Burning with one program or another makes any difference?

[Phoebos]

What I want to ask is if we burn a DVD using TMPGEnc burning tool of TMPGENc DVD Author or using Nero or any program for the SAME authored material will it make any difference in compatibility or life durationof the DVD?
Personaly I find very practical and easy to use TMPGEnc DVD Author to author AND to burn (no coasters for the moment) even if TMPGEnc is poor in menus etc, but I want to be sure that it is equivalent for the product it makes.

Thank you in advance

[fmctm1sw]

There's a thread around here that looks into burning material with different apps. Has scans as well. It may even have been put in the articles or guides section...

[mats.hogberg]

Yes. A recent comparision here by Fandim between Nero, DVDDecrypter and ImgTools Burn clearly shows a difference.

/Mats

[Zisguy1]

Yeah, I use the TMPGEnc DVD Author writing tool all the time too.

Aside from features, there should be no difference between properly-written burning apps (given no buffer underruns or other issues like that). The drive itself adjusts laser power, etc... the burning app basically just sends data to the drive.

If there's a difference between apps, I'd like to hear the precise technical explanation for it. Otherwise, I personally wouldn't believe it, and would take it as a normal variation between different writes.

[Cunhambebe]

Aside from features, there should be no difference between properly-written burning apps (given no buffer underruns or other issues like that). The drive itself adjusts laser power, etc... the burning app basically just sends data to the drive.

- I do agree. Encoding with TMPGEnc as MPEG2 is an excellent idea. Sony DVD Architect is an amazing piece of software for me. Please check it out.

[mats.hogberg]

Aside from features, there should be no difference between properly-written burning apps

Fandims test tells another story. Or could it be that not all apps are properly written? When creating a software solution for anything, you'll get as many different solutions as there are developers. Not all solutions will be equally efficient, and will meet the goal in various degree - and still all be properly (to varying degree, I admit) written.

/Mats

[proxyx99]

Fandims tests are far from conclusive plus other testers had opposite results to his. There shouldn't be any compatibility issues. I have yet to see the report about some recognised apps making incompatible discs. Plus many burning engines are licensed, not developped in-house. It is possible that you will set as competitors makers of the same engine sold under different names. What is true is that:
"Not all solutions will be equally efficient, and will meet the goal in various degree - and still all be properly (to varying degree, I admit) written.
/Mats"

So far there is no clear winner on "burn quality front". My take: practically no difference.

[lordsmurf]

Yes. It can make a difference.
Depends on many factors, especially the burner.

[proxyx99]

There is a logical lapsus here, if "especially the burner" then not burning software! which is the topic. Don't sound so cryptic LS. Show us the difference... (you talk about)

[Phoebos]

Burner is another story, yes we re talking about the software only.
The question can be put in another way:
The same person with the same equipment and the same type DVD-R burns the same vobs BUT with different programs. (ie Nero vs TMPGEnc Burning tool)

Are we producing 2 DVDs EXACTLY the same? Shall both of them live the same? Is any chance one of them after 3 years to start freezing or appear any other problem?

[Zisguy1]

Yes. It can make a difference.
Depends on many factors, especially the burner.

Like what sort of factors?

This claim is sort of like saying that Windows Media Player playing a .WAV file will sound different than WinAMP playing the same .WAV file, or a .JPG viewed in Paintshop Pro would look different than if you viewed it in Photoshop. There may be hidden reasons why, but I won't believe it without specifics because on the surface it makes no sense.

Are we producing 2 DVDs EXACTLY the same? Shall both of them live the same? Is any chance one of them after 3 years to start freezing or appear any other problem?

You wouldn't ever produce 2 DVD's exactly the same, because of variations in the media, laser power used, etc. from burn to burn. The question is if these differences are the result of the burning software, or just normal variations between different pieces of media and/or speed + laser power adjustments made by the drive.

If there really is a difference between burning apps, then the burning apps are doing a *lot* more than sending data to the drive's buffer. If so, what exactly are they doing... I want to know.

Edit P.S. Fandim said this:

"Going to be burning the same disc, on the same media, at the same speed, in triplicate."

How did he manage this magical feat? There's no way to write to the same disc three times... unless it's a DVD+-RW, each disc is only writable one time. This makes his tests unscientific by introducing an uncontrolled variable: Different discs may not be of the exact same quality. Even different portions of the dye surface on a given disc may vary. If he repeated this test a hundred times rather than three and kept getting the same results, it would be more believable.

[mats.hogberg]

burns the same vobs BUT with different programs.

IMO, that's wrong too - because then, we intruduce yet another variable, that affects DVD player compatibility; how the DVD is constructed. To test the burning engine, you should write the same DVD image, not the same files.

/Mats

[proxyx99]

Let's not get carried away... Is there really a need to get any deeper in this bogus issue? Since there is no proof and results of one contradict the other it sounds like a waste of time. Pure hogwash.

[Zisguy1]

Let's not get carried away... Is there really a need to get any deeper in this bogus issue?

The question was asked/thread started, so why not? Your choice to follow the thread or not, of course. I've seen far more useless threads go on a lot longer than this one around here.

[tmh]

I think this is a very interesting issue. I can easily see that some burning programs just don't work very well and may NOT properly burn under various circumstances. However, I'd me VERY interested to hear someone explain how when they DO burn successfully one can be "different" than the other.

Isn't it a transfer of digital info from source (HD) to the disk? TRANSFER being the key term there. How is it that one could have a "better" transfer if BOTH transferred at all?

Logic and basic knowledge of computers tell me that it either transfers the info successfully or not. I just don't see "better" or "worse" in the equation. Wouldn't THAT just be the burner's consistancy?

HOW can software provide a different transfer of info? Now, i know nothing about this specifically so I am truely ASKING "HOW" . If no one can explain it, i'll stick with what seems logical.

[mats.hogberg]

One thing that might make things different, is that different apps takes different routes fron HDD to CD/DVD writer. Some use whatever ASPI layer is installed in your system(like cdrdao), some, like Nero, comes with its own ASPI layer that it uses. I'm sure there are other possibilities - "talking" to the writer directly might be one.

/Mats

[proxyx99]

The only issue that as I recall could impact burn quality was the implementation of linking technology, "smart-link" "burn-safe" and whatever they were called. Initially there were issues with that as it was still under development and had everything to do with the drive burn strategy and memory buffer management that was written to drive's eprom memory. Software does not control the burn, writer's firmware does. All software does is initialize processes and control streaming of the data to the burner according to user preferences.

Unless someone comes up with a reliable information/proof that software controls laser operation and tracking subsystem then the whole investigation here is just utter crap.
What does effect quality is media-burner relationship. That is why companies published their preferred media manuf. and types (tested and certified media).

Never seen a burner manuf. saying "use this app for best results" unless someone in this forum knows something that even drive manufacturer's don't. Think about it. ... or did I miss something...
Seems that new discipline of science is beeing born here... right before our eyes

[p_l]

More grist for the mill:

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=45025

[mats.hogberg]

Again, that thread revolves about how the image is layed out and created - not how it's burned to media.

/Mats

[proxyx99]

Yes. A recent comparision here by Fandim between Nero, DVDDecrypter and ImgTools Burn clearly shows a difference.

/Mats

Mats, forgot that?

Now, I'm having trouble following your position... sorry, you have no position yet, you're in the process of positioning yourself...

[mats.hogberg]

My position? My position is that writing data to a writable media (like CD-R and DVD-R) can be done with different efficiency/quality, which however shouldn't be confused with the fact that the data to be written (of course) can also be assembled differently.

/Mats

[Phoebos]

Im a little bit confused.

Are we concluding that burning the SAME image using theoretically SAME media BUT with a different app will result in a different end product? Practically the one product or the other will have the possibility to be problematic while the rest not? Yes or No?

[mats.hogberg]

We're not concluding anything, AFAIK, but I think the answer to your question is yes.
If we include "creation of image" in the question, the answer is yes.

/Mats

[Zisguy1]

Im a little bit confused.

Are we concluding that burning the SAME image using theoretically SAME media BUT with a different app will result in a different end product? Practically the one product or the other will have the possibility to be problematic while the rest not? Yes or No?

Nobody has yet given any technical reasons why two properly-written burning apps (say Nero v6.6 and DVD Decrypter v3.5.4.0) could or would produce burns differing in quality (e.g. better KProbe results with one program than another). Personally I can't even envision how this could occur, let alone why. It sounds impossible.

[mats.hogberg]

Please feel free to think so. We don't have to come to an agreement on this.

/Mats

[pippas]

Nobody has yet given any technical reasons why two properly-written burning apps (say Nero v6.6 and DVD Decrypter v3.5.4.0) could or would produce burns differing in quality (e.g. better KProbe results with one program than another). Personally I can't even envision how this could occur, let alone why. It sounds impossible.

I can only comment on personal experience regarding different results.

I have made a number of copies of TV shows for a friend who has a Cyberhome DVD player.

Using the same files and media, he can only play the discs if they were burnt with Decrypter - the Nero discs simply refuse to play on his machine.

In the interests of eliminating a fluke, I have repeated the experiment 3 times -- each time the only difference was the burning program - and each time the Nero discs won't play --

so there is something different going on with the two burning programs - I can't think of any other reason ( except possibly 3 flukes )

[Xylob the Destroyer]

I author with TMPGEnc DVD Author, but cannot burn with it. Every time I try, I get an error saying that there is a file missing and the burning engine cannot initialize...
I have uninstalled/reinstalled several times and have even had to reformat (for other reasons) and still no luck.
So after I author, I just burn with DVD Decrypter.
nero is kinda poopy on my machine, maybe it doesn't like my burner....

[fritzi93]

After installing Nero, I couldn't burn with TDA either. Now that I've uninstalled Nero, I'll have to try TDA again.

[Nelson37]

I can see several possibilities for burning difference. Smart-Burn, as previously mentioned, but how about incorrectly identifying proper media burn speed, or defaulting to 8x on a 4x drive? Even setting the laser for RW on an R disk could be incorrectly done by software.

Yes, this would take a pretty stupid programming team. Your Point?

Drawing from my SVCD experience, I would say image creation is far more important and likely to be the problem, very often the burning app will be doing something along the lines of authoring and this is usually where the actual problem lies.

[lordsmurf]

There is a logical lapsus here, if "especially the burner" then not burning software! which is the topic. Don't sound so cryptic LS. Show us the difference... (you talk about)

Not cryptic. Busy.

Example:
Pioneer 109 ...
RecordNow Max is fine. DD is fine. Prassi is fine.
Nero is junk. NTI is junk.

Example:
Any burner ...
RNM, etc .. fine.
TDA ... junk.

Firmware, versions, etc ... all play into this.
Some never see this, having clean combo of all.
Others see nothing but trouble, something not perfect.

All engines write different, all burning apps see data different, etc.
Same for hardware.

It SHOULD all be ABOUT the same, but sometimes not.
I run into this whenever I start to try new hardware/software.