Beta opens 15 Oct Join
Blog

Rights and registration11 min read

ISRC vs ISWC vs IPI: codes for alts, instrumentals and 30/60 edits

ISRC vs ISWC vs IPI for composers: which code each alt mix, instrumental, 30/60 cutdown and stem needs, who issues them, and how to get your own.

By Daniel Angelucci, composer and founder of DADAAUDIO

Short answer: every version you actually release or deliver — the instrumental, the alt mix, the 30 and the 60, the sting — is a separate recording and normally gets its own ISRC. The song or cue underneath stays one musical work, so it usually keeps one ISWC, and the versions go on that registration as alternate titles. Your IPI never changes from version to version, because it identifies you, not the music.

That's the rule of thumb. The rest of this article is about where it comes from, where it bends, and how to get each code in the first place.

ISRC vs ISWC vs IPI: three codes, three different things

The confusion usually comes from treating them as three flavours of the same thing. They aren't. Each one points at a different object.

Code What it identifies Who issues it Looks like
ISRC (International Standard Recording Code) One specific sound recording (or music video) The rights owner of the recording, using a prefix from their national ISRC agency, or a distributor on their behalf GB-ABC-26-00012 (12 characters)
ISWC (International Standard Musical Work Code) One musical work — the composition, music with or without lyrics Your society (the "registration agency") when you register the work; held centrally by CISAC T-034.524.680-1
IPI (Interested Party Information) A person or company with a share in works — writer, composer, arranger, publisher Your society when you join; the database is run by SUISA for CISAC 11 digits

The IFPI's own rules say it plainly: an ISRC is "not used to identify compositions or lyrics", nor products like a CD or an MP3. And iswc.org says the reverse: an ISWC "will not identify recordings, sheet music or any other type of performance". So a single song can easily carry one ISWC and a dozen ISRCs, and that is exactly how the system is meant to work.

The ISRC rule: new creative input, new code

The ISRC Handbook (4th edition, 2021) puts the key principle like this: if a recording differs from another "because of different creative input", it needs a new ISRC. The IFPI's guidance page adds that "each distinct recording should be assigned its own unique ISRC", and lists different mixes and edits, and versions with a different playing time, as material changes.

Applied to a typical sync or library delivery, the handbook's examples give you clear answers:

  • Alt mixes and remixes — new ISRC. "Different versions or recordings or mixes require different ISRCs."
  • Instrumentals — new ISRC. A version "where the vocal (or other element) has been suppressed" gets its own code if it's intended for release.
  • 30s, 60s and other cutdowns — new ISRC. Where a recording "has been edited to remove or add sections such as verses or choruses", a new code is assigned.
  • Extended versions — new ISRC.
  • Underscore, bed or "no melody" mixes — new ISRC, by the same logic as instrumentals: elements have been taken out on purpose.
  • Stems you deliver or release on their own — their own ISRC. Stems made only as part of production, never released separately, don't get one. The handbook also notes that stems provided for the film sound process "might themselves need" ISRCs.

And the cases where you keep the same ISRC:

  • The same recording as WAV, MP3 or AAC, or in high resolution. The ISRC identifies the recording, not the file.
  • The same recording on a compilation, a different platform or in a different country, or after it changes hands. Ownership changes don't change the code.
  • A length change with no creative input — a different fade, say — where the difference is under 10 seconds. Over 10 seconds, it's a new ISRC.
  • A remaster that only applies whole-track processing (level, EQ, compression, de-noising applied uniformly). A remaster with real creative input gets a new code.

One exception worth knowing: for short clips used for promotion, the handbook lets the owner skip separate ISRCs if the metadata makes it unambiguous which full recording each clip comes from. That's aimed at previews and ringtones, though. A 30-second edit you deliver for broadcast is a version in its own right.

The ISWC rule: one work, many versions — usually

On the composition side, the logic is different. A 30-second edit of your cue doesn't create a new piece of music: same melody, same writers, same splits. So in practice the societies treat the versions as one work, and the version names become alternate titles.

Here's how two of the biggest societies put it:

  • ASCAP (Registering your music): if the writers, publishers and share percentages stay the same, "there is no need to register different versions of your songs. They will all be considered the same work for payment purposes." If the versions are known by different titles, you can add those as alternate titles to the existing registration. If a version does have different writers or splits, register it as a separate work with a title that tells it apart.
  • PRS for Music (What is an alternative title?): you can add an alternative title "when the interested parties, share splits and underlying musical work are the same". Remixes can go on as alternative titles too, as long as the parties and splits don't change; if they do, "you must register it as a separate work".

BMI, SOCAN, GEMA, SACEM, SIAE and the other societies all have their own forms and wording, so check your own society's help pages. The principle — same writers and same splits means same work — is the common thread.

What library composers actually type

A MusicLibraryReport thread shows the convention a lot of library writers use: the main title, then alternate titles with a suffix for each version, like "TITLE 30", "TITLE 60", "TITLE BED" and "TITLE STING". It's not an official format, but it's readable, consistent and easy to match against a cue sheet. Whatever you choose, use the same suffixes across your whole catalogue.

When a version becomes a separate work

There are real cases where a "version" is a new work with its own ISWC. The ISWC FAQ says musical arrangements, lyric adaptations and translations "must receive their own unique ISWC numbers", linked back to the original in the metadata. The eligible types it lists include "instrumental version of a work with associated lyrics" and an individual cue within a soundtrack.

In plain terms, think about a separate registration when:

  • someone new has a writing share — an arranger, a remixer with points on the publishing, a lyricist for a new vocal version;
  • the splits change between versions;
  • the "edit" has become different music: a new section written for the cutdown, a new melody, a translated lyric.

Practice varies between societies and between publishers, so when in doubt, ask your society or your publisher before registering. And if a library already registers your work, coordinate with them so the work isn't registered twice.

IPI: the code that never changes

Your IPI identifies you as a writer (and your publishing company, if you have one, gets its own). According to CISAC, the IPI system is administered by SUISA, the Swiss society, under CISAC and BIEM standards. You don't apply for an IPI separately: your society assigns it when you join. ASCAP says this typically takes two to three weeks.

IPIs matter more than they seem. ISWCs are only allocated once the work has complete metadata, including "the IPI Name Numbers and Roles of all creators". A co-writer registered without an IPI is one of the most common reasons a work sits without an ISWC. Older IPIs were nine digits; the standard is now 11, so pad old ones with leading zeros.

How to get each code (US, UK and Europe)

ISRC

You have two routes:

  1. Through your distributor. Most distributors generate ISRCs when you upload, and let you enter your own instead. Ditto, for example, generates them for free and lets you reuse existing codes when you move a release. The catch: those codes come from the distributor's prefix, and you only get them for what you release through that distributor. That rarely includes your cutdowns and stems.
  2. Your own prefix. You get a registrant code (prefix) from your country's ISRC agency and assign codes yourself:
    • US: the US ISRC Agency issues a "Rights Owner Prefix" for a one-time $95 administrative fee, with no further costs after that.
    • UK: PPL is the agency. You request the code when you register as a recording rightsholder member, or pick the "ISRC only" option if you don't want to join for royalty collection.
    • EU and elsewhere: each country has its own agency. The IFPI's Get an ISRC Prefix page sends you to the right one when you pick your territory.

The IFPI notes that a prefix "requires careful following of the ISRC rules and record keeping". It's worth it once you deliver versions outside a distributor: libraries, music supervisors, trailer houses. With your own prefix, every alt and cutdown can have a code before it leaves your studio. The handbook asks you to assign the code once the recording is finished and you've decided to release or deliver it, and to keep each code's details (title, version, duration, artist) next to it.

ISWC

You can't make one yourself. The ISWC rules say creators and publishers may not allocate their own; for new works, "no steps are necessary": the code is assigned when your society registers the work. Publishers can ask their society for access to the ISWC Allocation Service to get codes earlier. The same applies in every country: ASCAP or BMI in the US, PRS in the UK, GEMA, SACEM, SIAE and so on in Europe.

IPI

Join a performing rights society as a writer (and as a publisher, if you run your own publishing). The IPI comes with the membership.

Common mistakes

  • One ISRC on every version. It's the most common error, and it means a 30-second edit's broadcast or stream gets matched to the full mix, or not at all. Each delivered version needs its own.
  • Assigning ISRCs to recordings you don't own. The IFPI says a registrant "should not assign ISRCs to recordings owned by another party". If a library owns the master, the ISRCs are theirs to assign.
  • Re-coding a recording that already has an ISRC. If a recording already has a code, it keeps it, whatever the release or distributor. Two codes on one recording split its history in two. This is why moving distributors or re-releasing should always reuse the existing codes.
  • Reusing a library's ISRCs elsewhere. If a library assigned codes to your recordings, those codes stay with that recording. In a June 2026 thread, the advice was not to reuse them without the library's agreement, and to give new mixes fresh codes with a clear version title (for example "2026 Mix"). Check what your contract says about who owns which recording.
  • Duplicate ISWCs for one composition. Composers report libraries registering each edit as its own work, with its own ISWC (one such question from June 2026 is still unanswered). If the writers and splits are the same, that goes against what ASCAP and PRS advise. Since the 2020 modernisation, iswc.org says societies can merge ISWCs that were assigned in error, so raise it with the library and your society rather than registering the same work yet again.
  • Missing IPIs on co-writers. No complete IPIs, no ISWC.
  • Version names that don't match. If the file says "Cue 14 Alt", the cue sheet says "Cue 14 (No Drums)" and the society knows it as "Cue 14 Underscore", matching is harder than it needs to be. Pick one naming scheme and use it everywhere.

Which code goes on which version

The free Which code goes on which version table (PDF and spreadsheet) puts all of this on one page: every common version type — full mix, alt mix, instrumental, underscore, 60, 30, 15, sting, stems, remaster, re-encode — with whether it needs a new ISRC, whether it stays on the same ISWC, and what to type as the alternate title. There's also a checklist to run before you deliver.

Download the Which code goes on which version table

Every code on every version, with Aerie

In Aerie, every version of a track — main mix, alts, instrumental, cutdowns, stems — lives under one track, and each version gets its own ISRC. You can assign them in bulk from your registrant code. The ISWC sits on the track's Sync Passport, next to the credits with each writer's IPI, society and split, so the one-work-many-recordings structure is how the catalogue is built from the start. Catalogue health lists the tracks still missing an ISRC, and works can be exported as CSV or CWR when you register with your society or publisher.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between ISRC and ISWC?

An ISRC identifies one sound recording; an ISWC identifies the musical work (the composition) underneath. One composition can have one ISWC and many ISRCs, one for each recording or version.

Do 30 and 60 second edits need their own ISRC?

Yes. The ISRC Handbook says a recording edited to remove or add sections gets a new ISRC. The only exception is a length change with no creative input that is under 10 seconds.

Does an instrumental version need a new ISWC?

Usually not. If the writers and splits are the same, ASCAP and PRS treat it as the same work and you can add the instrumental as an alternate title. The ISWC system does allow separate codes for some versions, so follow your society's practice.

How do I get an ISRC code?

Your distributor can assign one when you upload, or you can get your own prefix from your national agency: the US ISRC Agency (one-time $95), PPL in the UK, or your country's agency via the IFPI's list.

What is an IPI number and how do I get one?

An IPI is an 11-digit number that identifies you as a writer or publisher across all societies. Your society assigns it when you join, so you don't need to apply for it separately.

Sources

More guides