Nero Recode & DVD Shrink

kyrcy · 20-02-2006

I have read that Nero Recode & DVD Shrink is the same program, but since Nero Recode is newer are there any advantages over DVD Shrink? Are there any real differences between the two?

*Gurm* · 20-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrcy

I have read that Nero Recode & DVD Shrink is the same program, but since Nero Recode is newer are there any advantages over DVD Shrink? Are there any real differences between the two?

We get this question frequently here.

Yes, Recode is an updated version of Shrink. However, there are some drawbacks:

1. It's not quite as flexible. In order to make it look/feel more like the rest of Nero, the author took away some flexibility. So while there are some new/improved features, there are also some missing.

2. You have to install Nero Digital to get Recode... and Nero Digital is a festering pile of dog poo.

3. Nero has little or no interest in supporting Recode, the user-based support for shrink (read: US) is 100 times better.

4. Recode costs money.

Hurricane Andrew · 20-02-2006

BUT....Recode is faster than Shrink. If you use another program to rip (i.e. DVD Decrypter) then Recode will process the output quicker.

The biggest difference is that Shrink is a one stop solution---ripping, removing protection, and burning (though I believe you still need to have at least Nero OEM installed, as Shrink uses the Nero burning engine). Recode is for compression/burning only---it will not rip your DVD.

As for Nero Digital being dog poo...well, I'll give you that it is more bloated than any software I can think of (Symantec System Works included), but despite that, it remains my favorite burning software. Version 7 gives you a fair amount of control over what modules get installed (if you can swallow the 100MB updates), and the evil Nero Scout can be eradicated with a quick registry setting.

__________________
-------------------
Hurricane Andrew

Home Rig: A64 X2 5200+, 8GB DDR2 (2GBx4) GSkill RAM, Seagate 500GB, Seagate 320GB, Samsung SH-183L, BenQ DW1650.

Work Rig: A64 3400+ (Newcastle - 2400 Mhz OC'd to 2520), 3GB PC3200 (1GBx2) A-Data RAM, WD 80GB, BenQ DW1640, BenQ DW1670

Kids Rig 1: A64 X2 5200+, 4GB DDR2 (2GBx2) GSkill RAM, Western Digital 320GB, BenQ DW1640.

Kids Rig 2: A64 X2 4800+, 4GB DDR2 (2GBx2) Patriot, WD 160GB, Seagate 120GB, BenQ DW1650, BenQ DW1640

Optical Drives not in use (yet): 2 Samsung SH-203B; 4 New DW1655's; 2 New DW1640's; New Plex 760, New Plex 750; Used Plex 712A; Used Lite-On LTR 52246S; Used Lite-On LTR 40125S; Used Toshiba SD-M1202 DVD-ROM; Used Mad Dog 52x CD-ROM; Used Ricoh MP7083A

kyrcy · 20-02-2006

I am mainly interested in compressing and not ripping. Does Recode ofair better quality or atleast the same quality in less time than Shrink when compressing a DVD-9 to DVD-5?

Hurricane Andrew · 20-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrcy

I am mainly interested in compressing and not ripping. Does Recode ofair better quality or atleast the same quality in less time than Shrink when compressing a DVD-9 to DVD-5?

Yes. The quality is equal to or better than Shrink, and it is noticeablely quicker.

__________________
-------------------
Hurricane Andrew

Home Rig: A64 X2 5200+, 8GB DDR2 (2GBx4) GSkill RAM, Seagate 500GB, Seagate 320GB, Samsung SH-183L, BenQ DW1650.

Work Rig: A64 3400+ (Newcastle - 2400 Mhz OC'd to 2520), 3GB PC3200 (1GBx2) A-Data RAM, WD 80GB, BenQ DW1640, BenQ DW1670

Kids Rig 1: A64 X2 5200+, 4GB DDR2 (2GBx2) GSkill RAM, Western Digital 320GB, BenQ DW1640.

Kids Rig 2: A64 X2 4800+, 4GB DDR2 (2GBx2) Patriot, WD 160GB, Seagate 120GB, BenQ DW1650, BenQ DW1640

Optical Drives not in use (yet): 2 Samsung SH-203B; 4 New DW1655's; 2 New DW1640's; New Plex 760, New Plex 750; Used Plex 712A; Used Lite-On LTR 52246S; Used Lite-On LTR 40125S; Used Toshiba SD-M1202 DVD-ROM; Used Mad Dog 52x CD-ROM; Used Ricoh MP7083A

*rdgrimes* · 20-02-2006

Recode is only quicker than Shrink in the analysis phase, the difference is on the order of 25-50% faster depending on the film. In the encoding stage, they are the same speed.

There's no difference in the quality of the output, given the same settings. Again, Shrink has more flexible settings for encoding, so it's not always possible to get the exact same settings in Recode.

Recode is also buggy for many folks, creating output that is the wrong size and such. I have both, and use only Shrink.

goman007 · 21-02-2006

I like recode better because you can decrypt with a program that makes it regular size (dvd fab) and recode reads through the analizing in about 2 min and then it is ready to be encoded to the computer to fit a 4.7 dvd, as for shrink it has to go through the disk 2x before it is ready.

kyrcy · 21-02-2006

There are cases that DVD Shrink (and probably Nero Recode) can not compress a DVD-9 to a DVD-5 without removing something from the DVD to make more space, while other software can. Anyone knows why?

*Gurm* · 21-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hurricane Andrew

BUT....Recode is faster than Shrink. If you use another program to rip (i.e. DVD Decrypter) then Recode will process the output quicker.

It is a bit faster, but if you set Shrink to the exact same settings as Recode (i.e. figure out which DA/AEC combination mimics what you've set Recode to do) it's not like TWICE as fast, it's like... 10% faster. Tops. And if you use DVD Decrypter to rip, Shrink is a lot faster too!

Quote:

The biggest difference is that Shrink is a one stop solution---ripping, removing protection, and burning (though I believe you still need to have at least Nero OEM installed, as Shrink uses the Nero burning engine). Recode is for compression/burning only---it will not rip your DVD.

Well Shrink won't rip newer DVD's either. You can burn with IMGBurn or DVD Decrypter as well as Nero with Shrink.

Quote:

As for Nero Digital being dog poo...well, I'll give you that it is more bloated than any software I can think of (Symantec System Works included), but despite that, it remains my favorite burning software. Version 7 gives you a fair amount of control over what modules get installed (if you can swallow the 100MB updates), and the evil Nero Scout can be eradicated with a quick registry setting.

Ok, here's my question which I've asked 100 times now.

You say it can be configured. Can you choose NOT to install Nero's evil codecs? The ones that register themselves as the ultimate codec for XVID, disabling the actual XVID codec entirely, but then SUCK? Everything I've heard says that no you can't. But please prove me wrong, I need to install Nero7 today, so...

*Gurm* · 21-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by goman007

I like recode better because you can decrypt with a program that makes it regular size (dvd fab) and recode reads through the analizing in about 2 min and then it is ready to be encoded to the computer to fit a 4.7 dvd, as for shrink it has to go through the disk 2x before it is ready.

You are confused.

*Gurm* · 21-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrcy

There are cases that DVD Shrink (and probably Nero Recode) can not compress a DVD-9 to a DVD-5 without removing something from the DVD to make more space, while other software can. Anyone knows why?

Yes, because the algorithms they use don't allow for compression beyond a certain percentage due to the way they're set up. Other programs' algorithms allow greater compression. Are those programs' algorithms "superior"? I would argue no, time has pretty much borne out that Shrink/Recode produce superior output to a lot of the other programs.

There just gets to be a point where transcoding away that much material is a BAD IDEA. If you really need to compress your disc 50%, you shouldn't be using Shrink anyway, you should be using DVD Rebuilder.

kyrcy · 21-02-2006

I tried DVD Rebuilder and it did not produce output that was visually better than what DVD Shrink did. So why use it when it also takes like more than twice the time?

*Gurm* · 21-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrcy

I tried DVD Rebuilder and it did not produce output that was visually better than what DVD Shrink did. So why use it when it also takes like more than twice the time?

Then it was configured incorrectly.

kyrcy · 21-02-2006

Shouldn't the default options be sufficient? Are you talking about the configuration of DVD Rebuilder or HC/CCE?

*Gurm* · 22-02-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyrcy

Shouldn't the default options be sufficient? Are you talking about the configuration of DVD Rebuilder or HC/CCE?

Yeah, they SHOULD... but oftentimes we see people on here who get REALLY bad results with DVD Rebuilder, and 9 times out of 10 it's the result of a bad version of CCE or a bad version of rebuilder or both.

Try the LATEST Rebuilder with the LATEST CCE...

I currently use DVD Rebuilder Pro with CCE SP and there's no question that it produces EXCELLENT results. However, DVD-RB was designed to work with CCE Basic, so those who do not have $2500 to drop on CCE SP can still use it flawlessly.

goman007 · 22-02-2006

about what do you have a better way?

kyrcy · 27-02-2006

Does anyone use anything else than CCE with good results?

Mike89 · 08-03-2006

Call me old fashioned but I just like being able to choose to drag over the movie only myself with DVD Shrink rather than have Recode 2 do it for me. Also. sometimes there are more than one Title (like a fullscreen and widescreen version for example). There again, with DVD Shrink you can see which one you want.

Another plus for DVD Shrink is if you compress/encode straight from the disk using AnyDVD and have two drives, you can put the blank in the burner and the movie in the other drive. With Recode 2 this won't work. For some reason Recode 2 will not read from that second drive. It will only read from the burner and then you have to take the movie out and put the blank in when it's ready to burn. Normally I rip to HDD first so that wouldn't be an issue. Sometimes though when I don't want to do that, having both disks in the drives is more convenient than having to come back and swap the disks.

While Recode 2 is a little quicker, it's a non issue for me cause I don't sit in front of the computer counting dimples on the wall waiting for the process to complete anyway.

Someone here mentioned that DVD Shrink uses the Nero burning engine. That's not the only option it has. DVD Shrink also can use DVD Decrypter to burn (which is what I use) just by adjustiing the settings in DVD Shrink. Once set, it's automatic from that point, DVD Shrink compresses/analyzes/encodes, then DVD Decrypter opens automatically to start the burn.

__________________
I7 920 @ 3.5 gig (ThermalRight U120E 1366 RT Heatsink), Asus P6T, 12 Gigs Corsair DDR3 1600, EVGA GTX 580, Acer P236H 23" (1920x1080), X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Pro, 2 WD 640 gig (32 meg cache) SATA HDDs, WD 750 gig (external e-sata) HDD, 4 SATA DVD Burners, Hauppage HD-PVR, Logitech Z-5500 5.1 Speaker System, Corsair TX750w PSU, HSPC Top Deck Tech Station, Windows 7 Pro x64

Nero Recode & DVD Shrink

Similar Threads

Search this Thread

People who found this also searched for