Disc At Once & Disc At Once/96

Whats the difference in Nero between Disc At Once and Disc At Once/96 which one is best used with the Liteon 48125W.

With my Plex 2410 CD text is only written when when selecting
DAO (instead of DAO/96). Using my 48125w both options work fine.
When making CD copies DAO/96 should read/write the sub
channels, too. IMHO this option (DAO/96) doesn’t make any
sense when writing files from HD. I can’t find any differences
between them. :confused:

In DAO/96-Mode, Nero itself creates the subchannel data. This is the same as Clone-CDs “RAW-DAO-96”.
In DAO, the writer creates all subchannel data on its own.

You should use DAO/96, since some LiteOn drives seem to create bad subchannel data in some cases (which can be fixed by having Nero create them :slight_smile: )

Which mode should i use when burning files from my HD. I was told that DAO 96 is much better for burning data than the DAO.

That’s true only if your drive sufferes from the mentioned bug. If it doesn’t, then it does not matter at all if you use DAO or DAO/96.

Does disc at once/96 add any extra layer of data correction when burning file backups from the hard drive. Is there anything above C2 error correction?

I would not recommend the use of DAO/96 unless there is a specific purpose for it. It is more likely to cause errors than to produce any benefit. It does not add error correction, and may introduce duplication errors because it is writing in RAW mode. It is absolutely not necessary for normal burning of file backups, and may corrupt your files.

The standard disk-at-once mode is the preferred method for normal recording with any drive including Lite-on drives.

Originally posted by alexnoe
[B]In DAO/96-Mode, Nero itself creates the subchannel data. This is the same as Clone-CDs “RAW-DAO-96”.
In DAO, the writer creates all subchannel data on its own.

You should use DAO/96, since some LiteOn drives seem to create bad subchannel data in some cases (which can be fixed by having Nero create them :slight_smile: ) [/B]

wohoo,thanks alex…from now I will burn with DAO/96 :slight_smile:

Does overburn in DAO/96 same with DAO :confused: :confused: ? NO different at all ???

What benefit will i get if i use DAO/96 instead of DAO while burning a normal Data CD ???

In theory, DAO and DAO/96 produce the very same discs when writing normal data CDs! Former versions of Nero were buggy in DAO/96 and data could be corrupted.
That’s why, in the earlier versions, DAO/96 was not
recommended.

But in Nero 5.5.9.17, DAO/96 seems to work well, so there is no reason to say “use DAO” or “use DAO/96”, unless a writer behaves weirdly in either mode (which LiteOns sometimes do in DAO)

Originally posted by alexnoe
[B]In theory, DAO and DAO/96 produce the very same discs when writing normal data CDs! Former versions of Nero were buggy in DAO/96 and data could be corrupted.
That’s why, in the earlier versions, DAO/96 was not
recommended.

But in Nero 5.5.9.17, DAO/96 seems to work well, so there is no reason to say “use DAO” or “use DAO/96”, unless a writer behaves weirdly in either mode (which LiteOns sometimes do in DAO) [/B]

This is absolutely untrue, incorrect advice, and is a misunderstanding of basic CD-ROM recording methods.

RAW writing with DAO/96 would absolutely be the wrong choice for backing up of normal data files, and usually would have utility only for copying discs with CD Text, CD+G, or some copy protections.

When data files are written RAW in DAO/96, the error correction is not reconstructed which can lead to generation loss errors.

See [[b]http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq03.html#S3-51]How do I copy something in “RAW” mode? What’s DAO-96?](http://www.cdrfaq.org/faq03.html#S3-51)

and Can I make copies of copies?

I’ve looked for a diplomatic way to assess the author’s knowledge on CD reading/writing of that link you point to, but there is none. His ideas about write modes are just plain nonsense (this time, I really mean nonsense. It’s just that).

“RAW DAO-96” refers to a method for writing “raw” 2352 byte sectors with 96 bytes of associated P-W subcode channel data (section (2-6)). This is useful for copying discs with CD+G, CD-Text, and certain forms of copy protection. “DAO” refers to its use in combination with disc-at-once recording.
The author entirely confuses Mode 1 vs Mode 2 Form1 vs Mode 2 Form 2 with DAO vs. DAO-96 (which is btw DAO vs RAW96R).

The 2nd one isn’t better either. This time, the author doesn’t know C1, C2, C3, E22 vs E32 etc. The problem of copies of a copie does not exist in the mainchannel data at all if proper media is used (that does not cause E32 errors when reading). Only subchannel data has a generational loss (not even C1 is performed). “Simulated” physical attributes could also have that issue (such as the latest SecuROM)

I highly recommend him (and you!) to read the MMC and ECMA-130 specs!

You have never been known for diplomacy, but quite the contrary, so I will speak your language. Your World’s Greatest Authority On All Things obfuscation and doubletalk is not changing the fact that you are wrong. :cool:

Andy McFadden’s CD-Recordable FAQ is widely recognized and respected on the Web as a reliable and understandable authority on CD-RW that doesn’t resort to doubletalk to make (or avoid) points. It is one of the best, if not the best CD-RW guide on the Web. The first article was published 2002/05/08 and the second 1998/09/17, but nobody has noticed that these articles are “nonsense” but you. I entirely agree with the articles.

The author confuses nothing. It is you that are confused :confused: and don’t know how to gracefully admit that you are wrong, trying to undermine and refute a valid explanation to save face. :o

All of the WGAOAT rambling about C1, C2, C3, E22 vs E32 etc. may serve to confuse some, but it is a BS answer and you know it. :rolleyes:

DAO 96 is RAW writing (2,352 bytes of uncorrected data) with 96 bytes P-W of subchannel data. Using this mode to copy data files from a hard drive has no purpose and makes no sense. Suggesting that someone should copy normal (cooked) CD-ROM mode 1 data discs in RAW (DAO 96) mode is not a responsible recommendation. :frowning:

. It is one of the best, if not the best CD-RW guide on the Web…but nobody has noticed that these articles are “nonsense” but you.
This explains a lot :Z :a

OK, one single try to correct this stuff, although entire rewriting would be better.

Mode 1:
One sector contains 2048 bytes of user data. The writer receives 2048 Bytes per sector and can generate all error correction data on its own. This mode can be used for TAO, DAO, or any of the RAW modes.

Mode 2 Form 1:
The offset of the user data to the beginning of a RAW sector is 24 bytes, not 16 bytes, but otherwise there is not much difference.

Mode 2 Form 2:
C3 error correction is not used. You can store 2324 bytes per sector of user data.

RAW
The writer receives 2352 bytes per sector. It does not matter at all whether this data is Mode 1 or Mode 2, or if it is nonsense.

The writer will just store to the disc whatever it receives.
It is up to the software if it creates correct error correction data, or if it creates bad error correction data (e.g. to cause an unreadable sector).

The writer will create all subchannel data on its own.

RAW96P / RAW96R
The writer receives all data (2352 RAW + 96 bytes subchannel). It does not check or change or verify anything. The data will be processed (adding C2/C1 error correction etc) as it is. Unlike normal RAW mode, RAW96 modes allow to write Twin sectors.

If a software copies a CD in RAW96R mode, then it is up to this very software if it corrects anything or not (e.g. CloneCD allows to fix bad Q-CRC values).
It is no problem either to read “normal” data (such as cooked data from CD or files on a hard disc), calculate subs and C3, and then write that in RAW96R.

It is clear that RAW96R writing with bad, buggy software causes bad discs, and the first Nero version with RAW96R support had such problems, but they have been fixed.

Believe it or not, the explanation given in the FAQ you’ve linked is wrong.
The author claims that RAW reading is done without performing error correction. This is wrong. C1 and C2 is always performed. If a drive could deliver RAW data without performing C1/C2, then it would send 3136+96 bytes per sector, not only 2352+96.
No currently available drive officially supports such a read mode.
RAW data only differs from the “real” data if C2 error correction cannot fix all errors (i.e. if there are more than 2 C2 errors within one F2 frame). Such an error is called E32. And as long as there is no E32 error, copying RAW data has no generational loss

Again, read the specs!

DAO 96 is RAW writing (2,352 bytes of uncorrected data) with 96 bytes P-W of subchannel data. Using this mode to copy data files from a hard drive has no purpose and makes no sense.
Of course does it make sense! Read my post again! The normal SAO and RAW mode of some LiteOn drives seems to be broken!
When copying such a disc later, you can of course read cooked (C3-error corrected) data, reencode it to RAW96R and write it in that mode.

I have used both and havent had problems i was just wondering which is best to be left on. DAO96 in nero is much better for CD extra cds etc because you can write CDtext to the CD AUDIO which you couldnt do in DAO cause it would break the standard. It actually says in the nero help if you right click on the different writing modes. Its the best to write in i think so anyway thats my opionion after reading up about it.

my query has created a big hot debate here.

what do the 2 sides suggest me then ??

Shall I use DAO or DAO/96 for writing normal data CDs ??? :confused:

You can use whatever you like, as DAO/96 works with the newer version of Nero. But if you were using an old version, DAO96 would mess up your disc.

Edit:

See my update which corrects some information mentioned below.

Hmmm… the result of the discussion is that the user still doesn’t know what to do… :frowning:

When reading the above I see that alexnoe and inertia are in discussion about different topics which all revolve around the technical term ‘DAO96’.

This abbreviation implies 2 things: writing in raw mode AND 96 bits of subchannel data. When writing in raw mode (which can only be done in DAO/DAO96 mode (and maybe SAO?)) the software calculates the C3 error information (the content of the data part of the raw sector can be the by alexnoe mentioned sectors with their different modes). In this case the question is if the software is able to do a better job then the firmware of writer. In theory they both should be able to do their job without errors… Too my knowledge there are no examples of software or firmware which is not able to generate correct C3 error information.

Then there is the part about the 96 bits of subchannel data. When writing in DAO you let the writer generate all the subchannel data. When writing in DAO96 you let the software generate all the subchannel data. Again the question, which one does a better job? The firmware of the writer or the software? In theory there should be no difference, in practice both parties have shown they sometimes do a bad job…

Then there is the question when should you use DAO/DAO96. When writing normal data files there is absolutely no use in using DAO or DAO96. That is: if you trust the firmware of your writer to generate the C3 error detection information. In general I would say you should be able to trust you firmware to do this correctly. :slight_smile: So when should you use DAO/DAO96? You should use these writing modes when writing copy protected data cds (DAO or DAO96 depending on the protection) or when writing audio cds (DAO or DAO16) or when writing audio cds with cd-text or karaoke cds (DAO96).

So this covers the writing part of DAO/DAO96. But most of the times the writing part of a cd-recordable has a relation to the reading part. Reading can also be done in raw mode. When reading in raw mode you say to the writer: don’t use the C3 error correction information to correct errors. When this mode is used the reader only performs C1/C2 error correction (which is the most basic form of error correction which is embedded in the cd standard and can’t be manipulated by normal writers and is always used/performed by readers). So when do you want to read raw? In case you want to backup a protected data cd, or an audio cd (an audio cd is always read in a sort of raw mode). In most of the cases when reading raw you also want the content of the subchannels (for example psx game cd, or a cd-text/karaoke cd). There is only one method to read them. There is no error protection mechanism for the subchannels, there is only a crc-check in the q-channel.

So now the question of the users:

Whats the difference in Nero between Disc At Once and Disc At Once/96 which one is best used with the Liteon 48125W

See the technically detailed explanation of alexnoe or my summary above.

Which mode should i use when burning files from my HD. I was told that DAO 96 is much better for burning data than the DAO.

When burning normal data don’t use DAO/DAO96, use a normal writing method.

Does disc at once/96 add any extra layer of data correction when burning file backups from the hard drive. Is there anything above C2 error correction?

Like explained above when using DAO or DAO96 mode you let the software generate the C3 error correction information. When backing up data files it should not matter if the software or the writer generates the C3 error correction information.

What benefit will i get if i use DAO/96 instead of DAO while burning a normal Data CD ???

You will get no extra benefit. When burning normal data cds there is no use for writing raw and let the software generate the 96 bits of subchannel information.

I have used both and havent had problems i was just wondering which is best to be left on. DAO96 in nero is much better for CD extra cds etc because you can write CDtext to the CD AUDIO which you couldnt do in DAO cause it would break the standard. It actually says in the nero help if you right click on the different writing modes. Its the best to write in i think so anyway thats my opionion after reading up about it.

For writing a cd-extra cd you would need DAO or DAO96, because it is in effect still an audio cd (which wants DAO in order to follow the standard). If it has also cd-text you need DAO96.

my query has created a big hot debate here.

what do the 2 sides suggest me then ??

Shall I use DAO or DAO/96 for writing normal data CDs ???

With all the information provided in this thread I think you should come to the conclusion that you don’t need DAO/DAO96 when writing normal data cds.

Now something about each unique way of helping users and answering question by alexnoe and inertia. I think/believe that alexnoe is very knowledgeable on this subject (and other subjects of course :slight_smile: ) and all the information he has provided above is correct. But his answers have the tendency to be technical (because he tries to be correct as possible). Inertia tries to help users from another point of view. He tries to summarize information which makes it understandable for the average user. In my opinion this is a good approach because it helps the majority of the average users. Alexnoe’s way of helping users is also good of course but sometimes his expert knowledge needlessly confuses things for the average user. Btw, I think that Andy McFadden’s CD-Recordable FAQ is mainly targeted at the average user. For real in-depth information on cd’s it is not best information source available.

I haven’t read the mentioned parts of the CD-Recordable faq but I know what kind of information is provided in there. One discussion topic between alexnoe and inertia I want to clear up.

Originally posted by Inertia
RAW writing with DAO/96 would absolutely be the wrong choice for backing up of normal data files, and usually would have utility only for copying discs with CD Text, CD+G, or some copy protections.

When data files are written RAW in DAO/96, the error correction is not reconstructed which can lead to generation loss errors.

The first part is correct. The second part is not correct. Generation loss can only occur if raw reading is used before raw-writing the image.

Originally posted by alexnoe
The problem of copies of a copie does not exist in the mainchannel data at all if proper media is used (that does not cause E32 errors when reading). Only subchannel data has a generational loss (not even C1 is performed).

This is correct because of the additional remark on E32 errors. E32 errors are errors which are not correctable by the standard C1/C2 error correction mechanism. In order to correct these E32 errors the C3 error correction information is needed.

So when you make backups of backups and you use raw-reading and raw-writing it is possible that you get generation loss errors whenever an uncorrectable C2 error occurs, because you have turned off the C3 error correction level. But when you are reading normally and you write the data raw there is no possibility for generation loss errors.

I hope that I have cleared things up. I hope I haven’t offened anyone. I am glad that we have an expert moderator like alexnoe and very knowledgeable users like Inertia, but I don’t like it when these people start fighting/flaming each other… The purpose of CDFreaks is still to help other users out I would say!

:slight_smile:

First, the actual problem is that each software uses different terms! If they all would comply to defined terms (DAO/96 is none of them), it would be easier to discuss these!

When burning normal data don’t use DAO/DAO96, use a normal writing method.
What is a normal writing method?

[quote]RAW writing with DAO/96 would absolutely be the wrong choice for backing up of normal data files
The first part is correct. [/quote]No, it isn’t! Assuming that neither software nor firmware are buggy, DAO and DAO/96 produce the same discs when burning normal data or audio. So why should either mode be the wrong choice? If one is the wrong choice, then one of the 2 equal discs would be worse :wink:

For some LiteOns+Nero, this statement is not true btw. When writing AudioCDs with Nero in my LiteOn using DAO, Q-Mode-3 data (=ISRC codes) is added by the writer :Z , so you should use DAO/96 (due to bad firmware in this case)

When writing in raw mode (which can only be done in DAO/DAO96 mode (and maybe SAO?))
:confused: DAO means “SAO and finalize disc”, nothing else.

I use “normal” DAO for everything I burn.