audio sync problems burning DVDs with Nero..s/w suggestions for DVD authoring?

Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by Toby, May 10, 2006.

  1. Toby

    Toby Guest

    Hi folks,

    I have just entered the new world of trying to burn content to DVDs instead
    of going to tape. I've got a 90 minute program cut on the Avid which I tried
    transcoding and burning with Nero 7. The audio drifts--it is slower than the
    video by a full 1.5 seconds at the end of the program. This is driving me
    nuts...I've checked the exported version of the program and it is fine, but
    by the time it gets on the DVD it is not. Is Nero buggy? I've never had any
    trouble duping CDs or DVDs or burning data discs. I've looked under the
    configure menu and don't see any real audio settings, apart from enabling or
    disabling "smartburn" or whatever it is called. Is this a sampling rate
    problem? Alternately, does anyone have any good suggestions for DVD burning
    software which might solve this problem?

    Many thanks in advance,

    Toby
     
    Toby, May 10, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. I have done scores of productions without any of these kinds of problems.
    I use Adobe Premiere to edit (and then export M2V) and then Adobe
    Encore to author the DVDs (making IMG image files). I use DVDdecrypter
    to burn the IMG image files to the DVD discs because I typically need to do
    lots of "re-orders" where I need to burn more discs on demand.

    Adobe Premiere has a simple DVD authoring and burning feature included
    (which I have never used) and Adobe Encore will also do burning itself. But
    I prefer DVDdecrypter as it gives infinitely more information about the
    burning process.

    What kind of file did you use to get the video from Avid to Nero?
    Have you tried other options (other file types, having Avid encode
    MPEG instead of Nero, etc. etc.etc.)?
     
    Richard Crowley, May 10, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Toby

    Toby Guest

    I exported from Avid as a DV stream, since Nero doesn't seem to like QT
    reference movies, which is how they are normally exported for authoring from
    Avid. I did a web search and found out that audio drift is a major problem
    in authoring DVDs, with Nero and with other software. At present I solved
    the problem with a burning/authoring program called ConvertXtoDVD. The audio
    is now perfect, but I am seeing some motion artifacts that were not there in
    the Nero burn, so I am still experimenting. I do have Encore, and I guess
    now is the time to learn how to use it. Thanks also for the tip on
    DVDdecrypter.

    Toby
     
    Toby, May 11, 2006
    #3
  4. Toby

    doc Guest

    nobody likes QT. we even had fits with quicktime with our macs.

    drd
     
    doc, Jun 22, 2006
    #4
  5. Two strikes today, "doc."

    Wow, I've got to tell you you're are the ONLY guy I've ever known who
    has had ANY problem with Quicktime running on a Mac for about a decade
    now!

    Many knowledgeable working professionals, myself included, think it's
    great simply because we NEVER have to think about it.


    The QT codec is robust, completely stable, constantly evolving, supports
    popular standards like i264 and best of all, used with a modern internet
    connected Mac system, it's constantly updated seamlessly and free
    without my lifting a finger to do so.

    Want more perspective? Here's a personal experience for you.

    A few months ago, I produced an instructional DVD for sale. The product
    includes 133 DV clips that needed to run on BOTH PCs and MACs.

    These were "plain vanilla" DV files, no extra compression or encoding.

    I thought we were going to have to provide BOTH AVI and Quicktime files
    for complete customer target machine compatibility - but after extensive
    testing I got a surprise.

    None of the "low level" PC machines we tested it with could play the QT
    file without jumping through download QT for PC hoops.

    But surprise, surprise - we could take the same QT file - simply batch
    change the header to AVI, THEN the dumb PCs would finally recognize and
    play them, PLUS Quicktime would look at those SAME files, essentially
    ignore the AVI headers and also play them without a hitch.

    In other words, the PCs file handling wasn't sophisticated enough to
    look beyond the header info - while the Macs looked at the FILE itself
    rather than just the header code - and determined that it could play the
    files just fine.

    Yet another modest score for simple, seamless "Apple" software.
     
    William Davis, Jun 22, 2006
    #5
  6. Toby

    Dave Guest


    Totally agree with you here William, especially the part about
    evolving. Its nice to know their's a company actively developing QT as
    opposed to AVI which is kind of this free for all open source type
    system, with no real development at all, and no future that I can see
    either.

    Can't tell you how many times I've loaded up an AVI file on my pc, only
    to be told that I can watch or even hear it because I'm missing some
    obscure codec.. With QT, you just play it, and it always works.

    dave
     
    Dave, Jun 23, 2006
    #6
  7. Toby

    Rick Merrill Guest

    the oxymoron of the day ;-)

    (true but the words contract each other like 'jumbo shrimp')
     
    Rick Merrill, Jun 23, 2006
    #7
  8. I don't understand what you just said or how it involves "open
    source"? AVI is simply a container format (and oddly enough, one
    designed by MS) and can contain any number of types of audio or video
    formats. That's the reason you have problems with "codecs", because it
    could contain basically any possible type of encoded video or audio.
    There's nothing *to* develop with AVI files, as stated they're just a
    container which is supposed to pass a 4CC to the rendering application
    - it's up to the rendering app how it invokes the required decode
    facility. You must be talking about WMP for this experience, beacuse
    I've never had your problems with codecs when using QT or Real Player.

    WMP11 has got much improved codec lookup : actually it should apply to
    all [windows] versions of the player too, because the back end error
    reporting has been modified to tell the user *what* codec is needed.
    From there it's only a short web search away to get the right playback
    working.

    Cheers - Neil
     
    Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media], Jun 23, 2006
    #8
  9. Toby

    doc Guest

    Robust it is . . it's so heavy duty our mac couldn't handle the video. It
    played the audio and we got to listen to some of our online d/l's but as far
    as see them, we'd been better to turn on a PC and watch the vid using the M$
    Windows Media link.

    You say I'm the first in a decade? Well, our pals in Akron had the same
    problem with their Macs too. So, that's TWO strikes on TWO already and in
    my book that's an OUT! That's why we got rid of the things.

    DrD
     
    doc, Jul 16, 2006
    #9
  10. Toby

    doc Guest

    AMEN! I liked QT on my first digital camera and that worked well on my PC.
    When we started reading, using, editing, and outputing in QT my attitude
    changed completely. Moreover, as the evolution of QT has ondated itself,
    something happened in the streaming and thus that's where things went sour .
    .. the missing link (the one that makes the video work all the time) and as
    I've stated before we're not the only one that has the problem but perhaps
    the only with the balls to say that it wasn't working on our Mac's (notice
    the past tense of the verb "was" cause we got rid of the mac's but still
    have problems with the QT vid links on occassion - not always - just some)
    and "yes" we have the most current download (other than the BUY one that
    pops up EVERY TIME we open the stupid FREE player)

    DrD
     
    doc, Jul 16, 2006
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.