Question about dual layer dvd+r

[Agent99]

newbie question:

Will a dvd+r dual layer disk be recognized as dvd+r single layer if you try to burn it on a regular burner? I guess what I'm asking is: could a regular burner record onto the first layer of a dual layer dvd+r disk?

Thank you.

[yoda313]

Hello,

Why would you want to???

Single layer discs are SO much cheaper. It's not worth the test.

Kevin

[-jsl-]

Will a dvd+r dual layer disk be recognized as dvd+r single layer if you try to burn it on a regular burner? I guess what I'm asking is: could a regular burner record onto the first layer of a dual layer dvd+r disk?

No and no.

[Agent99]

It's not that I would want to waste dvd+r dl, I'm just curious.

I don't quite understand why it wouldn't work. More energy is required to burn the 2nd layer than the 1st layer, right? So a single layer burner would easily burn the 1st layer but not the 2nd layer.

I tried reading some of the earlier discussions but I guess I just don't get it. Can someone explain it in plain English?

Thank you.

[Gil T Pleasure]

I think that the outer and inner layers must be written to with the same amount of data to be compatible. Single layer burners don't have enough power to burn the inner layer of the DVD+DL disc.

[yoda313]

Hello,

I think you could just burn 4.37gb on a double layer with no problem. I just think it needs a double layer laser to burn it because of the different dye used. Though I'm not positive as I haven't read any technical documents on it.

Kevin

[overloaded_ide]

Interesting question

And though for now it does not make sense, in the future it might.

First to answer your question, It would take some studying of HOW the DL disks are writen and testing to see if they could be writen in other ways. I am sure when the price of DL disks gets low enough to toss em out like princo 1x disks then some people will be doing that testing

In the mean time who knows for sure? If the disks are burned one layer at a time it would make sense that a SL burner could write a DL disk on one layer, just wherever it happened to hit, first or second layer. Then rather it could be read back would be another question. But I am sure the disk ID and firmware would conflict, so the old SL burner would not even know what the disk was anyway.
As for the drives themselfs, it is evident by the fact you can upgrade firmware on some SL drives to make them DL drives that a SL drive can burn a DL disk. Nec 2500 and Nec 2510 are supposedly the same drives, just one is SL and the other DL, upgrade firmware with a hack and the 2500 is also a DL 2510 supposedly.

My first instinct on this however is that if you take a normal SL drive and shove in a DL disk it simply will not recognize the burning strategy at all, kinda like trying to burn a +R disk in a burner that supports only -R disks.
Now if you hack the firmware to recognize the disk maybe it would burn one layer, but why bother, hack it to be a DL burner then and burn both layers

I could see when the price of DL disks get super cheap it might be a decent question and something nice to know. If only a 5 cent difference in cost of disks why bother stocking both SL and DL disks? If the DL burner goes down and you still had a SL burner for backup being able to toss a DL disk on hand in and burn it would be handy.

Kinda like I have an 8X Nec and 2x Toshiba, I only been burning 4x disks I had on hand in the NEC anyway, but why bother stocking 2x seperatetly for the Toshiba? Now my NEC was acting up and I installed it in the office system for testing it and I have to burn on the Toshiba at 2X now till I either find the problem why the NEC quit or RMA it.

When disks were high priced for 4X I would got the same why bother type answer if asking if a 4x would burn on a 2X burner probably. But now they cost about the same so might as well use one disk for everything.
Course the 4x/2x is a speed thing, different than SL or DL which is a format thing.