I already own one. The Panasonic RP91 (which I bought for its other features, not DVD-RAM) plays DVD-RAM just fine. I agree though, these types of players are uncommon.DVD-RAM really doesn't enter the picture here, as no one has any plans for making a dvd player that can read the format.
The defect management (as I understand it) is largely dependent upon Mt. Rainier. The benefit of DVD+RW is that Mt. Rainier will support it but with current specs, Mt. Rainier will NOT support DVD-RW. Thus in the future when Mt. Rainier is implemented, DVD+RW will be superior to DVD-RW with data. But as of today Mt. Rainier with DVD+RW doesn't exist. (Based on my admittedly superficial knowledge, I wouldn't be surprised that DVD-RW may eventually also get a form of Mt. Rainier as well, but I'm not holding my breath.)This is an interesting statement, what is the difference between significant defect management and just "some defect management?" The DVD+ people seem to think they have a pretty robust defect managment system built into the drive. DVD- is said to have none built into the drive. Other than on paper comparisons, what is the real world defect rate of RAM vs +R vs -R? Does anyone know?
As for the video argument, this doesn't apply to Mt. Rainier anyway since you're not going to using Mt. Rainier discs in your DVD player.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 54 of 54
Originally Posted by shardison
That last link you supplied Kusanagi should bring these discussions here to an end. What more can we add? It rages on much better there.
Also Philip, what about +RW format being able to write data and then read-verify at the same time? Something the -RW format cannot do. I read this some time back; would you please comment?
Just to add I'm interested in that this is another interesting discussion thread.
Kusanagi, us +RW/+R people are eagarly awaiting your response.
I'M NOT BASHING!!
Posted: May 09 09:44
I feel both formats (I hate using the word format for +/-R/RW; DVD is the format) have equal merit in the DVD video authoring world. Especially now that +R is available.
Err... no. While both -R and +R (giving it the benefit of the doubt here) should have great compatibility with standalone players, for professional authoring work there is essentially zero support for DVD+R. Indeed even many of the consumer level programs don't even support +R.
This will change with time but currently your statement is not correct.
Now I remember what I read about writing and reading back. I didn't remember it right. See this:
The point is, because of the large track wobble of the +R format, the drive can read the wobble and accurately calculate where it last left off writing, which is why the "accurate" lossless linking is advertized. I don't believe that -R format has as this capability. Does it?
Originally Posted by shardison
Does anyone have information as to what is required in video for accurate enough linking so you don't get skips in the video?
I have read that the CD Audio spec requires gaps of less than 100 u. The first burnproof gives results of less than 40 u and apparently current iterations of burnproof (or is it JustLink?) gives results of 2-5 u, and I think Yamaha has gotten this down to 1 u.
What does the DVD video spec require, and what does Pioneer's or Panasonic's burnproof for DVD give you?
Indeed, one wonders just how accurate the linking is with current drives. Also would DVD-RAM be the most accurate of them all?
Just asking as a layperson...
Originally Posted by shardison
OTOH, all DVD-RAM (but not DVD-RW) writes are verified. I suspect that's one reason why DVD-RAM writes are slow when compared to DVD-RW and DVD+RW. (My DVD-RAM drive does 1X write but 2X read.) That said, DVD-RAM 2X write drives are supposed to be coming out soon.
Well, seems cdrinfo has confirmed what we have been saying (and fighting over). DVD+R is NOT as compatible in DVD-ROMs when compared to DVD-R. The specific page of the review is here (scroll down to see the comparison table) --
"As the test results showed, all DVD-ROM drives read DVD-R media without any problems. The playback was excellent without any glitches. The DVD+R media had some issues with four drives."
Also, their conclusion wraps it up pretty well --
"It is obvious that the MP5125A has many advantages against the DVR-A04 but also several disavtanges also. The biggest "problems" are the less compatibility of DVD+R and the higher price of the drive (DVR-A04 costs around $320 (bare drive), while MP5125A is expected around $430. The media prices are also much different, $1-2 for unbranded media, 5-6$ for branded DVD-R media, while DVD+R is expected to cost around $8-10."
Thanks for the info Kusanagi. Do you have any info on the compatibility of dvd+r's on standalone dvd players. I've found a little info but most of them vary. But let's look at this from another standpoint. How may people actually want to create dvd+r's to play on their dvd-rom. Maybe it is just me but dvd+r's run on average for about $6 to $9 and I soley use dvd+r's for VIDEO. If you want data just create a cd-r which is probably compatible with every dvd-rom on the market. I have some sources that claim dvd+r's will play on about 90% of standalone dvd players. I'll post them later when I remember where I put them, but even I was amazed at those statistics. I can say that right now I am in the process of doing compatibilty test here at work. So far I've tested 20 different standalone dvd players and probably will end it at about 30 or 40. So far my dvd+r has worked in 18 of 20 and I'll post the names and final results sometime this weekend. I guess it is back to that same question of what do you want the drive to do for you. I want it to be compatible with standalone dvd players and so far it is serving my purpose.
Do you suppose there are other message boards out there that are arguing the merits of one DVD player over another based on compatibility with + or -R? Or MP3 and WMA?
We don't argue that WMA is better or worse than MP3 here, but we do note that one or another DVD player has the ability to play the MP3 or WMA audio formats, and we praise that player. We also note that it plays VCD or SVCD, with equal praise for that ability.
I think we're all on the wrong end of the equation here. It's really up to manufacturers to be compatible with the widest range of digital sources and formats; be they MPEG2, Divx, -R, +R, or whatever.
We should all accept +R and -R as strong opponents with a common goal; bring DVD video authoring to the masses.
We should instead punish any manufacturer that makes equipment that does not support +R, -R, and MP3 for starters; because the manufacturers are the source of incompatibility; not the formats.
Place the blame where it belongs.
Originally Posted by shardison
Yes VCD is a bonus, but to me SVCD is a non-issue. Commercial SVCDs are not really available (commonly), so really it's only important if it can play VCD well and DVD well. And even then for me in the North American market VCD is only really just an added bonus I'd rarely use. For the Asian market it's different though I agree.
To me WMA is irrelevant. Why? Not because of the sound quality. Actually the sound quality can be quite good, but MP3 is the cross platform format, whereas WMA isn't really. So if a DVD player played WMA, I couldn't care less. Plus, I encode all my MP3s (now about 27 GB) at 256 kbps with Fraunhofer, so it's hard for any other format to get significantly better quality.
I don't think we should punish a maker that doesn't support either -R or +R necessarily. Sure, it may be an option to look for, but there is no requirement for every manufacturer to support everything with all their products. The vast majority of people never will make a DVD-R (or +R). They just wanna watch 101 Dalmations on pressed DVD. If it really matters that much to you, that's why we have compatibility charts like the one at vcdhelp.com.
I have a Sony DRU-120A DVD+RW/+R drive. I can burn a movie to the +RW disk, but they will not play in my Hitachi 505 stand-alone player. The 505 would play SVCD, but not DVD+RW disks.
I tried to use the DVD Bitset Utility, but it won't run using the Sony DRU-120A. I even have a flash for the Hitachi, but haven't used it. Got it from Hitachi Syndicate. Now, some owners of this Sony drive says that I must flash its ROM to make it a newer version of the Ricoh in order for the Sony to work with the bitset utility. I don't know how to do that. I've re-burned my movie 4 times on a DVD+RW disk and the 2nd time, it actually played in the Hitachi. But, maybe the bitset utility work that time, but I don't remember. I don't remember what I did that time... maybe used NERO instead of the other software to burn. I try to use the bitset utility and it seems to do nothing. I may have to buy a newer DVD player?
I have 5 DVD+R disks, but wanting to save them until I am ready to go final with some home movies. Everytime, when I burn a DVD+RW disk, it always plays fine in the computer's DVD ROM player, no problem.
If you have a suggestion or recommendation, please post here or send it to firstname.lastname@example.org Thanks.
I can tip in more evidence from the authoring world. I have been a recording engineer since 1994, and under an old label I released many discs both on pressed silver and on CDR throughout the late '90s. I now work in DVD only, since CDR is ubiquitous and anyone can burn whatever they want on the cheap. However I don't do nearly the volume of DVD now as I did CD then, because it became a side project for me as of 1999.
The production houses where you'd make pressed silver discs prefer first and foremost that you give them the pure data, either as a DAT backup, or similar module. They make more money if they author the DVD themselves, of course... but even if it were free, they run the risk of missing deadlines and production timelines if the factory has to send it back because it won't convert to a compliant glass master.
Once they have pressed a job or two for a given producer, such as you or me, if that producer shows that they can produce compliant DVD-R masters, they will take them. DVD-R-A is preferred, but DVD-R-G is accepted if you don't plan to use any copy protection. DVD-RAM is also typically accepted, but only as a pure data carrier as per the paragraph above. DVD-RW is not accepted. DVD+R/RW is never accepted at all, by ANY of the production companies I've worked with. They look on it like cassette tape or VHS, because it can't be read as a standard media master for mass replication.
Basically, they will take the discs providing you give them something that will produce an acceptable proof disc under all normal circumstances. The standards set by the DVD forum, and the various CCI "books" back in the days of CDs, are there for a reason... very expensive machines that produce masters and replicate pressed discs are tailored to work to those exacting standards, so that they can press a run of fifty thousand discs or more and have no qualms that they will play in any set-top player.
All that being said, the point becomes moot as more and more DVD players read both formats, and as the likelihood of dual-standard burners increases as time goes by.-MPB/AZ
+R and +RW hasn't been on the market for that long. So of course, it's not as well established in the authoring world. While informative, your experience doesn't exactly tip the balance, most people do not want to press 50,000 DVDs. And even, if they did, it's not hard to copy a DVD+R to a DVD-R when and if it is required.
Sony will eventually come out with a revised firmware but in the meantime, you can try what these guys are suggesting:
Regarding defect management on DVD-RW (or +RW):
I back up non-critical files to DVD-RW. Is there no error correction, or unreliable correction built into the format? Is DVD-RW 'weaker' than DVD-R? I understand there are reflectivity differences and set-top player issues, but given a DVD-ROM drive that can read these formats, is there a reliability difference in the formats themselves?
I assumed DVD-writable formats were at least as robust as CD-R/RW data recordings (i.e. non-audio, non-VCD), even for video data.