assigned new on a reissue?
ISRCs are hard to trust on compilations. Often find that new ones are issued for the compilation, or the people putting the compilation swap album and single ISRCs as they are more focused on the payments than the actual recording.
An AcoustID can be a little more reliable for merging recordings. Especially if the target is checked as often different compilations use the same versions of a recording.
Linking Works can be sped up with the Guess Works script. It is kinda 80% accurate and needs checking, but saves a lot of time.
Copying other recording credits can also be done with scripts. Though that is much more of a manual process as there is a lot to check.
3 Likes
You shouldn’t create duplicate recordings, but only those that are a different mix or edit.
A different ISRC suggests the possibility of a different recording, but this is by no means certain. More often, only the ISRC is different, not the recording itself. A remastered recording should have a different ISRC, but according to MB guidelines, it is still the same recording.
If you create new recordings when adding a new release, you should try to merge them afterwards to existing recordings and recording-work relationships will be automatically assigned to your release.
2 Likes
Oh really? If one copy was loud and distorted and another was nominal level, still the same recording? Is a surround mix a different recording or not?
What I’m doing now actually requires listening to tell because there are different mixes, vocals or not.
A surround mix is a different mix, thus a different recording.
Usually, a new mix is ​​advertised as such, and a different number of channels definitely constitutes a different mix and a different MB recording..
1 Like