I'm now migrating some CD-R burns done in 2000 to hard disk. I've had two
failed reads so far, each time a single file rather than an entire disc.
These were burned on quality stock, either TY or Mitsui (now MAM-A)
Next will be the hard drives not spinning up I expect.
Ultimately, your data will only survive if you maintain redundant copies,
check it periodically and recopy every few years.
-jeremiah
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>
>
> At 9:51 AM +0100 5/1/11, Chris Edwards wrote:
> >
> >
> >On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Rob Danielson wrote:
> >
> >| ~4 years ago I found several web sites with tests of burners with
> >| several criteria measured. There were significant differences between
> >| burners.
> >
> >Right - and good luck buying a 4-year old burner model :-)
>
> Hi Chris--
>
> The few reviews I read yesterday suggest to me there are still
> significant performance differences in today's models. One can still
> find 4-5 year old drives for sale. Makes some sense that a drive that
> does not also burn double-layer and BR could be more mechanically
> reliable at handling vanilla DVD-R's.
>
>
> >
> >Personally I have little faith in recordable DVDs in the long-term.
> >Plenty disks I wrote a few years ago are no longer readable :-(
>
> This may be consistent with the poor burner/media combination
> observation. Quite a few burners create disks that will not
> consistently read on other burners. 4X and 8X burned disks more so.
> When I noticed this at a lab and on an early iMac and a Powerbook G4,
> I looked into the matter. After settling with the Pioneer
> DVR-107D/T-Y silver discs combination, no disks have failed to read
> even on other drives. I'm burning disc #3064 as I type.
>
> I'm more confident about these optical DVD-R disks than I am a boxes
> of IDE hard drives that hold material.
>
>
> >
> >One thing I've been told, by an ex-BBC person, is that the "rewritable"
> >DVD media may actually be better, because the chemistry involved is
> >different, and lasts longer.
>
> I think the pits can be read more reliably for a period of time but I
> don't think the longevity is better than gold/silver media with
> phthalocyanine dye.
>
>
> >
> >But as has already been said, the only way to be sure is to periodically
> >copy stuff to fresh media. Hence I now keep everything on live hard
> >disks.
>
> Smart, but if one has more than 3-5 drives, drive to drive
> duplicating is quite expensive and tedious. I'm risking letting the
> optical disks do that work for me for the next 20 years,..
>
>
> >Amongst other advantages, when the time comes, copying stuff will
> >simply involve a single "drag'n'drop" type operation on my computer, which
> >should be MUCH easier than copying loads of DVDs one by one...
>
> For sure! As of this month, I've started keeping the field recording
> originals on 1TB drives too for this reason. Rob D.
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
jeremiah moore | SOUND |
http://www.jeremiahmoore.com/
|