|
CloneDVD 2 vs. Nero Recode 2
|
|
|
bryanwake
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
29. June 2006 @ 19:46 |
Link to this message
|
I already have Nero 7 Ultra Edition which I use to shrink video files (Nero Recode 2) but I've been hearing great things about CloneDVD 2. Which is better in terms of quality and speed? And if I already have Nero Recode 2 is it worth another $39.00 to get CloneDVD as well?
Bryan Wake
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
laddyboy
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. June 2006 @ 19:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
It isn't in my opinion if video quality is the criterion. Imo both deliver virtually the same quality.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. June 2006 @ 00:24 |
Link to this message
|
My vote goes to Nero Recode 2 with "Advanced Analysis + HQSR + Assign Best Quality to Main Movie". However, that's just me, so use whatever you're more experienced with and or have more knowledge hands on.
Good luck.
|
Senior Member
|
30. June 2006 @ 02:54 |
Link to this message
|
let me put it to you this way. when it comes to quality output, i'm speaking about quality output only, Nero Recode2 is simply the best transcoder there is. but the only way to see the difference is, with high levels of compression(over 40% actual compression)and a big screen tv, otherwise, they all look the same.
Nero Recode2 or Shrink using deep analysis and AEC/ fabdecrypter or anydvd running in the background/ IMGBurn to burn/main movie only mode= perfect.
|
Senior Member
|
30. June 2006 @ 03:35 |
Link to this message
|
In my experiences, CloneDVD is much faster. I've tried to use Recode 2-3 times, and end up stopping it, and going with CloneDVD or Shrink, about 30 minutes into it. Recode was so slow, it was pathetic. It was working in real time, which is way too slow, for me. I don't want it to take two hours, to do a two hour movie!
People that use it regularly, haven't been able to tell me what speed setting to use, to get it done quickly, with good quality. Haven't had a lot of time to play with it either.
As said...........this is my experience with it.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. June 2006 @ 04:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have both, and have not used Recode as CloneDVD2 works great. I have not had the need to try to learn Recode yet. Will probably get around to it someday. CloneDVD2 is just plain easy.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. June 2006 @ 04:49 |
Link to this message
|
CloneDVD is fast and works for low compression movies fine 90% or above on the gauge. However, it does not come close for high compression with other programs such as Recode, Shrink or even 1click. If you want some comparisons quality wise go to this thread
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/343299
A member pazzini did some comparisons using encoders in RB and then the transcoding programs on Saving Private Ryan which is compressed at 49% you will see how they stack up. Clone for this high of compression really loses out. Just my two cents.
|
|
pazzini
Suspended permanently
|
30. June 2006 @ 05:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
Hi bryanwake :)
If I was you I would stick with Recode2, Recode2 quality output is far superior to clonedvd2.
I have Clonedvd2 but I only use it when no compression is needed (transcoder disabled) because it's fast. When a little bit of compression is needed upto 15-20% I use Recode2 with high quality, and advanced analysis AEC default (sharp sometimes max smooth)
Everything else goes through DVD-Rebuilder Pro with Procoder2 and the results I achieve are excellent even with very high compression.
Like arniebear suggested have a look for yourself using the link that arniebear gave you hopefully it will help you make your decision.
|
|
sammychan
Junior Member
|
30. June 2006 @ 18:27 |
Link to this message
|
Some DVD players handle compression better than others. Personally I always use CloneDVD2 + AnyDVD. When I clone DVDs, it goes down to 60% - 70% of it's original size and CloneDVD2 makes the DVD in 28 minutes. I don't see any quality loss on my TV.
What types of DVD players do you guys use ? I use an insignia portable DVD player which I just hook up to my 28 inch TV when I'm at home. Same thing when I used to use DVD Shrink last year, the DVD movies looked just the same as my originals. I just use CloneDVD2 over Shrink just because the odd times I do only want the main movie, CloneDVD2 takes the extra features out completely whereas Shrink puts a "Video has been removed" sign on your TV screen hehe. No big deal though. Anyways I don't see any difference between CloneDVD2 and the original DVD on my DVD player anyways and so I can't imagine Nero Recode 2 being any better. I remember for Brad Pitt's Troy DVD, I compressed it down to 55% with CloneDVD2 and the picture was beautiful all the way through, no pixels or anything just the same as the original. But since our software is the same, my only guess is that some DVD players handle compression better than others.
|
Senior Member
|
30. June 2006 @ 18:35 |
Link to this message
|
I am TOTALLY in agreement with arniebear and pazzini as far as when I use which proggy. You can DEFINITELY tell the difference on a 52 inch widescreen HDTV. Ech one has its place in my arsenal...
Dropbox: http://db.tt/p5P9bH1d
System 1: Core2Quad Q6600 O/Ced @ 3.15 GHz, Gigabyte GA EP35 DS4 mobo, Zalman 9700, 4GB PC6400 RAM, Sapphire Radeon 2600HD Pro, Samsung 920BW 19" Widescreen LCD, Hauppauge! PVR-350.
System 2: Core2Duo E6400 O/Ced @ 3.2 GHz, Gigabyte GA 965P S3 mobo, Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro, 2GB PC6400 RAM, PNY GeForce 6600, Hyundai B70A 17" LCD. |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
ironD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. July 2006 @ 02:44 |
Link to this message
|
|
I am with alkohol on this one, I have used both and to be honest I used Clone2 just a couple of weeks ago on a disc just for a goof, but I prefer Recode2. Try them both and see which one you prefer.
D
|
