Has Dual Layer DVD+R ripened out or not?

I am wondering if there are people who have NO problems burning Dual Layer DVD+R cause so far all my attempts failed.

Since 2 months I own a new dvd writer called Pioneer DVR-112D (firmware 1.22) and since I was pleased to have found a 10-box Dual Layer DVD+R for 16 euros (this was the first time they costed less than 3 euros per piece), I thought lets give it another shot. The brand is Intenso but the mediacode is RICOHJPN D01. The discs are 8x rated.

I now burned my first disc and it seemed to go without trouble and even cddvdspeed gave a neat graphic (see below) BUT when I did a md5 compare between the original data and the data on the disc there were discrepancies between them, so I am beginning to wonder if
a) buying an expensive verbatim would be the solution
b) Dual Layer DVD+R isnt stable at all.

If only buying verbatim would be the solution, then the price difference between a DVD+R and DL DVD+R is still huge (and that after 3 years of DL media existance !) and btw RICOH media isnt bad is it ?

Will burning them at 2.4x make any difference ?

Which is more or less true. Anyway, it’s the wisest way to go.

then the price difference between a DVD+R and DL DVD+R is still huge
The manufacturing is more complicated and quality comes with a price. Besides, it’s stil about half the price of a 240mn VHS.
and btw RICOH media isnt bad is it ?
They use a cheaper manufacturing method and most burners don’t like this “inverted stack” technology. Some burners seem to handle this media better but overall, the users satisfaction rate is low.
Will burning them at 2.4x make any difference ?
No idea.

If you really want to cut price, better try CMC DL media in my opinion. Some have had good luck with it.

could you tell me a little what ‘inverted stack’ means. Is it like when a mold has edges and inverted means the inverse of these edges ?

The link provided here by chef explains a bit about it.

ok thanks, its clear to me now that there are (at least) 2 kinds of DL discs and that mine are inverted-stack ones (made up out of 2 seperate ‘discs’ and ‘glued’ together)

This is strange that verify failed while burner had no problems reading the disk. I had similar problem once when burner was in external enclosure. It turned out that a laptop had bad USB port. For normal data transfer (reading) system (OS) would correct errors. However when burning no such correction is done - data is shoved via DMA into the burner. Therefore quality of the link/cable is very critical. I wonder if your cable is no good. I would replace it just to try. BTW make sure it is 80-wire cable (assuming your burner is internal).

As for the media. Ricoh DL that is branded under some other names usually is fake or the lowest grade made by someone else with Ricoh code. I used Windata branded (Microcenter in US) which was Ricoh 8x just like yours. It was made by Umedisc in Singapore. Results were 33% - good, 33% very marginal, 34% - coasters.

So far I failed to find anything even remotely close to Verbatim. And I tried them all with three different burners (NEC, LiteOn and Samsung). My impression was that NEC (AD7170) had beter results than others. Howeveer not by much. It would produce coasters too.

I am about to try old 2.4x technology disks. I am getting a feeling that 8x disks were developed mostly to cut cost of manufacturing. Hence bad quality. I burnt couple of Memorex branded 2.4 Riteks. So far they were OK (not great but OK). Need more data though. Too early to tell.

Good luck

yeah its internal and connected with a good quality 80-wire cable. I am sure its got nothing to do with data-errors created somewhere down the route between the harddisk and the burner laser but thanks for your suggestion.

check www.intenso.de , this is the brand I got. I bought them while they were only 16 euros per 10 discs but maybe its too cheap :slight_smile:

in the early days of DL media I bought a few 2.4x DL discs and tried burning them on my old Lite-On SOHW-832s and I got more reading trouble then now(you know those dropping lines in cddvdspeed :P) but at least the read data that the drive reproduced was sane :slight_smile:

after having burned 2 intenso DL discs (RICOHJPN D01) with Nero that appeared being burned fine (even Nero verification said ‘succesfully’ strange enough) but later gave data verification errors on a file that was on the layer change border of these discs, I decided to use another software to burn such a DL disc (Roxio Easy CD Creator) and voila : NO ERRORS
maybe the discs are fine after all :slight_smile:

See below pics. btw: the iside folders is a md5 compare program that compared the original folder with a folder of the files I copied back from the burned DL DVD

I did not realize you were using Nero. It does not work well with DL to say at least. ImgBurn is the only one that sets the layer break right. Give it a try. There are also tutorials for it if you have any trouble. It is failrly easy. Google it and you will find it.

I really appreciate your reaction. I’ve always thought Nero was THE program for us ‘professional’ people. I will have a look at imgburn but ive got no material I would need a DL disc for (and spoiling one is not my intent) so it’ll have to wait :slight_smile: Nero really disappoints me now ! I thought I could trust it 100 % (also for DL)

Ive always understood that setting the layer break was something for dvd authoring programs so that the ~2 second layer change pause wont affect a high-data-rate scene (but occurs in a scene where theres little action so the data-rate is less [vbr])

Why would it matter for data-integrity in general ? If Nero doesnt choose that point carefully why would my disc reproduce different data then that it has burned with :eek: (that should never happen IMHO)

Also would choosing a better layer-break point mean that not the full 7.95 GB could be used because then the first layer would be left a bit empty at the end when it decides to start burning to the next layer a little earlier ?

Just to make it clear again, Nero is the wrong choice for burning DL media, always.

ok I get it :slight_smile: Its just that I expected more of Nero :slight_smile:

Me too, especially because now Nero 8 is out. :frowning:

yeah after 8 main releases they should’ve learned their lessons :slight_smile:

btw, nero becomes a bigger/heavier monster each time a new release is due. They think they need to please us with alot of non-burning related programs that other companies have allready made. They dont fool me though: I installed the bare core only and disabled scary services like the Scout. After all i’m a professional and a software :cop: :bigsmile:

Today I successfully burnt my first DVD+R Dual Layer.
DVD+R DL media: Platinum 8.5GB, 8x speed
Media Code: CMC MAG D02.

The DVD was recorded with a Samsung SH-S182M DVD recorder at 6x speed. These discs are quite cheap, you can buy them for 1,52 euro per disc including jewel case at www.azerty.nl.

I burnt the disc with Nero, version (latest Nero 7 version). In this thread it is suggested that Nero is not reliable burning Dual Layer media. Is this based on facts, or are people just echoing something that they once heard or read?

Anyway, data verification with Nero was successful, and as a second check I did a binary compare of the recorded data with the source data, using a program called FileSync, which was also successful.

DL media have had teething problems from the start. It’s not hard to design a drive that meets the DL specification–or any specification, for that matter. But getting that drive to work with real production discs is another thing. The first DL drives on the market were set up for Verbatim DVD+R DL 2.4X samples. The actual production discs were different, and many people had problems with these first drives until a rash of firmware updates became available. (But even now, those first DL drives work poorly with other DL discs and not well with even Verbatim discs.)

The problem was the rush to market. Drive manufacturers are desparate for a form of differentiation. Speed has always been the big deal, but now that going beyond 52X for CD-R or 16X for DVD+/-R makes little sense (…yes, 18X and 20 media will be available, but they will be modified forms of 16X with new MID codes that will probably cause problems with all legacy 8X and 16X drives–just beautiful!), drive manufactures needed something new. DL was it. Yamaha, to their credit, came up with the silly T@2 labeling system; but that failed. DL drives were rushed to market too far ahead of the media, and people immediately had problems.

Today’s DL drives are far more compatible with 2P discs (the ones that use a “photo-polymer” temporary stamper that gets thrown out after being hardened by UV light), but compatibility problems remain. That’s a major reason why Taiyo Yuden is reluctant to introduce DL media. They are unsupported by all DL drives released so far, and if their discs do not work, AfterDawn critics will immediately blame the failure on quality or counterfeiters. However, in order to reduce the cost of production, 8X DL media are being manufactured with a new process; and those media tend to be incompatible with legacy DL drives and many, but not all, new 8X DL drives. This process, known as “inverse stack,” does away with the temporary photo-polymer layer and the debris it can introduce, and reduces cost because of no waste, fewer manufacturing steps, less debris, and better yields. The fact that IS media are less expensive does not mean they are lower quality. The fact that they often do not work on DL drives is also not an indication of lower quality, just less compatibility.

IS DL media are the future, like it or not, because consumers and retailers–who have even more influence than consumers!–are demanding lower prices for DL. That means that the DL category has not yet ripened. Expect to see better DL drives in 2008 that are more compatible and produce better DL recordings with 2P and IS discs.

And the next drive differentiator? DVD Download. The drive guys are going to push this as the next best thing. It allows consumers and kiosks to put CSS protection on their download recordings. Anyone who understands what it does has been skating around CSS for years. Those who don’t understand what it does may not even be interested.

AFAIK, TY have already introduced DVD-R DL (TYG11), though it’s not widely available. And some drives support it, how well though I wouldn’t know :slight_smile:

A member or two here have bought some of the discs, IIRC.

Very interesting post, [B]wilhelm[/B], thorough and comprehensive. :clap:

Looks like we have a new media expert onboard. :cool: