Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ThaCrip

  1. 17 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    you can install new kernels, but it's really a mishmash sometimes (especially if you installed an LTS kernel previously)

    I suspect if you try to install non-standard kernels in Mint it 'may' act up (which I would avoid as a general rule) but the stuff I mentioned is officially acknowledged by the Mint team (as I have seen mods there on their forums suggest that sort of stuff to people here and there with newer hardware). with 'apt install linux-oem-22.04c' and they even have a one with less support, which is newer than the LTS(5.15) but not as new as the one I mentioned(6.1), in the 'Update Manager > View > Linux Kernels' of 5.19 kernel, which they only support to Aug 2023. but soon they will probably have a newer one than 5.19 offered in the Update Manager for those who want it (it does not install by default as those who are on 5.15 will stay on that kernel series unless they install a newer kernel).

    but I also heard the Mint team say that's it's best to stick with the LTS kernel unless you have a real reason to use a newer one, like you need it for support of newer hardware etc.

    so I guess a 'safer bet' would be if your system is supported by 5.15 (Nov 2021 released) it's probably best. still, I would be confident newer kernels (the ones Mint supports) will be okay on Mint 21.x series to.

    but like you said, 'there's a distro out there for everyone'.


    17 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    What's the point in having RAM and power if you aren't going to use it? Most modern laptops can handle hungry desktop environments without blinking an eye these days.

    Fair enough. but one thing about lighter DE's, less stuff to act up, high end hardware or not, it will run well. I am more of the mindset once the interface looks 'good enough', which I feel Xfce and other similar ones are, I prefer to side with speed/reliability over a fancier interface. but I get there is no definitive answer here as it's still mostly preference.

    but I guess with certain hardware, it might easily handle the more fancy interfaces. but what I like about Mint's DE's (Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce) is they have a traditional Windows like feel to them, which I think is always a safe bet.

    but in terms of RAM... I suspect it's generally not much either way with DE's, at least in regards to Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce (or the like) variations. so it's pretty much a non-issue from the RAM aspect. but short of lighter users (who may be able to get by with 4GB of RAM), 8GB of RAM is pretty much a minimum nowadays. I got 16GB of RAM (I had 8GB from May 2012 until 2020 when I bought some used DDR3 ram (2x 8GB) for my main PC, which it's now at the limit of the motherboard). I would probably say 8GB or 16GB is the sweet-spot for most people (and probably makes up a large portion of computers still in use, with some 4GB of RAM PC's as PC's that don't have at least 4GB of RAM are probably straight up ancient) and more than 32GB of RAM is probably overkill for the vast majority of people.


    17 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    Sounds like it's getting a little long in the tooth LOL. I've just setup my old A10 ASUS laptop for my daughter to use with the latest 22H2 windows 10 on it. Still running fine. That ones about 10 years old. But hardware does get to a point where it become pretty much obsolete as it can't keep up with data transfers - like using USB2.0 to transfer 100GB of files. You can do it, but is the time worth it? I generally just use older hardware for gaming machines etc so once they're setup, I don't have to touch them.

    Yep. it's showing it's age ;) ; but it's still usable as I tend to roughly use a measuring stick of when doing fairly basic tasks if it's routinely pegging the CPU to 100% or thereabouts then you know it's truly ancient hardware and it's pretty much time to move on (like pretty much a underpowered laptop I have HP2000 with a AMD E-300, but I mainly use this (which has Mint 21.1-Xfce on it) for playing movies on TV's from .mkv files). but just browsing internet etc, CPU usage is not too high on that ASUS A8N32-SLI board. it's also limited to 4GB of RAM MAX, which is what's in it (4x 1GB DDR 400Mhz) as I would say the RAM would be more of a issue than CPU will be for general usage, 'if' I had to use that on a regular basis like I do my main PC. but I only use it once in a while, so it's still passable.

    but with that motherboard I got in early 2006 (the high end 2005 tech) is a ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe (socket 939) and originally had a single core CPU in it but I upgraded it to a dual core back in 2010, which at the time was still my main PC until May 2012 (which is when I got my current main PC). that old 2006 board currently has a AMD Athlon X2 3600+ dual-core 2.0GHz, but I got it overclocked to 2.3GHz. but this setup is a backup desktop, which I generally don't use much but it's nice to hang around for older hardware as while it has SATA II ports, it does have some IDE connections to so I can use my old CD/DVD burners that have IDE connections on them (and a small amount of old IDE hard drives I got if I need to).

    AMD was better than Intel at the time (like early 2006), but shortly after I got that, Intel came out with the Core 2 Duo CPU's and, to my knowledge, Intel has been ahead of AMD ever since in terms of performance per core. but prior to that AMD was ahead of Intel for probably around 5 years (like with gaming etc). my primary PC has a i5-3550 (runs at 3.5GHz under full load) as that's 11 year old CPU tech (although I had a i3-2120 CPU (2-core/4-thread) in that from when I got it until the year 2020 when I got a near dirt cheap ($20) used i5-3550 (4-core/4-thread) which was a solid upgrade for barely any money). in fact, my current main PC (ASUS board etc) is the longest I ever owned a primary PC as it just crossed the 11 year mark last month (my previous record high was 6 years and 2 months (March 2006 until May 2012)) and still works well although the on-board sound on it died back in 2020 but I just got one of those cheap USB sound cards with a 3.5mm jack on it to restore the sound and then just disabled the on-board sound in the BIOS/UEFI. I plan on sticking with this setup for the foreseeable future since it does pretty much everything I need.

    but I see your point with USB 2.0 given it's limited to about 30MB/s transfers where as a typical USB3 (or SATAII/III (probably even SATA I on some level)) will allow the hard drive to work at maximum speed which, unless one has a small capacity hard drive it can probably do around 80-100MB/s+ (even on smaller capacity HDD's 50-60MB/s or so)). I think the USB3 connection itself can do up to 300MB/s at least, or maybe up-to 500-600MB/s, as I know SATA II is limited to 300MB/s and SATA III can do up-to 500-600MB/s.

    but good point about the older hardware for gaming machine as once they are setup you don't have to mess with them, especially if it's pretty much a offline machine.

  2. 18 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    And I'm running Linux on newer systems, so need newer kernels. But it's all good - Whatever works right?

    Yeah, even on the newest Mint 21.x series, the default kernel is 5.15 which that kernel was released in Nov 2021 (first Mint 21.x series release was about mid-2022), so it's got a little age on it. but one can install a bit more recent kernels to it if needed. so I guess it depends on how new ones hardware is. but if one needs a bit newer kernel, the newest one I see available in it is 6.1 which appears to be from Dec 2022 ( apt install linux-oem-22.04c ), so roughly a half year ago.


    24 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    I tried LM years ago (with MATE, I think I tried Cinnamon as well)

    While 'Cinnamon' is sort of their main version, Cinnamon/MATE had a issue on at least two out of the three computers I have in regards to video playback (720p/1080p x264 and the like) with Celluloid paired with MPV for hardware accelerated video playback. but Xfce works without issue which is why at this point and for quite a while now I settled on Xfce. it's especially noticeable on a slower laptop I have etc. even my main PC has the issue but it's not as obvious and I can temporarily fix it by restarting Cinnamon, but then the issue returns roughly a day later (I generally leave my primary PC on all of the time). but with Xfce I simply don't have the issue, even after a lot of time passes. currently my system up time on my main PC running Mint 21.1-Xfce is 74 days and counting.

    even in terms of basic interface... while the three offered by Mint (Cinnamon/MATE/Xfce) are similar, I never cared for MATE's interface as I think Cinnamon/Xfce are more similar/better, but ultimately I had to side with Xfce as I think it's a safer bet across a wider range of hardware.

    but I suspect with Linux variations in general... there are probably quirks and preferences etc. so it's hard to definitely say one is 'the best', but I would guesstimate Mint (Xfce) is probably one of the better choices for users coming from Windows to Linux (assuming their hardware works on it).

    but from what you say, it appears you prefer a interface that's a bit more fancy at the tradeoff of being more resource hungry. personally I think DE's like Xfce look good enough and are on the lighter side as it does the important stuff well enough with a simple/clean interface.


    35 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    As long as you're not using it for day to day things (like banking) that need the security and you're not connecting it to the net, you should be fine. Besides, Win10 works well enough even on slightly dated PCs

    I forgot to mention... on that backup computer with Mint/Win7, it cannot run any Windows newer than Windows 7 as while Win10 32-bit installs, it's unstable, and Win10 64-bit outright won't install as it complains about lack of nx-bit. but I am not too surprised as the motherboard is basically high-end tech from 2005 (I built it in early 2006).


    53 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    But I hear what you're saying about just converting over entirely to Linux and their file formats.

    Yeah, I already did over 3 years ago now at this point.

    it was only some odd months ago I did the Linux(120GB SSD SATA)/Win7(on 80GB IDE HDD) on my backup computer setup. but it boots to Linux (Mint) by default.

  3. 19 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    As using it in windows, you could just right click a folder and you can open that location with the program easily. Running it in Wine I don't think there was that option, so you had to navigate in the program itself (which takes time).

    Well when it comes to general audio playback, I just always have Foobar2000 open and you can change songs easily enough through it's GUI. as for playing back songs, I always load the main Foobar2000 and then drag-and-drop songs into whatever tab you want and play. even in regards to general playback, through Foobar2000's settings, I made it so you can rewind/fast forward with the arrow keys. spacebar is play/pause etc. but the Foobar2000 program needs to be the active window for it to work.

    I even have the 'right click (like right click a file(s) in Foobar2000) > Convert' section setup with shortcuts which makes it easier to convert from FLAC to MP3 etc in the future. this is actually pretty easy once it's setup as you open Foobar2000, drag-and-drop files into it's own tab etc, then select them all (or whatever you want to convert, right click and select Convert etc.

    also, after setting up Foobar2000 through PlayOnLinux, through my Mint 21.1-Xfce installation on the 'Keyboard > Application Shortcuts' section I setup a keyboard shortcut to load Foobar2000 by pressing CTRL+SHIFT+F. this is not straight forward/easy but it's not too difficult. but I just generally have PlayOnLinux create a desktop shortcut to whatever Windows program I want to use as then it's simple enough.

    I noticed on some Wine installations, like through the standard system install itself, that sometimes it does not affiliate double clicking a exe to run it (so I got to use terminal etc) but I noticed installing it from the official Wine website (winehq.org) seems to automatically affiliate exe's with Wine to where it acts a bit more like Windows where you just double click to run a exe. but even with the official WineHQ site install, I also suggest installing the 'apt install wine-desktop-files' as this creates shortcuts on your start menu for easier access to 'Configure Wine' (instead of having to do 'winecfg' from terminal) etc.

    so while Foobar2000 does not have a fancy looking interface, it's practical function is where it shines as it does the basics well (maybe some slight tweaking needed) if you don't mind loading up the program to play your music.

    p.s. but with FSTAB I mainly did that so that hard drives are always mounted to the same location regardless of whether the /dev/sda changes or not (which it might on random reboots).


    29 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    TBH Once I settle on a distro, I was more thinking along the lines of running Windows in a virtual machine instead of dual booting.

    Yeah, I am not much of a fan of dual-booting in general as it's a safer bet to either run Windows or Linux exclusively.

    even on the rare occasion I need to play with Windows on my Linux machine, I just run it through a virtual machine (QEMU/KVM etc)

    but with virtual machine, while it will probably be okay, I suspect there are some instances where ones has to be running Windows on the actual machine for it to work. but I imagine this generally won't be the case (I have one thing that requires the real Windows though, but fortunately I rarely use that device that requires Windows).

    p.s. the only dual-boot system I do have of the three computers I got is my backup desktop where Linux Mint runs from a 120GB SSD and Windows 7 is on a 80GB IDE. the Windows 7 I do have installed was installed from a custom/updated to Jan 2023 ISO I made with a 'Integrate7' script by a user on another forum called 'wkeller'. it's about 2.1GB larger than the official stock Win7 SP1 from Microsoft which I think was from 2011 or so. I know Windows 7 support was officially gone as of Jan 2020, but it did get updates until pretty much Jan 2023 but was not easy to do etc. but I only have that installed on what will likely be a rare use occasion where I have to run a very limited amount of Windows games on that old computer since, in short, they don't work on that computer since the Linux driver is using the older 'radeon' driver instead of what more modern gaming on Linux uses on the AMD side of things, which is 'amdgpu' driver. but those old games I got on that work fine on Linux on my primary PC but it's using a proper NVIDIA driver etc.


    35 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    I'm sort of 50/50 ATM. I can do a lot of things in Linux, but when it comes to audio/video production a lot of things are still quicker in Windows unfortunately. Its just a matter of finding the equivalent software I'm happy with in Linux But I'm getting there. I'm going to try and give the native Linux apps a go first before I switch to running Windows apps in Wine if I can.

    Yeah, I see.

    I don't use much Windows software, mainly just Foobar2000/ImgBurn and maybe a little bit beyond this (along with some games), but the Windows software I do use, there just ain't a good Linux equivalent (maybe with burning software on some level, but even with that ImgBurn is more optimal), especially with Foobar2000.


    39 minutes ago, schmidtp said:

    I'm using a Fedora based distro ATM (Ultramarine) and most things are generally working well (except the occasional snag). I've got a slight issue ATM I can't solve with drives being corrupted occasionality when Linux writes to NTFS formatted partitions. Unfortunately my Files drive has to be formatted in a type that both Windows and Linux can read when I switch OS.

    I see. but since you are still fairly heavily using Windows, I totally understand with keeping NTFS. in fact, when I made the switch to Linux in Jan 2019 full-time I held off about 1 full year after that (so to around Jan 2020) before changing pretty much all of my hard drives from NTFS to EXT4 just to make sure I was going to stick with Linux in the long term.

    but I did notice some issues on Linux with NTFS hard drives, like with torrents it would download to 100% but there was fairly often a tiny bit of that data I had to pause, do a 'force recheck' and then it would find a bit of missing data and then when I started download again it would finish and generally be okay. but on EXT4 I never experienced that issue once. so while I think 'NTFS' on Linux is 'mostly okay', there can potentially be weird quirks like this and what you experience etc.

    anyways... while I get there is a lot of Linux distro's out there, so it might be difficult to find one to settle on for some people, I never had a real reason to dump Linux Mint as it's been around a long time, is based on Ubuntu (which is one of the more used Linux distros as while there might not be strictly any 'standard' when it comes to Linux, I would say Debian/Ubuntu (both can use '.deb' files) based ones are probably as close as it gets) and has support for nearly 5 years each major release as it seems a fair amount of others might be in the 2-3 years of support cycle. also, while I get many Linux OS's can claim to be 'stable', I would be willing to bet with Linux Mint things are more likely to just continue working vs some other variations.

  4. 23 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    So let me wrap my head around this - you're ripping from a 8.5GB DVD and directly converting to X264?

    No. but ill make it clearer (and with much less words)...

    -DVD9(8.5GB) to DVD5(4.7GB) (movies) using Devede works as expected (no stutter. works well) (with the libdvdcss2 installed of course).

    -720p/1080p x264 (movies) using Devede to convert to standard DVD (4.7GB) video format has a little stutter like I was saying.

    p.s. the original 720p/1080p x264 movies I have work perfect (no stutter). so the stutter issue occurs during the conversion with Devede (source file being 720p/1080p x264) to standard DVD format.


    23 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    Probably the only thing I really miss from Windows when I'm using Linux is Mp3Tag. You can run it in Wine, but doesn't integrate very well (accessing drives and what not).

    For all of my general audio playback/conversion I use Foobar2000 (paired with the Encoder Pack... https://www.foobar2000.org/encoderpack ) on Linux as that's simply better than any native Linux program.

    I heard of Mp3Tag but I never bothered with software like that since once I setup my FLAC files, which I can do in Foobar2000, everything works well after that during say FLAC to MP3 etc conversions (with a little tweaking in Foobar2000 itself depending on how you like things setup with file names it creates etc).

    but I noticed occasionally, in regards to 'accessing drives and what not', you may have to tweak things. like on a game (Windows game running on Linux) I am running a graphics enhancement mode on, in the ini configuration files, it has Windows drive letters (say D:\Games\GameNameHere\ etc) and by default it won't be setup correctly. so I open 'Configure Wine (or winecfg from terminal) > Drives' section as this can be corrected here (along with some tweaks in the ini so it's looking for the mod files in the proper directory).

    even in regards to my save state in Foobar2000 with all of my music loaded with different tabs etc, like even if I backup that data, say format my system (or wipe the wine profile to start clean) etc, and restore the Foobar2000 profile save state, since drive letters will likely change in Wine, if you try playing music (from the previous profile data that you restored) it will probably fail since the drive letter won't match, but this can be corrected on that 'Drives' tab in Wine basically and then all of your tabs in Foobar2000 that you restored from your profile are working once again as expected.

    I got my additional hard drives mounted to the same point upon boot up (through '/etc/fstab' file using UUID etc)... like say '/media/1TBHDD' for example. so if my music is in some general folder on that hard drive and Foobar2000 can't see it, I just go to Wine's 'Drives' tab and select the proper drive letter Foobar2000 is expecting to see that music on (which you will know the drive letter that's needed by the error screen Foobar2000 shows when you try to play the music and it's not in the location Foobar2000 expects). so say Foobar2000 after profile restoration expects some music you are trying to play in a tab at D:\ etc etc, on the Configure Wine section on 'Drives', for 'Letter' you put "D:" and for target folder I put something like "/media/1TBHDD" (so to Wine it see's that 1TB HDD as the 'D' drive now) and then apply and now all of the tabs/music folder I had previously configured work well once again instead of having to redo it from scratch which can be a little time consuming.

    I setup the limited amount of Windows programs I use on Linux through PlayOnLinux as this keeps things separated from the standard system installed wine which I generally use for games. basically the system installed wine stores stuff in the default ".wine" folder in ones Home directory. with PlayOnLinux all of it's stuff goes to a different location... in ones home folder it's more easily accessed through 'PlayOnLinux's virtual drives' shortcut it creates. but it's basically stored more precisely at "~/.PlayOnLinux/wineprefix/"

    p.s. that Foobar2000 'encoder pack' is only needed if you plan on converting from say FLAC to MP3/AAC/Opus etc. but for proper Apple AAC conversion through Foobar2000 (which is the best AAC (AAC-LC)) you need to take additional steps for it to work (you need additional files) as it won't work simply by installing Foobar2000 and the Encoders Pack. but if you don't use AAC (AAC-LC) and just MP3 etc, a default install of Foobar2000 and the Encoders Pack will work.

  5. 13 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    Although I did have a little look into various app's available on Linux for ripping DVDs. K3B looks to be a good alternative as it also supports libdvdcss I believe once installed

    I did play around with that libdvdcss not all that long ago (roughly a year or two ago) and it did work for removing copy protection from a older movie DVD I had when playing around with it. I think I used it in combination with 'Devede' software when converting to standard 4.7GB DVD if I recall correctly.

    that Devede (apt install devede) is decent software but the only real problem I had with it is... when converting actual movie DVD's it worked as expected, but when converting from 720p/1080p x264 (h264) video files, while it worked, the final video on the DVD side of things had a bit of stutter in the final DVD output during playback and I could never figure out how to fix it (the source 720p/1080p x264 files worked perfectly (no stutter) as expected. so the stutter on the DVD side must have been some weird glitch during conversion).

    not that it was a big deal, since I don't use DVD for video playback anymore in general (maybe rarely), but it would have been nice to figure out just in case since while the final disc is watchable, there is consistent stutter throughout the video. like it plays fine, slight stutter, plays fine, stutter and continues to end of video file. off the top of my head, I want to say the very slight stutter occurred once every few seconds or so. but I suspect some people it might not bother, but that sort of stuff bothers me as it's noticeable instead of working perfectly like it's supposed to (like I say, the DVD9 to DVD5 worked perfectly though with no stutter).

    sort of that stutter issue I was happy with Devede as it even creates a ISO for you to burn/use. but if you are converting from say DVD9 (8.5GB) to DVD5 (4.7GB), I think Devede will work well for you, as like I said, when I converted from a real DVD, there was no stutter in the final video output by Devede. I just used the main movie file with a basic menu created by Devede in my testing.

    a moment ago (on Mint 21.1-Xfce which is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS) when issuing 'apt install libdvdcss' it shows (as I already installed it a while ago)...

    Note, selecting 'libdvdcss2' instead of 'libdvdcss'
    libdvdcss2 is already the newest version (1.4.2-dmo1).


    p.s. I use ImgBurn on Linux for all my general CD/DVD burning. it works once setup properly as you have to tweak a couple of things for it to work on Linux. like it has to run in WinXP mode on Wine and, off the top of my head, I think on Wine versions newer than v4 series or so, you have to change from ImgBurn's default ASPI driver to SPTI etc in ImgBurn's options otherwise it won't see your CD/DVD drives. but once you do this, it works well.


    13 hours ago, schmidtp said:

    I decided there were too many variables backing up audio CDs to Bin files. So decided either WAV/CUE or FLAC/CUE would be a better alternative as you can't just make a disc copy of a CD

    I would avoid storing WAV for long term storage as FLAC is better and is about half of the storage space with identical sound quality since it's a lossless audio format.

    personally I don't worry too much about super precise audio CD backup, like people get with 'Exact Audio Copy' software (it's good software, as I am not dissing it, but it's probably a little overkill for most people), as the main thing is getting the song data from original CD (which is basically WAV) to FLAC format and then from there one always has a high quality source to convert to lossy formats (MP3/AAC/Opus etc) when needed.

    because the way I see it... as long as there is no obvious read errors when getting the basic song (WAV) data from the CD to ones hard drive, even if 'Exact Audio Copy' is technically a tiny bit better, in the real world, I highly doubt a person would be able to audibly detect any differences. like for example (especially if your audio CD don't have any obvious scratches etc)... Exact Audio Copy vs just copying the audio file(s) from ones file manager to hard drive. I am willing to bet they are pretty much the same in real world sound quality (assuming no obvious read errors).

    because CD audio already exceeds human hearing. because even decent bit rate lossy files people struggle to notice the difference between the lossless and lossy file and after a certain point they basically can't tell the difference and if they can't tell the difference between lossy to lossless it's pretty much guaranteed they ain't going to notice anything from Exact Audio Copy vs a standard copy/paste of WAV files from ones CD to hard drive (assuming no obvious read errors occur).

    so while I don't fault people using programs like Exact Audio Copy, as it's still good stuff at the end of the day, I think it's almost a obsession with people after a certain point with sound quality etc. like for example... standard audio CD's vs "HD" audio. it's totally pointless to waste space with HD audio because us humans can't tell the difference outright since standard Audio CD's that have been around since the 1980's already exceed our hearing ability. point being, it's basically impossible to improve on sound quality of standard Audio CD's to a difference that would actually matter to us humans.

  6. So the gist of it is the OP is trying to create a ISO from the VIDEO_TS folder so then he can mount the ISO through Windows with right click etc. but like dbminter said, "It sounds like the ISO's are definitely not compliant in some variety" which I imagine is the issue.

    it's been a long time since I played with that sort of stuff, and while I suspect there is easier ways with other windows software (but if there is, it's probably old software at this point), it appears one can create a ISO through terminal etc using something like... https://superuser.com/a/109223 & https://askubuntu.com/a/28071 etc

  7. 10 hours ago, dbminter said:

    I do have somewhat of a real world result for how long BD-R last.  I had one I burned 7 years ago back in March where all the contents read back fine from last week.  So, BD-R should last at least 5 to 10 years.

    But, I've also had DVD-R from last year that were readable after I had burned them 19 years before.

    Yeah. that's why I tend to prefer DVD because given they have lasted 10-20 years already, and if there is no obvious degradation with KProbe scan etc, chances are they are going to last at least decades, unless of course disc deterioration starts to hit a disc rapidly out of no where, which I would 'guess' is unlikely.

    but I guess on paper, since they went from CD to DVD to BD, while you get more data on each disc, they are all the same physical size so it's cramming more data into a smaller space, which at least theoretically, makes it more susceptible error (like read errors etc).


    1 hour ago, Bassthang said:

    Thanks for your thoughts on the formats and longevity. I've recently read some old CDs that were written in the 90s and they seem OK, so I reckon your findings are spot-on. I also tend to copy files from my older archive CDs to new DVDs every few years, just in case. I'd rather have 2 or 3 copies of a file than none!

    In my opinion, that's largely a waste of time to re-copy to 'newer' CD/DVD's etc.

    but I do agree, as extra insurance, that besides the usual two copies on two different hard drives method (which is more practical in general since it's minimal effort and convenient and offers a reasonable level of protection against data loss), that having a one copy on say Verbatim media and another copy on Taiyo Yuden media offers that much more insurance as I do this occasionally, but I would never consider re-burning it given the current copies show no signs of degrading (which KProbe etc scans would show since you can keep original scan after burning, then compare it to a newer scan you do many years later).

    but after a certain point this stuff almost starts to become a bit obsessive, which is why I figure a good balance of things is the two hard drive stuff along with at least one copy on DVD media etc (although for super high importance stuff, two different kinds of DVD media for example are all that much better because the odds of both of those dying at the same time is probably slim enough).


    1 hour ago, Bassthang said:

    DVD is not an option for some of my data, though. We're talking multi-track audio (Pro Tools and the like) from home recording projects and backups of my band's professional studio projects (which can be huge) so a single project would have to be split across dozens of DVDs. Not ideal. Likewise, my partner's digital photos (which I'm currently sifting though) take up a lot of space.

    Yeah, I understand.

    because in terms of optical media, for really a large project, BD-R is more practical (given 25GB a disc vs 4.7GB). but 'may' be more risky in terms of longevity of discs and there is less drives to read it available to the masses etc.

    honestly though, if I had many TB's of data to backup, short of super high importance data, I would just stick to regular hard drives, just use more hard drives... like besides the usual two copies on two different hard drives, which is a good bare minimum convenient standard, just use more and keep some offline for extra insurance against viruses etc and accidental data deletion.

    hell, most of the data I backup I stick to the two hard drive method since it offers the best balance of convenience(like ease-of-backup/using that data)/data security.

    p.s. just speaking for myself... even for backing up digital photos (i.e. family photos etc) I noticed a good portion of what I have backed up, is a bit of excess as I could probably get rid of some pictures to save space since most pictures are nothing TOO special. but then I get as a side effect of this, it takes time (probably quite a bit depending on how much you have to sort though) to sort through these and tune it before burning to say DVD etc, which while it makes the final disc one burns of higher quality pictures/videos etc, the time it takes to do this can be a lot. so I guess one tries their best to balance things.


    1 hour ago, Bassthang said:

    It's such a shame that the BDR format seems to have been nobbled and sidelined by the manufacturers.

    I think a lot of the reason why BD-R never took off like CD/DVD is lack of general public using it since it seems many switched over to streaming etc. optical disc seem to be limited to a limited amount of people nowadays.

    the only reason I still use optical media is because I feel it's the all-around best alternative for backing up data for long term storage if you put hard drives aside. plus, optical media ain't prone to accidental data deletion etc. it's a nice way to permanently store data for at least years, but probably decades.

    1 hour ago, Bassthang said:

    The WinXP machine is my Music PC, running Pro Tools and older software like Cubase and some vintage Adobe products (I now use Affinity on my laptop for my art and design, but sometimes it's quicker to just go back to a simpler Adobe tool to do some jobs). It doesn't connect to the Internet any more, nor is it used for day-to-day tasks. It's also where I run my old PC games (Doom, Quake, Unreal, Half-life and so on). I like it just the way it is - what a breath of fresh air it is to use XP after faffing around with Win10!
    I do have some Linux PCs too (still trying to decide which distro is best for me), and I now have the use of my late partner's Mac laptop, so I have a lot more options.

    I see. like one of those machines you don't like to touch since it's good for old school stuff. I totally get it ;)

    p.s. speaking of old games, I got MAME (arcade emulator) setup on some of my PC's for playing my favorite fighting games, which are the arcade versions from the 1990's (which I used to play all besides MK1 in the arcades back in the 1990's), Mortal Kombat 1 through Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 (i.e. MK1/MK2/MK3/UMK3) and Killer Instinct as I have been playing around with these once again lately on my X-Arcade stick (which I bought back in the 2000's decade as it's the older serial port version which I got the adapter that converts it to the more modern USB connection). anyways, the games you mentioned I played those at one point in the last to (like back in the 1990's etc). my single favorite gaming experience would be Mafia (2002) which, while one could setup on a old Windows computer (as I do have this setup on a old computer running Windows 7 (also has Linux Mint on it)) as a backup, it works on my primary PC running Linux Mint computer through Lutris/Wine etc.


    2 hours ago, Bassthang said:

    I do have some Linux PCs too (still trying to decide which distro is best for me)


    Yeah, while there are plenty of choices (as there is no definitive answer)... I think Linux Mint is one of the safest choices for beginners and people in general (it's been around longer than most and stuff is more likely to 'just work' etc). because it's based on Ubuntu (the current Linux Mint 21.x series is based on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS) which is similar enough to Debian as these have been around a long time (Debian since 1993 and Ubuntu since 2004. Mint has been around since 2006) so are a bit more common/somewhat standard. but one area Mint shines over many others is the amount of time it's supported for as each major version is basically 2 years apart and is supported for pretty much 5 years...

    -Linux Mint v20.x (released about mid-2020) = supported until April 2025

    -Linux Mint v21.x (released about mid-2022) = supported until April 2027

    and if the pattern holds, which it probably while, Mint v22.x will be released about mid-2024 and supported until April 2029.

    the default kernel for newest Mint 21.x is currently 5.15 which that kernel was from Nov 2021. so as long as someones hardware is not too recent it should be okay. even if they need a newer kernel you can install newer ones on Mint through the OS itself. but generally... the Mint team suggests sticking to the kernel that comes with it unless you have a specific reason (like newer hardware support etc) to need a newer one.

    anyways, it seems a fair amount of other Linux variations only have support in the 2-3 years range before one would have to upgrade where as Mint is pretty much 5 years (technically it's not a full five years, but close enough).

  8. On 4/10/2022 at 5:07 AM, Bassthang said:

    I've used IMGBurn for years to write archive discs - mostly of my music files (multi-track projects in Pro Tools and Cubase, WAVs and MP3s)

    If these are standard 44.1/16-bit WAV files, you are better off converting them to FLAC since sound quality will be the same (since it's a lossless format) but roughly half of the file size etc. basically there is no real reason to burn WAV as a data disc for general data backup over FLAC (even if you need WAV for whatever reason in the future, it's easy to convert it back to WAV, and of course, no sound quality loss).


    but for your general situation... in the future, I suggest sticking to DVD recordable (Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden) as they are probably not as picky as BD-R stuff is in my estimations. I think BD-R is more of a question mark for longevity where as I think CD-R/DVD-/+R is more time proven and, like I always say, it's easier to find a drive that can read CD/DVD where as BD media is not widely adopted like CD/DVD was where just about everyone had one of those drives in the past at some point in the 2000's decade and thereabouts. so while I realize you only get 4.7GB(DVD-/+R) vs 25GB(BD-R), unless you have a lot of high importance data you need for long term storage, DVD is 'good enough' as for most of my backup I tend to opt for the more efficient two hard drive setup as this keeps ones chances of data loss low enough and it's far more convenient where as stuff I burn on DVD tends to be much more limited and is a nice alternative/insurance for a limited amount of high importance data I don't want to lose.

    and personally... I don't think M-DISC are worth the extra cost. even assuming they last a long time, the price is too inflated and decent quality CD/DVD media will likely last 'at least' decades in my experience given I checked the disc quality of some discs (largely Verbatim and some TY(Taiyo Yuden)) I burned around 10-15 years ago (I date my discs when I burn them so I know exactly when I burned them) with KProbe etc and they still scan well to this day (i.e. not even close to failure).

    so if you do get some DVD recordable media, after burning, while it's not required, if you are concerned with longevity it's a good idea to get a feel of the initial burn quality as the better they are initially the longer they should last in theory given, assuming they degrade more on the slow side, it will buy a person that much more time before read failure etc.

    p.s. the stuff I burn with IMGBurn (I use IMGBurn on Linux to burn stuff not all that long ago) reads okay on my Linux Mint computer. so I imagine if this reads okay, Windows 10 should have no issues reading a burned disc. I see you mentioned you got a 'WinXP' PC, unless you must keep WinXP on that computer for whatever reason, I suggest wiping the drive and installing some form of Linux (which is free) on it as you can still use ImgBurn on that if you want to.

  9. 16 hours ago, AlbertEinstein said:

    Well, I have to question your claim that CD's can't be improved on. I mean, you can buy flash/SDXC storage and use them in portable devices these days in most new vehicles. And there is no chance in hell of the disc skipping if you hit a large pothole. The sound quality of music on a flash stick would be the same as it is on a CD-R.

    When I said CD's (meaning standard AUDIO CD's) can't be improved upon I meant strictly in terms of the sound quality they produce, since they already exceed human hearing abilities.

    sure, if you could carry lossless audio files (i.e. FLAC etc) made from standard audio CD's on a device that can play them, that's equally as good to and would be inline with what you said about it not skipping etc.

    but in regards to putting music on a flash stick and playing it in a car... technically, unless it can play lossless (FLAC etc) there would be some level of sound decline. although in practical real world use (which is where it really matters)... once a lossy file (i.e. MP3/AAC etc) reaches a certain point (like bitrate) us humans pretty much can't tell the difference especially when just sitting back and enjoying the music. but I like to always have a lossless source to convert to lossy files when needed since no matter what audio formats change to in the future, you always have a high quality source to convert from as FLAC will never get outdated simply because as long as it was ripped from a standard AUDIO CD the sound quality is already exceeding human hearing abilities.

    there are listening tests over on hydrogenaud.io website etc for people who like learning/reading up on this stuff. but what I am saying here is the gist of it. even LAME(MP3) @ V5 (130kbps average) scores pretty well in a public listening test to where I am confident many people would struggle to notice the different between that and the lossless source (FLAC or original audio CD and the like) and even those who can tell the difference, through ABX tests (which you can run on Foobar2000), it's not going to be a obvious difference when you are just sitting back and enjoying the music. but it's basically common knowledge (at least on that hydrogenaud.io site) that AAC(standard AAC-LC)/Opus do better than MP3 at lower bit rates. lets say lower bit rates are about 128kbps or less (but probably more around 96kbps and less). but at higher bit rates (say about 128kbps or higher or not all that much beyond this) it don't really seem to matter much in real world whether you choose MP3/AAC/Opus etc.


    16 hours ago, AlbertEinstein said:

    I think the biggest plus for optical media is the longevity of the burn and the cost per gigabyte if you get a good buy on the media whether it's CD-R, DVD-R, or BD-R. Of course, I use BD-R because they store 5x as much data as DVD's and up to 50x data over CD-R if you buy dual-layer. And for $5 a pop you could buy a BDXL disc to store 100GBs of data. That is equivalent to 1000 CD-Rs. No swapping of discs would be requiring but then again flash is the most convenient replacement for optical media these days.

    Yeah, clearly longevity of the data storage is where optical media shines and is the primary reason I still like having them around for some level of high importance data backup.

    also, while I am sure BD-R offers more storage space for the price... it's initial investment costs etc and lack of drives out there are probably what I would say is the biggest problem with it compared to more standardized/widely used CD/DVD. plus, it's not been around as long as CD/DVD media so it's a bit less time proven and not only that you are packing a lot more data into the same physical space which just this alone makes me think it's more picky and 'may' be more prone to data corruption as time passes. especially if you count the non-standard 25GB BD-R media with more than one layer as I imagine dual layer (or higher) media is more susceptible to issues than single layer media.

    so even if I did use BD-R media, I would almost certainly stick strictly to the standard 25GB discs as they probably have wider compatibility vs 100GB BDXL etc types of discs and cost per disc is probably a lot more reasonable etc.

    but yeah, flash media is appealing due to convenience as it seems many opt for convenience over long term data storage as I would never trust flash based media over optical media for long term data storage, especially if flash based storage is a persons only data backup source. with that said, flash based storage can be a nice additional backup source to more typical long term storage on hard drives and optical media though.

    p.s. but like I said in the past... I generally avoid CD-R's for storing data (unless someone has a very limited amount of high importance data backup) because it's not as practical as DVD (given DVD's hold 6.7x the amount of data of a CD-R) and disc cost between CD/DVD is about the same and data reliability is probably similar between the two assuming one uses quality media.

  10. On 4/27/2023 at 4:32 PM, AlbertEinstein said:

    I walk a fine line myself between walking away from optical media or not. I still think it's superior to the life of a 1 TB flash SSD but that's only because I have CD-R that have lasted over 20 years. That's some reliable shiaught!!!!

    That's ultimately why CD/DVD is still a good option for long term data backup (I have a fair amount of DVD's from 10-15 years ago still working well today and scan well with KProbe which gives one a good ball park indication of burn quality etc) as long as one does not have a boatload of stuff to burn (lets say 'boat load' means TB's of data), it's practical. I never got into BD burning as it's not enough of a benefit for me to justify the initial investment cost and not only that CD/DVD are far more common/standardized among the masses to as it will be easier to find a drive that can read CD/DVD many years from now than BD discs since just about any optical drive will read DVD's and all will read CD-R's basically. all-in-all, I prefer 4.7GB DVD for more limited high importance data backup (in addition to typical hard drive backups).

    but besides a more limited amount of higher importance data I just backup data on regular hard drives since it offers the best storage space and reliability for the price for most data backup.

    p.s. in terms of CD-R's... personally I almost exclusively use these for that occasion I want to burn a standard audio CD (ImgBurn can even overburn these to as on the standard Verbatim CD-R's (100-pack CMC Magnetics media code for about $20 for 100 discs) I have successfully burned to basically 82min15sec(shows up as 82min12sec on my standard CD player from the early 1990's and plays to the end without issue)) since standard audio CD's are still the best all-around available physical format available as the sound quality can't be improved upon since it already exceeds human hearing abilities as all of that 'HD' audio is marketing BS and just wastes storage space as standard 44.1/16bit is already more than good enough.

  11. I see. that's nice and all that the mfg actually did something, but assuming what I had was not a bad batch, then somewhat older DVD burners might not like current Verbatim DVD-R media and I can't imagine they will release any more firmware updates for older drives at this point in time.

    but off the top of my head... you would think DVD media would not really change in the last decade or so since the technology has been mature for probably a good 10-15 years now.

  12. Honestly, I would not be surprised if the media has changed and your burner does not like them given my experience not long ago as I probably have a similar burner as you do.

    because I got a batch of Verbatim DVD-R 100-pack within the last year or two from Amazon and had to send it back due to so-so burn quality (while the small amount of burns I did were still technically readable(passed ImgBurn's 'verify'), besides one, KProbe scan showed burn quality was so-so compared to their usual standards) and I have the same type of discs (same media code and everything) I bought back in Jan 2014 and those still burn well on the same two burners I had a long time now (i.e. Liteon iHAS-324B(which I think I got in 2011 as I initially primary got this for XBox360 game burning))/Sony Optiarc 7240s(I had this since about 2009)). so I would assume something has changed, or maybe I happen to get a bad batch etc.

    but that experience was beneficial for me as now I got a rough idea how bad a KProbe scan has to be before outright read failure will occur on the disc (the one that failed to 'verify' on ImgBurn) since I scanned that particular disc.

    but I see the OP is trying to burn 'Windows'. the newest Windows 10 ISO's have not been small enough to fit on DVD media for years now so I just use a multi-boot USB stick to directly load ISO's. Windows 7 SP1 ISO will fit on a regular DVD but if you update that same Windows 7 ISO so it's got all updates as to about Jan 2023, it's too large to fit on a regular 4.7GB DVD.

    p.s. but once I got a refund and sent those back I found some new old stock of Verbatim 8x media (MCC 003) on Ebay and those burn pretty much as expected (there is some fluctuation in burn quality but it's still much closer to higher burn quality than low burn quality).

    EDIT: I just noticed the brand on the OP's is generic. so I would probably lean towards that being the problem. still, it's possible even going with brand name (Verbatim DVD-R etc), unless I got a bad batch, might not like that burner since it's probably similar enough to my iHAS324B.


    52 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    If Verify completed and DiscSpeed returned no errors, that's good enough for me.  I don't even bother with DiscSpeed results at all.

    While that's probably generally okay if your burner likes your media, anything I care about I don't really take a chance and make sure it scans well with KProbe (basically similar to DiscSpeed) since that's a bit more accurate way to gauge burn quality. because if it's in the ball park of a higher quality burn, then it just buys you that much more time should the disc start to degrade over the years before the DVD burner/reader itself will fail to read the data on the disc. because if ones burn quality is so-so to begin with it will probably fail that much quicker.

    another semi-quick test one could probably do it get a rough indication of burn quality, assuming they don't want to use KProbe/DiscSpeed, is just copying the data back from the disc to the computer. like if it slows down during the copy, then that's a rough indication that at least that DVD burner/reader is at least slightly struggling to read it. because generally if a KProbe/DiscSpeed test shows it's got solid burn quality, chances are when you copy data from the disc back to hard drive it will read it with no slow down etc.

    so I guess it just depends on how important ones data is on how far they want to take things in this regard whether a simple burn/verify with ImgBurn is enough, or they want to take it a bit further with more details on KProbe/DiscSpeed etc.

  13. The way I see it is this...

    M-DISC are supposed to be good for long term storage. but even if we assume that is true, given their really inflated costs, I would argue regular quality DVD recordable media (i.e. Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden) are overall better since they are still high enough quality that those are unlikely to fail for decades, or at least the foreseeable future given I have DVD discs around 10-15 years old and they still scan well with KProbe (which is a disc quality checking program to give you a pretty good idea of the burn quality of the disc). basically there is little to no degradation since I burned them about 10-15 years ago (I date all of the discs I burn so I know precisely when I burned media) and given my experience from not all that long ago with a batch that did not like my burners I got a pretty good ball park figure on how bad a KProbe scan has to be before a DVD burner will struggle to read it and my discs burn 10-15 years ago (even some others more recently etc) are still far from coming close to that point to where a read issue would be likely to occur. so basically I would expect these disc to still be easily readable in at least another 10-20+ years from now and could be well beyond that for all I know. but even if we only got say 30-40 years, that's a large portion of a persons lifespan anyways.

    I tend to use hard drives for my general data backup, but I do use DVD for a more limited amount of high importance data.

    note: I generally store my media in a room (out of any obvious sunlight, especially direct sunlight) and the room does see some level of humidity here and there and the room they are in, in the summer time, probably see's temps around 80-85f (or about 27-29c) as while the general house has AC, that particular room is so-so.

    bottom line... I would recommend using standard quality media (Verbatim or Taiyo Yuden) over M-DISC in general. M-DISC might be okay for a very limited amount of super high importance data if you got money to burn though.

  14. 14 hours ago, LIGHTNING UK! said:

    Maybe it's running USB 1?

    Possible. but I would guess quite unlikely given the age of USB 1 devices at this point as you would probably have to have a computer no newer than early 2000's tops which at this point would be fairly ancient as pretty much everything will be slow on those devices at this point in time (as I would guesstimate for a more 'usable computer' anything older than mid-to-late 2000's is probably straight up ancient nowadays as just about all tasks will be painfully slow.

    but not only that, but at about 1MB/s (USB 1) that would take a rather long time to burn a DVD and would be obvious something is not right even to non-tech types especially given the OP mentioned that his computer (I am assuming main computer) copies a DVD in around 10 minutes. USB 1 would be well beyond that.

    anyways, the rest of what you said should pretty much bottom line things for the OP.

    p.s. the last computer I had with USB 1 range USB ports was a computer from 2001 as my next one I built in March 2006 (it was pretty much high end 2005 motherboard tech) had USB 2 ports. even my current main PC (I bought motherboard in May 2012) only comes with USB 2 ports but I got a add-on PCI-E x1 card to get USB 3 on it.

  15. Well if you are burning data to a DVD from a external hard drive, even a USB 2 connection should be able to keep up since it's got about 30MB/s transfer rate which I am pretty sure exceeds DVD write speeds as 16x DVD write is about 22.2MB/s. so the buffer should not be a issue off the top of my head.

    but one quick question... on the '2nd hand old laptop', how long does it take to complete a burn? because this will give you a good indication of whether the buffer is truly a problem or not. since I can't see log, taking a guess, the laptop is probably about 8x burn speed on DVD discs.

    p.s. but if you just bought a second hand laptop, I would definitely wipe the drive and start fresh (with Windows 10 (possibly Linux depending on how old it is and what you want to do with it)) to guarantee everything is in good running order as you never know what the previous owner has on it with potential viruses etc. it's the only way I would trust using it with anything sensitive online. but since you said tech is sort of like hieroglyphics for you, then I am guessing this might be somewhat difficult for you to do.

  16. Yeah, I keep anything of importance in FLAC format to as it's always a reliable high quality source if you need to convert to a lossy file from. but on-the-go I tend to use MP3 @ V5 (130kbps average) as it's good enough quality and efficient with storage space and widely supported.

    p.s. standard Audio CD's (16/44.1) will never get outdated either simply because even at that rate it's already exceeding human hearing. so all of those "HD" or "hi-res" audio files/formats are purely marketing junk and just a waste of storage space as I always keep all of my lossless audio in standard 16/44.1 format since it's less space then "HD" audio and quality is CD level quality which will never get outdated.

  17. 9 hours ago, ornulv said:

    Ok Thanks for information.   Basically, its Mp3 files I burn,  that is the format they come in ,they are 320, but from time to time its Flac.

    With 320kbps that's high enough to where most if not a high percentage of people won't be able to tell the difference between the lossless(FLAC etc) and lossy(MP3 etc) files. so even though it's more proper to use FLAC(or any lossless format) when creating a standard audio CD, you are ultimately good at the end of the day.

    I create MP3's from FLAC with Foobar2000 (with the 'encoders pack' installed) but I use the V5 (130kbps average) setting since it's more quite storage space efficient (I realize storage space is cheap nowadays, but it's more of the thought of it though) and sound quality is high enough to where I would bet most people won't notice any difference as while 320kbps is good sound quality wise (it's the highest possible MP3 setting), it's a waste of storage space and is inefficient since you can get basically the same sound quality but at noticeably less bit rate. but generally speaking if you are using MP3, I suggest using V5 (130kbps average) or if you prefer to play it a bit safer V2 (190kbps average) is a safe bet as it's probably a good balance of file size/sound quality with MP3 erring on the side of sound quality. but V0 (245kbps average) is the highest of the variable bit rate settings as there is pretty much no need to go beyond that at the very most with MP3. granted, I realize if you can't re-rip from FLAC then what you got is what you got though as it's best to just leave them as they are since it's generally best avoided converting from lossy to lossy since it will just further degrade the MP3 files etc.

    p.s. to get ImgBurn working on Linux, you have to tweak things a bit though (but after this you just load up the program and use it like usual). but the gist of it is when loading up ImgBurn, Wine (Wine is basically a program for Linux that allows some Windows programs to run on Linux) has to be set to WinXP mode and on Wine versions newer than about the v4 series when loading up ImgBurn you have to adjust 'Tools > Settings > I/O' and on 'Interface' select 'SPTI - Microsoft' and for 'SPTI - Device Enumeration Method' you select 'Device Interface' (or 'Drive Letter') and press okay then ImgBurn will now see your CD/DVD etc burners. if you don't use the 'WinXP' mode on Wine, ImgBurn will immediately hang upon loading on Linux. I suggest setting up ImgBurn through PlayOnLinux as it keeps it separated from the system installed Wine, but this is optional as you can use the system installed Wine if you want to (which no Wine software is installed on Linux by default).


    6 hours ago, dbminter said:

    If you want ImgBurn to burn FLAC to Audio CD, you'll need to download and run something called madFLAC.

    Yeah, I heard about that. but, at least on Linux,  I don't think add-ons like that work, at least to my knowledge. which is why I just convert to standard WAV (with Foobar2000) which ImgBurn can use natively with no additional stuff required.

  18. 11 hours ago, ornulv said:

    Experiencing some instabilities with Brasero in Linux, I downloaded ImgBurn to a desktop with W11

    Use ImgBurn on Linux instead ;)

    if you need certain audio file formats it's easy enough on Linux as you can use Foobar2000 on Linux as that's what I use for general audio playback/conversion.

    but when burning a standard audio CD on Linux with ImgBurn (I even overburned some standard audio CD's by 2min15sec (so total of 82min15sec) and work well. but the amount you can overburn will vary from brand of CD-R as I am using your standard cheap Verbatim CD-R with CMC Magnetics media code as these are the furthest I overburned CD-R's successfully), I suggest temporarily converting your audio files (preferably from FLAC since it's optimal with no sound quality loss) to WAV since ImgBurn can directly use standard WAV format without issue on Linux. like when I burn a standard audio CD with ImgBurn on Linux, I always convert to standard WAV format first temporarily (from my FLAC audio files) as ImgBurn will work without any problems then.

    but like dbminter said, you basically create standard audio CD's in ImgBurn from "Tools > Create CUE File...". then you can drag-and-drop WAV files into ImgBurn, select whatever options you want, save the cue file, then 'Mode > Write' and drag-and-drop CUE file in here and burn is the basic idea.

    p.s. when burning standard audio CD's it's always best to burn from FLAC files instead of MP3 for optimal sound quality since FLAC is a lossless format where as MP3 is not. granted, a decent bit rate MP3 will probably still be 'good enough' when burned back to a standard audio CD for most people though. but if all you have is MP3, there is nothing you can do at this point but just convert them back to WAV and then burn on Linux through ImgBurn.

  19. Some Blu-Ray players can directly play MKV (h264) files as I have one that can read them from a USB stick (and I would assume a disc to but I never tried from a disc off the top of my head) but I had to format the USB stick as NTFS file system as exFAT etc did not seem to work. I got a Samsung Blu-Ray player. but I typically don't use this and just use a under powered laptop I got to play back MKV files on the TV through HDMI instead.

  20. I tend to agree with dbminter. it's very unlikely your new discs have been written to. you can try the I/O stuff as I have to change that ('Tools > Settings > I/O' and then change from 'ASPI' to 'SPTI - Microsoft' and on 'SPTI - Device Enumeration Method' I use 'Device Interface' (or 'Drive Letter')) since I am using Linux (Mint 21.1-Xfce) otherwise ImgBurn won't see my CD/DVD burners by default.

    I suggest you try the following as this should help confirm whether it's a Windows issue or DVD burner issue...

    download Linux Mint 21.1-Xfce ISO (this one for example... "mirrors[.]layeronline[.]com/linuxmint/stable/21.1/linuxmint-21.1-xfce-64bit.iso") and make a bootable USB stick (you can use Rufus (free software) to make a bootable USB stick with that ISO file), boot to Mint, and once it boots to desktop then insert a blank DVD into your burner and close the drive, wait some odd seconds, and then check the file manager in Mint as it should show something like 'Blank DVD+R Disc' under the 'Devices' section on the left side area of file manager (see my small screenshot posted below). I figure if you experience this, chances are something is out of whack on Windows 11. note: don't worry this won't touch your current Windows installation as this is safe to do as once you reboot, it will be back to how things are currently for you.

    this would be a decent way to test to see if anything is out of whack on your current Windows install that's preventing ImgBurn etc from working properly. because if it still reacts the same way on Mint, I would lean towards your CD/DVD burner itself is probably the issue. if not, something on Windows 11 is out of whack. honestly, I won't be surprised if it's simply a Windows 11 issue.

    p.s. I suggest using Windows 10 in general (which is supported until Oct 2025) since it's less likely to cause issues from what I have heard. but it's your call if you want to stick to Windows 11 or not. I dumped Windows for Linux Mint in Jan 2019 (the limited amount of windows games/software I use work on Linux Mint) and given the direction Microsoft is headed with Win11 etc I am all the more happy I dumped Windows as Mint's interface is clean without the bloat etc. but I understand not everyone can do this as there might be windows software that they cannot go without and does not work on Linux through Wine. anyways, you can see Windows goes in cycles with 'good/bad/good/bad' and right now Windows 11 is part of the 'bad' cycle which has held true since at least Win98 to date (Win98(good),WinME(bad),WinXP(good),WinVista(bad),Win7(good),Win8(bad),Win10(good),Win11(bad?)). but it does seem likely Win11 won't reach the wide adoption that Win10 has given current market share... Win10 = 68%. Win11 = 17%. for measure... Win7 still has 11% and it's not had support officially since Jan 2020. you could basically say there have only really been three dominate/widely used OS's from Microsoft over the last 20 years or so... WinXP/Win7/Win10.


  21. SMALL UPDATE: while ImgBurn etc still basically works on Mint 21.x series (which was released in about mid-2022 and is supported until April 2027), I noticed there seems to be a small issue on PlayOnLinux through Mint 21.x series (that was not there on Mint 20.x series) where, for example, when you start up PlayOnLinux, on the main program window if you click the 'Configure' you will notice that on certain tabs (mainly 'Wine' and 'Miscellaneous') that certain things are cut off/not currently visible like it should be and it always stays like this everytime you load up the program (until you manually adjust it, which works temporarily).

    so it's a small inconvenience that you always have to use the mouse on say the top of the 'PlayOnLinux configuration' window for example and drag it up at which point you can now see everything normally (or, optionally, just maximize that window to see everything). (small side note: I am currently still using Wine v6.0.1(32bit) for use with ImgBurn currently on Mint 21.1-Xfce)

    but here is some screenshots to show you exactly what I mean (the narrow one that cut off icons one should be able to see is what the program always does everytime you load it up (which this was not a issue on Mint 20.x) but the pictures you can see everything one is supposed to see are after I put mouse pointer on top of that open window and held left click and moved mouse up which stretches the open window so one can see everything now like it should be in the first place)...





  22. Personally I think the 'Windows Store' is pretty much useless junk if you ask me (it would be better off being completely removed from Windows as it's just unnecessary bloat). I prefer traditional ways of installing software where you just go to a website, download a .exe, install it and use.

    p.s. but in all honesty, I dumped Windows for Linux in Jan 2019, so 4 years ago now. so basically I used Windows from 1995 until Jan 2019 (basically Windows v3.11 through Windows 10) on my primary computers etc. the small amount of games (Mafia series/RDR2 etc) and Windows software (Foobar2000/ImgBurn etc) I use works fine on Linux.

  23. If you are just trying to 'burn files' (assuming these are just data files you want to backup) to a CD or DVD use 'Mode > Build' in ImgBurn. then on 'Output' select 'Device' (then you can simply drag-and-drop files into the ImgBurn window, adjust whatever settings/burn speed you prefer etc, then burn it is the basic idea here). NOT 'Mode > Write' which is for burning image files like .iso/.cue+.bin etc.

    but so things are clear... what precisely are you trying to do?

    p.s. but in one of your pictures there is only about 154MB there which is not much.

  24. It appears you got a laptop DVD burner. those tend to be worse/more picky than desktop burners (so if you have trouble burning certain kinds of CD's etc, that's probably why). what CD's are you trying to use?

    but you cut off the image to the right which shows more info. can you post another picture showing the whole ImgBurn window there?

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.