Home News Reviews Forums Shop


Nero 5.5 can't read it's own 1st session on multisession CDR

Nero Burning ROM, Nero Express, NeroVision Express, Recode, InCD, etc..

Nero 5.5 can't read it's own 1st session on multisession CDR

Postby dforion on Mon Mar 08, 2004 2:47 pm

WIN XP Pro
Nero 5.5
Yamaha 3200E CDRW
TDK (TY) CDR disc


This is what happened:

1. Burned Session 1 (New multisession) on CDR - only datafiles.

2. Burned Session 2 (continued multisession) on CDR - , Nero recognized Track 1; then burned Track 2 (4 wave files).

3. Nero recognizes Session1/Track1 and Session2/Track 2, But Nero is no longer able to display contents (ie. Folders/Files) for Session1/Track 1.

4. Burned Session 3 (continued multisession) on CDR (1 data file).

5. Nero recognizes Session1/Track1, Session2/Track 2, Session3/Track 3; Nero shows the contents of Session2 (4 wave files) and Session 3 (1 datafile) together, but STILL CAN'T SEE CONTENTS OF SESSION 1.

6. Roxio can see the contents of Session 1 (Folders and Files), but won't let me copy even one single file to the Harddisk.

I am clueless how to recover Session 1 (200MB).

Any help is GREATLY appreciated!

Thanks.
Dave
dforion
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:31 pm

Postby cfitz on Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:49 pm

How did you continue the CD? When you did continue it, did you import the earlier session? It sounds like somehow you didn't.

I personally don't use Nero's automatic-refresh option when continuing multi-session discs. I find that it is too easy to lose track of what it is doing, at least for the way I use multi-session discs. For example, maybe on your hard disc you deleted or moved the first set of files after you burned them to the first CD-R session. Then if you had Nero's automatic refresh enabled with the "remove deleted files from the compilation" option set, when you burned the second session Nero would have seen that the files were deleted from the hard disc and "deleted" them from the CD-R as well. Of course, they aren't actually deleted, they just aren't pointed to by the current directory structure on the CD-R.

You should be able to import the first session when burning a new session and then be able to see those files. Of course, when you do that you won't be able to see the files on the later sessions (you have to import the last session every time you add a new session in order to be able to see them all). You can also download IsoBuster and use it to get at those earlier sessions.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby pranav81 on Tue Mar 09, 2004 1:31 am

cfitz,right as ever!


::Pranav::
User avatar
pranav81
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 6:57 am
Location: Solapur,Maharashtra,India

Postby dforion on Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:12 pm

Thanks cfitz! Your help saved the day, and the CD-R! It sounds like you have been down this path before.

The burner I used is not my own. As I recall, I did import the session, but when recording session 2, I used the defaults. Since this is a CD-R I knew nothing could be deleted so I did not worry about it. For Session 3 I choose to "add to the compilation".

IsoBuster was able to easily see all the sectors and tracks and extract them to the HardDrive. After I extracted all folders and files, I felt confident and added a 4th session with one short 2 MB file but imported the 1st session, that being the most import session on the disc. I also specified to Finalize the disc. Nero began writing to the disc than ran into an error and was unable to complete the writing. After waiting 5 minutes I shut down the program because it was not responding.

Afterwards, Both Nero and IsoBuster had trouble reading the disc but Win XP Explorer could see the first session.

I decided to start all over and burn all the folders/files from all sessions DAO to a new CD-R and be done with it. It worked.

I believe I learned my lesson that MultiSession CD-R's are fragile and unpredictable at best. I hope I have better luck burning MultiSessions to CD-RW discs. Or maybe I should stay away from Nero MultiSessions altogether?

And a final note is Nero could do a whole lot better in its Help in explaining what needs to be known AHEAD of time when buring MultiSessions.

Thanks again cfitz for coming to the rescue!
dforion
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 7:31 pm

Postby cfitz on Tue Mar 09, 2004 8:52 pm

You're welcome, DFORION, and I'm glad you were able to retrieve your data.

DAO is probably the most straightforward method to burn a disc and is also the method most likely to be compatible with other systems. When I have a disc full of material (either physcially full or logically full - e.g. pictures from vacation 2003) I always burn it DAO. But I also use multi-session TAO burns as well. Once I gave up on Nero's auto-refresh option as too confusing for me and got into the habit of always importing the last session when burning a new session, I haven't had any problems.

I wouldn't say that multi-session burning is fragile (I reserve that adjective for packet writing), but I do agree it can be a bit unpredicatable. Of course, that isn't meant to imply that Nero is randomly selecting files for inclusion/exclusion when importing previous sessions. It doesn't. But unless you take special care to be aware of exactly what options you have selected and how they will interact with what you have already burned on the CD-R and what is on the hard drive, it can lead to unexpected results.

This is what I normally do when burning multi-session discs. Assume I have the following folders on my hard drive that I wish to back up:
Code: Select all
-mystuff-+-photos
         |
         +-software

Within the photos folder are a bunch of jpeg files that I am in the middle of cropping, adjusting colors and otherwise retouching. Within the software folders are a bunch of source files for programs I am writing that, since I make lots of mistakes, I am constantly changing to eliminate bugs. Note the theme for both of these folders: I am making lots of changes to many files.

When I burn my first session, I could just burn the folders as is so that I would have this on the CD-R:
Code: Select all
CD-R_root-+-mystuff-+-photos
                    |
                    +-software

However, if I did this I would run into trouble when I wanted to store my next backup of these same files:
Code: Select all
CD-R_root-+-mystuff-+-photos
          |         |
          |         +-software
          |
          +-mystuff-+-photos
                    |
                    +-software

Obviously this wouldn't work because there are two folders with the same name in the CD-R root folder. To get around this I always rename the top-level folder of my backup with the date of the backup. For example, after burning a backup on March 1 and March 5, I would have this:
Code: Select all
CD-R_root-+-mystuff_2004_03_01-+-photos
          |                    |
          |                    +-software
          |
          +-mystuff_2004_03_05-+-photos
                               |
                               +-software

This gives me several advantages. First and foremost, I can keep multiple copies of the same folder on the same CD-R without them interfering. Second, I have a complete snapshot of all files at each backup so I don't have to try to figure out which version of one file went with which version of another file. Third, I can easily read the dates of backups so if I need to revert to an earlier version I can easily find it. Finally, because I includ the date in a yyyy_mm_dd format with leading zeros, alphabetical order is the same as time order, making it easy to browse directory listings. Note that I chose to append the date so the sort order goes by folder name first and then date, but you could also choose to prepend the date so that the sort order is date first and folder second.

Now, my method works well for me because I typically have many changed files per backup, and I like having a complete snapshot of all files at every backup. But it has drawbacks as well. Probably the most serious is that it doesn't use CD-R space very efficiently if you only have a few files that change between backups or you just want to add a few files. Burning second copies of all the unchanged files to include a few changed or new files is wasteful. It would be more efficient to just link to the unchanged files and burn fresh the new and/or changed files.

So, in the end you have to look at your specific situation and pick the right strategy to suit it. That strategy might be mine, some variation of it, a strategy you devise yourself, or even Nero's auto-refresh if you thoroughly understand what it does and it matches what you want to do. There are as many valid ways to organize backups as there are computer users. :wink:

As for CD-RW working better with CD-R when it comes to multi-session burning, no that is not the case. Your trouble when attempting to import the final session and finalize the disc was probably the result of a bug in Nero, using two different burners or versions of Nero, a defect in the CD-R, or a glitch from the burner. I don't believe your problem is indicative of any inherent weakness in CD-R media used for multi-session burning. Assuming healthy CD-R and CD-RW media, there isn't any difference between them and both will work equally well with multi-session burning.

If you were to force me to say which is more reliable with multi-session burning I would say CD-R simply because CD-R is more reliable at the physical layer in general. Also, there is no danger of physically erasing data on a CD-R while there is with CD-RW. Oops! Did that pop-up window I just clicked "yes" on ask me if I wanted to blank a non-empty disc?!? I thought it was asking if I wanted to continue the session from a non-empty disc... :(

Oh, and one more thing. Because I have found CD-R to be more reliable and have a longer lifetime than CD-RW, I recommend CD-RW only for short-term backup of non-critical files and copying files from one place to another. I would never commit the sole copy of a valuable file to a CD-RW disc, or to any one piece/type of media for that matter.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby pranav81 on Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:53 am

Explained nicely cfitz.But I dont agree with you with what you said about packet writing,that it being fragile.I have myself been using packet writing for a long time now and I have about a dozen CD-RW's that are DirectCD/Drag-To-Disc formatted.It's true that Ahead's InCD never worked for me,but I believe Drag-To-Disc anytime now.It has never failed for me,until now.

Yes,I agree with you on what you said in the last para.
::Pranav::
User avatar
pranav81
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 6:57 am
Location: Solapur,Maharashtra,India

Postby cfitz on Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:07 am

You are right, Pranav, that many have had good success with packet writing. I just have a bias against it due to my personal experiences (for example see my travails in the COM4824 review). On the other hand, most of my packet-writing experience has been with InCD, and people who are happy with packet writing tend to use Drag-to-Disc or other programs that don't have "Ahead" stamped on them. I wonder how many people have been permanently turned off packet writing due to bad experiences with InCD?

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby dodecahedron on Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:45 am

cfitz wrote:I wonder how many people have been permanently turned off packet writing due to bad experiences with InCD?

me for one. :o :( :x
hopefully it's not permanently though.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie
-- JRRT
M.C. Escher - Reptilien
User avatar
dodecahedron
DVD Polygon
 
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2002 12:04 am
Location: Israel

Postby pranav81 on Fri Mar 12, 2004 1:24 am

cfitz wrote:You are right, Pranav, that many have had good success with packet writing. I just have a bias against it due to my personal experiences (for example see my travails in the COM4824 review). On the other hand, most of my packet-writing experience has been with InCD, and people who are happy with packet writing tend to use Drag-to-Disc or other programs that don't have "Ahead" stamped on them. I wonder how many people have been permanently turned off packet writing due to bad experiences with InCD?

cfitz



I have tried InCD when I first upgraded to Win XP because I had EZCD 4,the software came with my burner.Obviously it didnt work with XP so I got Nero 5.5 and was happy.But when I installed InCD the system came up with random automatic reboots,the files took long long time to copy from HDD to the CD-RW's.I was finally frustrated and had to get EZCD 5 Plat. as I badly need packet writing.That was the first and last time I used InCD.My friends too dont have good experience with InCD and have completely stopped packet writing. :(


::Pranav::
User avatar
pranav81
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 6:57 am
Location: Solapur,Maharashtra,India

Postby cfitz on Fri Mar 12, 2004 1:53 am

That's too bad, but it does match my experiences. :(

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am


Return to Nero (Formerly Ahead Software)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

All Content is Copyright (c) 2001-2017 CDRLabs Inc.