DVD+R Gold vs. "Gold"?

[buddycat]

I'm wanting to archive my hobby group's VHS recordings, and I've done a lot of research on the lifespan of DVD. While the jury's still out, the storage conditions seem to have as much bearing as what the quality of the disk is (as long as you're not using crap). So, I've been looking into gold archiving disks, and am confused by the wild differences in price. I"m trying to save omeny here,so I'm wondering what's the difference between something like these http://www.amazon.com/JVC-Taiyo-Archival-25-Disc-Spindle/dp/B00319DJ6Y/ref=sr_1_2?ie=U...4152310&sr=8-2 (granted, it's 25 vs. 50, but look at the price per unit) vs. http://www.amazon.com/MAM-Mitsui-Archival-grade-50-pak-Cakebox/dp/B0011B5DEK/ref=sr_1_...4152350&sr=8-3. Why would there be so much of a difference. Does it matter? Is it that the Taiyo Yudens are just gold dye, not gold surface, or what?

[jman98]

One of our forum regulars has a lot of info on this subject. Hopefully he'll add to this thread.

Off the top of my head and if I remember correctly, he suggests that gold is basically a waste. Gold is NOT in the dye. I can guarantee you that. Is the reflective surface. On the pro side, gold never oxidizes, so that won't be the cause of such a disc going bad. On the con side, I believe that because gold has a different reflectivity than the normal backing that they actually have to put a small layer on top of the gold of the normal reflective material, so it sort of defeats the whole advantage of using gold in the first place.

MAM's discs were considered quite good years ago, but some think that they really don't make quality media any more. I'm not at all suggesting that you put a lot of stock in media scans, but Nero does make a tool that can do it. Just for the heck of it I compared a gold MAM CD-R with an off the shelf CD-R that someone burned for me (I think it was on Memorex media) and the MAM CD-R had more errors on it than the supposedly crap Memorex disc did. From time to time I bought some of the MAM CD-Rs, but after that test I decided that I was probably wasting my money on them and I should just use either Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden.

Personally speaking, I have a suspicion that Verbatim's AZO dye may have a slightly longer lifespan than other dyes. For long term storage, I would go with Verbatim's DataLifePlus series (NOT the new DataLife series which is cheap junk). Here's a link.
http://www.rima.com/prod/1798.html

[VegasBud]

buddycat,

The best answer to your question depends on how much of the specifics you want to know.

[begin least detail version]
The shortest answer is to not get sucked into the hype about "gold" media. It costs substantially more, but doesn't provide any additional (real world) benefits over "normal" media. Here, in Las Vegas, we'd call it a sucker bet.
[end least detail version]

[begin moderate detail version]
The supposed benefit of using gold for the reflective or semi-reflective layer(s) in dvdr media is entirely based on it's increased resistance to corrosion (when compared with other metals). While it's true that corrosion of the reflective layer would adversely affect reflectivity, the reality is that corrosion requires the reflective layer to be exposed to the ambient air. With dvdr media, the reflective layer is sealed right in the middle of the disk, with equal thickness layers of polycarbonate above and below, so contact with the ambient air isn't a problem. In the unlikely event the disk is delaminating (the layers are separating), so the ambient air is in contact with the interior of the disk, the disk is going to fail from other factors before corrosion of the reflective layer becomes a problem.

On the downside, gold is the most expensive material to use for the reflective layer, and is less reflective.

The NIST says the dye will fail before the reflective layer. They're the pros...it's probably best to listen to them.
[end moderate detail version]

[begin maximum detail version]
The best publicly available source for all the details is found in patent applications (the applicants are eager to protect everything, so they're as specific as possible). A good starting point would be this patent. Although it was filed in 2007, the publication date is only ~two months ago...which makes it about as up-to-date as you're likely to find.

When researching in patents, it's generally most productive to start at the "BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION" section.
[end maximum detail version]

[buddycat]

Okay, so now I'm back where I started -don't buy gold. So,what brand is best, how long does it realistically last? I've heard that keeping my materials on an external drive is not a long term solution, either. I recognized that I"ll have to make new copies every few years. So how long should I wait? I think I have some disks that are already 6 years old.

[lordsmurf]

jman and vegasbud hit the major points.

I've heard that keeping my materials on an external drive is not a long term solution

This is myth, too.
Good backup policy means using several backups in several locations. It rarely says anything about the digital media format, because it largely does not matter. Hard drives and optical discs are equally reliable in most conditions.

[VegasBud]

what brand is best...

For single layer, I've given up on anything but Taiyo Yuden or Verbatim. For dual layer, anything but Verbatim +RDL is going to cause you grief...one way or another...sooner or later.

...how long does it realistically last?

To be honest, nobody knows. Scientific longevity testing revolves around putting disks in a chamber and stepping the temperature up to around 80ºC (176ºF) and the humidity to around 85%...and then letting the disks cook for varying amounts of time. Understandably, there's some measure of debate about how closely that relates to media longevity in the real world.

I have some disks that are already 6 years old.

I have quite a few dvdr disks which are older than that, and cdr disks going back years before the dvdrs. At least at this point, I'm not seeing any sign of impending doom. Until I start seeing some disks failing, I have to assume the media (as a whole) is not nearing, much less reaching, end of life.

I've heard that keeping my materials on an external drive is not a long term solution, either.

Dvdr and external hard drives are what we've got to work with (for now, anyways), and you can only use what's available. The best you can do is make redundant archival copies on both forms of storage, and periodically check for indications of a developing problem. If the dvds fail first, you still have the hard drives...if the hard drives fail first, you still have the dvds.

[buddycat]

(sigh) Okay. I am back where I where I was, then. Buy the Taiyo Yudens from now on. My strategy, then, will be replace the disks every 6 - 7 years, maybe, except if the media was cheap to begin with. Backup my files to my fellow hobbyist's drive. We both move all our files to new drives every 5 - 7 years. Make one or two copies on DVDs, and back everything up to off-site storage. That's the best we can do, I guess.

Thanks to everyone for their recommendations.

[jman98]

For stuff that's really important to you to keep as long as possible, and I'll leave the definition of "important" to you, you could consider backing up to solid state drives. They are really expensive right now, but with no moving parts, I would think that if you copied your stuff to a solid state drive and then removed it from a computer and put it in storage, it would last a very very long time.

[ron spencer]

Come on now...external drive is fine, but if you want to burn only, does it really matter what you use? If you only want to burn, burn a few copies, store them away from children, and after a year, reburn. Media is now so cheap does not matter how many burns you have. BTW, I still have stuff from 8 years ago that is still fine...on maxell.

No such thing as true archiving on DVD-R...

[buddycat]

For stuff that's really important to you to keep as long as possible, and I'll leave the definition of "important" to you, you could consider backing up to solid state drives. They are really expensive right now, but with no moving parts, I would think that if you copied your stuff to a solid state drive and then removed it from a computer and put it in storage, it would last a very very long time.

Solid state? Himm. Is that different than flash drive technology?

Ron: I think I'm just trying to avoid having to "wash, rinse, repeat" too often while additionally adding new material.

[bbanderic]

"Gold" discs are a waste of money IMO for reasons already mentioned. If using DVD -/+R, I would stick with the standard "premium line" Taiyo Yudens. Personally, I've moved on to Blu-ray (Verbatim) for disc data storage, it saves a ton of space.

I have my complete collection backed up 3 times, 2x on to disc and 1x on external hard drives. 1 set of discs and external hard drives stay at my home and another set of discs are stored at a relatives house.

A couple things not mentioned so far...

When backing up to disc I would do so as a "DATA" disc rather than a "playable" disc. Also, whether backing up to disc or external hard drive I would be sure to include an md5 file to each CD/DVD/Blu-ray/Flac/Photo folder etc. This is the surest, quickest way to determine the integrity of the disc/data. This will also be beneficial when "reburning" discs down the road, which IMO shouldn't need to be done as often as some have suggested if you use quality media. Every five years or more is good depending on how they check out, which is where the md5 files come in extremely handy.

[bbanderic]

For stuff that's really important to you to keep as long as possible, and I'll leave the definition of "important" to you, you could consider backing up to solid state drives. They are really expensive right now, but with no moving parts, I would think that if you copied your stuff to a solid state drive and then removed it from a computer and put it in storage, it would last a very very long time.

Solid state would be a dream come true but as you said extremely expensive, with the size of most peoples collections it really isn't practical for uncompressed audio and video unfortunately. Great for photos though.

[jman98]

For stuff that's really important to you to keep as long as possible, and I'll leave the definition of "important" to you, you could consider backing up to solid state drives. They are really expensive right now, but with no moving parts, I would think that if you copied your stuff to a solid state drive and then removed it from a computer and put it in storage, it would last a very very long time.

Solid state? Himm. Is that different than flash drive technology?

Think of them as cousins. It's basically the same technology but solid state drives contain some wear leveling algorithms to make them last longer. I don't think flash drives have that. You could also store to flash drives if you wish, but they are even more expensive than solid state drives for larger capacities.

[ron spencer]

[QUOTE=buddycat;1987898]

Ron: I think I'm just trying to avoid having to "wash, rinse, repeat" too often while additionally adding new material.

you will need to do the wash thing no matter what you choose, unless you go for tape, etc. There is no perfect burnable media...the dye on it will not last forever. You could take your stuff and get pressed DVDs, but not worth the effort. Reality is that you MUST do "wash rinse repeat" as a regular average user...if not then you will be like alot of people; your stuff will eventually get lost.

[VegasBud]

...external drive is fine, but if you want to burn only, does it really matter what you use?

Removing the alternate storage medium redundancy (the hard drives) from the strategy, and then using whatever optical media you run across...am I the only one who thinks that sounds more like "wishful thinking" than "archiving"?

No such thing as true archiving on DVD-R...

Time is a corrosive acid which eventually eats away at everything. The specific (and practical) purpose for archiving is to offset the acidic nature of time, which makes the goal of archiving to stay ahead of the "time corrosion", not to eliminate it entirely. In that circumstance, dvdr is well suited to its' part in an archival strategy. All it has to do is not go bad before the next generation of technology is implemented (and this generation of technology becomes obsolete). No archival method is meant to last forever.

As to "wash, rinse, repeat"...the correct interval between cycles would be whatever each person is comfortable with. In my case, since I have yet to see any corruption of my archives (in more than a decade), I don't see much point in replacing what isn't broken. Because I use alternate storage medium redundancy, I can afford to wait and see how my archival strategy plays out. As I said earlier:

If the dvds fail first, you still have the hard drives...if the hard drives fail first, you still have the dvds.

[buddycat]

10 years was my original timeline. Perhaps when I get everything on better media, I can think about that again. But hopefully, by then, there'll be a better media to switch to.