New review added: Ahead Nero Digital video codec

I just posted the article New review added: Ahead Nero Digital video codec.

  Today we have added a new review to our review database. This time we have not taken a look at a new CD or DVD recorder, but we've taken a look at software,  or to be more precise, a new...
Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/7424-New-review-added-Ahead-Nero-Digital-video-codec.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/7424-New-review-added-Ahead-Nero-Digital-video-codec.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

Okay, maybe I’m missing something, but does Recode only code in Nero Digital, or will it also simply compress the .ifo and .vob files (a la DVDShrink, DVD2One, etc.)? So far I’ve been using TMPGEnc DVD Author to recompile .ifos of episodic discs and compressing them w/DVD2One. The latest DVDShrink won’t open HDD files (?), DVDXCopy doesn’t give any option to do so, and DVD2One’s quality sucks. Also TMPGEnc has trouble recoding certain episodes on discs (?!?). In other words, I’ve been waiting for a good all-in-one solution. Is this it?
[edited by soreros on 24.12.2003 19:02]

NeroVisionExpress 2.1.0.4 is out see http://www.ahead.de no change log

I LOVE nero recode, its the best compression program with DVD-9 easyly copressed to DVD-5 (4.5gb standerd), it made a backup copy of the lord of the rings 2 (DVD-7.5) onto DVD-5 NO VISIBLE LOSS OF QUAILITY. (when recodeing dvds to dvds it does not use the nero digital mpeg4 but compresses the mpeg2) Only one fault is that you cant backup DVD’s with CSS copy protection, so you will need decript the protected VOB files first…
[edited by DoMiN8ToR on 24.12.2003 23:15]

it made a backup copy of the lord of the rings 2 (DVD-7.5) onto DVD-5 NO VISIBLE LOSS OF QUAILITY are you sure?? how much % did it sompress…i tested many programs …many gave me blur and blocks. dvd2one1.4 gives me the best results till now

I use DVD Decryptor to rip my dvd’s then nero recode 2.1.0.4 what a difference, the disk is like the original and does not appear to have any loss:)

speed vs. quality is quite acceptable. There IS obvious loss of quality though. On a standard TV there’ll be minimal impact but on HD it’s a call you’d have to make for yourself. ‘NO LOSS’ is untrue and a misleading statement to make. Good ‘few click’ solution.

Good point Damian. Though it isn’t a huge surprise w/ the 2 Towers. The movie is so damn long, there’s very little else on it. It should have been roughly a 75% reduction. One thing to note Weeblanden, please qualify your claims. Like Damian asked, what was the compression rate? Also valuable to know, what else was supposed to be on the disc? Did you recode the entire disc or recode just the movie files and then burn to a DVD? e.g.-Whale Rider, a relatively short movie at 1hour & 41 minutes, was given a 54% reduction if I kept all the material on the DVD. People! I repeat, qualify what you are talking about! It is fallacious to use the results from one movie to generalize the possible results of another. When I refer to “movie” I mean, the DVD, with all the original content. If you are pasring it down, say so. Thanks, I’m done. :stuck_out_tongue:

Oh yeah, and when you say, “no loss” do you mean no loss on TV or on a computer monitor? Regular TV forgives quite a bit of video blockiness and so on, a computer monitor won’t, and hey, I’d rather watch a movie on a 21" monitor (1024x768 minimum resolution) than on a fuzzy 50" screen anyway! Let us know! :stuck_out_tongue:

Aaaaarghhh. CDFreaks is clearly my reference news site for everything burning-related. But -please- be a bit more professional and objective when out of your “favourite field”… 1/ It would be appreciable to know HOW you realised the XViD and DivX versions. Software used, AVS scripts if there are, options (GMC, QPel, Quant.Matrixes used?). No word bout that :frowning: 2/ Since you are using The best (and only :)) software suite for NeroDigital which is perfectly tuned and designed dor ND, maybe you could have used the same kind of respected software suite for DivX and XViD (who said GordianKnot ?) And if you answer me that this is a guide aimed at newbies, and consequently “hardcore” tools are not suitable, please consider AutoGK at http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?threadid=64266 And maybe (ahem…certainly actually) your DivX/XViD results would have been comparable to ND. 3/ I’ll just quote kanuac : “very badly chosen screenshots” and even a different frame capture for ND ?!? :r This is unacceptable. 4/ Wow, this one was also posted : please kick the audio stream which, like triadone clearly explained, is certainly smaller for the ND AAC file, resulting in a certain advantage for ND. And finally, if you want a really objective and professional codec comparison, head to http://www.doom9.org/codecs-203-1.htm Hoping this will help ! Cheers.

curious, came back from a link and… my reply went magically to the time tunnel (or trash tunnel).