Topic: Data DVD-R's: How much verification is necessary?

[T.J.]

I 've been thinking about this question lately b/c for the past year i've been archiving all my shows to DVD-R for achival purposes. With this thread popping up: http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,94267.0.html I figured I post my thoughts and hope to receive some feedback.

Right now my work flow yields four data DVD-R's:

2) Data DVD-R with: edited tracked 24 bit flac fileset (w/ md5 and ffp) & untouched master 24 bit flacs
2) Data DVD-R with: edited tracked 16 bit flac fileset (w/ md5 and ffp) & edited master 16 bit wav files

I burn all discs a x8 speed. In addition to these copies I also burn a CDR copy for the car and upload to the LMA whenever possible.

I think I spend more time verifying the flac files and testing the md5 files than anything else! I will create the flac files and test them, create the md5 and test that. I will then burn the data disc using nero (w/ verify selected), and then re-test the flac files and md5's on the newly burned data disc.

Is this overkill? I've yet to encounter a failed test (knock on wood). But i'm starting to think all this flac and md5 testing is a little overkill.
thoughts?

[Gordon]

the verify with nero is overkill I think.  not a bad idea but not as good as running md5's of testing flacs.  what I've started doing is using traders little helper to make a verifiable ffp.  click on it and it runs much like a md5 does.  no need for both imo.  say if you later tag your flacs etc the md5 won't match anymore but the ffp always will.

[JackoRoses]

I burn at full speed for everything these days.
your mileage may vary and I understand about burning at slower speeds but after years of doing this I don't see a purpose any longer. The md5's or ffp check out at either speed.
I usually burn the untracked master to a disc and if there is room to spare I will throw tracked flacs on it too. I also burn a disc of the tracked flacs seperate and if there is room to spare I will throw on any unedited master tracks for extra redundancy but that is it for me.

[Gordon]

the burn speed issue has to do with life of the disc.  or that's how it was explained to me. 

[JackoRoses]

the burn speed issue has to do with life of the disc.  or that's how it was explained to me. 

interesting I never heard that one before.
I always heard it was for better data writing.

Back when I first started trading cd's it use to be 4x only and with what you are saying than everyone should burn at 1x ideally...
I was always under the impression the life of the disc comes down to a few things and not writing the disc.
The chemical makeup of the disc, and the atmospheric conditions the disc is stored in.

[Gordon]

the burn speed issue has to do with life of the disc.  or that's how it was explained to me. 

interesting I never heard that one before.
I always heard it was for better data writing.

Back when I first started trading cd's it use to be 4x only and with what you are saying than everyone should burn at 1x ideally...
I was always under the impression the life of the disc comes down to a few things and not writing the disc.
The chemical makeup of the disc, and the atmospheric conditions the disc is stored in.

well I should have said It's also for better data writing but I've heard both.  and I could be wrong.  life of the disc is definitely effected by the brand/make up of the disc as well.  for data I use to burn as fast as I could.  someone on this board convinced me not to.  don't remember who   anyway for a data dvd at 8x it's not that long anyway.  sometimes I burn at 4x.  I'm paranoid enough about master data disc that I will likely reburn everything in a few years anyway

[T.J.]

I'm paranoid enough about master data disc that I will likely reburn everything in a few years anyway

my thoughts exactly. i view the whole burn speed issue like i do printing: the image printed at slower speeds leaves a more permanent image.

i think i'm gonna give TLH a try. i've heard about it from numerous people. it is appealling b/c you have one program that does numerous functions. 

[Gordon]

I'm paranoid enough about master data disc that I will likely reburn everything in a few years anyway

i think i'm gonna give TLH a try. i've heard about it from numerous people. it is appealling b/c you have one program that does numerous functions. 

it's awesome! 

[John Kary]

the verify with nero is overkill I think.  not a bad idea but not as good as running md5's of testing flacs.

The burn to Nero is the most critical part!  If you write a bad disc and a chunk of data doesn't match what was on your drive, you can't repair it, right?  I would highly suggest verifying all discs for archiving purposes.  It doesn't take that long.

I'm not that familiar with md5/ffp, but aren't they just like an sfv, where you verify the integrity of the files?  It's not like a recovery record and allows you to repair corrupted data, does it?

[Gordon]

the verify with nero is overkill I think.  not a bad idea but not as good as running md5's of testing flacs.

The burn to Nero is the most critical part!  If you write a bad disc and a chunk of data doesn't match what was on your drive, you can't repair it, right?  I would highly suggest verifying all discs for archiving purposes.  It doesn't take that long.

I'm not that familiar with md5/ffp, but aren't they just like an sfv, where you verify the integrity of the files?  It's not like a recovery record and allows you to repair corrupted data, does it?

they (md5, ffp) verify the data (integrity of files as you put it).  and imo and others they do a much better job than nero.  you should always verify the md5,ffp but the nero is a extra step b/c you will then still need to run the ffp,md5.  if it's a bad burn then the disc won't read anyhow.

[F.O.Bean]

I ONLY use Verbatim DVD-R's from the local Sam's Club. They are MCC03RG20 discs and are of the HIGHEST QUALITY comparing them in this link:
http://www.digitalfaq.com/media/dvdmedia.htm

I have copied MANY of them back to my HD to burn for other folks and have had ZERO problems since using HQ Verbatim media and verifying md5's for those filesets. I also make an md5 for EVERY fileset and also verify with Nero 6 Ultra Edition. Hasnt done me wrong YET(*knocks on wood*). Also, EVERY spindle I buy, I run thru this software program called "DVD Identifier". Its freeware and EVERYONE serious about their collection should run it on the first 5-10 discs of each spindle
http://dvd.identifier.cdfreaks.com/

Also, I think the verify in nero is awesome. it tells when a bad burn or failed verification happens. and it does a bit-by-bit verification. how can that be a bad thing? its def saved mya ss a few times. besides, taking the extra time to verify in nero makes me feel safer anyway. I mean, they are archives I want them to be of the highest quality possible. I used to verify the optical media and verify the md5 as soon as the disc was burned, but after doing that for 5 years and NEVER having one check out anything other than perfect, i gave that up about a year ago because it takes SOOO long to verify an md5 on optical media. and I never had one go bad. I just verify the md5 of that fileset right before I burn it and verify in nero and thats good enough for me. I occassionally throw a dvd-r in the drive randomly and verify its md5. havent had a problem since using ONLY HQ Verbatim DVD-R's and im KNOCKING ON WOOD after saying that

[mandoman]

I too archive to DVD-R. (not DVD+R).

Finding the right media, burner, and software is the most critical step I think.

I burn at 1/2 max speed of the rated burner or media (whichever is worst case).
That has been 4x for me, but soon will be 8x with my newer 16x burner and 16x media.
This is just to give me peace of mind.

My media of choice is Taiyo-Yuden. I burn on my powerbook's (now macbook pro's)
superdrive using Toast Titanium. I ALWAYS run the verification step in Toast.

I would run the md5 checks on the burned media if you really want extra assurance,
but for me, I pretty much trust the media verification check.

I pretty much never get coasters and am very confident with my setup. Once you
go through a bunch of disc, you'll feel confident too.

[gratefulphish]

When everyone is talking about running the md5 checks, I assume that is only on the flac portions.  Is there some way to verify the accuracy of the writing of the masters themselves, other than Nero verifying?

[JD]

When I make an archival DVD I drop all the files into a folder on my desktop, then right-click on the folder, then click "Generate MD5 signatures".  This creates a single MD5 for the entire DVD. I then burn the contents of the folder, including the MD5 file. Then I can validate the DVD with one click at any time.

Works for me.

Edit to add;
I always verify all that all the files are good and not corrupt before creating this DVD MD5 file.

[JasonSobel]

When everyone is talking about running the md5 checks, I assume that is only on the flac portions.  Is there some way to verify the accuracy of the writing of the masters themselves, other than Nero verifying?

why not just create an MD5 file for the master WAV files.  that's what I do, and I assume many others do that as well.