# Simplest way to put shows on DVD?



## jeffw_00 (Sep 19, 2000)

Hi - I've done some searching and there's almost too much info in this. So, let me ask a simple question. I have a small number of some shows on my TiVoHD that I want to burn to DVD for my own personal use, digitally, using my PC.

They are not "copyright-blocked". Some are in HD, some are in SD. I have a DVD burner, and copy of Nero Express 6 on my PC. And want to put multiple shows on the same DVD (perhaps at different times). 

What's the easiest, least-expensive (in terms of shareware cost) most straightforward way to do this? 

Thanks very much!!
/j


----------



## geodon005 (Mar 10, 2004)

Easiest would be a stand-alone DVD recorder. I picked one up at Costco for under $100, and it works like a charm.


----------



## bobfrank (Mar 17, 2005)

I would suggest the easiest would be to use VideoRedoSuite for one program to do it all. Cost $80.00.

Slightly cheaper and slightly more hassle would be to use VideoRedoPlus to convert the .tivo files to .mpg and then something free like DVDStyler to create the DVD files. You they could use your favorite program to burn the DVD files to the DVD. Cost $50.00.


----------



## JWThiers (Apr 13, 2005)

bobfrank said:


> I would suggest the easiest would be to use VideoRedoSuite for one program to do it all. Cost $80.00.
> 
> Slightly cheaper and slightly more hassle would be to use VideoRedoPlus to convert the .tivo files to .mpg and then something free like DVDStyler to create the DVD files. You they could use your favorite program to burn the DVD files to the DVD. Cost $50.00.


I'll second the VideoRedo. Best money I have spent. Combined with Tivo Desktop to get the files off of the Tivo makes the whole process dirt simple. Once a show is downloaded onto a computer you can edit out the commercials and be ready to burn in just a few minutes. Now if i could get rid of the CCI flags from non OTA network programs. <sigh>


----------



## txporter (Sep 18, 2006)

Yeah, agree with VideoRedo TVSuite for the easiest solution. It is also by far the easiest solution for down-resing HD material to SD DVD. Downloading SD tivo video and putting on disc can be done rather easily with free programs (tivodecode + imgburn). You need to go through additional programs for down-resing and VRDTS makes that fairly painless.

Jason


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Agreed again with VideoRedo.


----------



## pdhenry (Feb 28, 2005)

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned VideoReDo TVSuite.

Another satisfied customer. No hasle, no playing with codecs. The DVDs play just like regular DVDs (something that I couldnt make work with Roxio).


----------



## nguyej1 (Jul 28, 2006)

pdhenry said:


> I'm surprised that no one has mentioned VideoReDo TVSuite.
> 
> Another satisfied customer. No hasle, no playing with codecs. The DVDs play just like regular DVDs (something that I couldnt make work with Roxio).


+1

With VideoRedo TVSuite, it is very easy to make a DVD.


----------



## jeffw_00 (Sep 19, 2000)

thanks guys


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Does "Suite" include "Plus"?


----------



## ThAbtO (Apr 6, 2000)

AbMagFab said:


> Does "Suite" include "Plus"?


TV Suite.

www.videoredo.com

I use the Plus and TVSuite on the same computer.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Nero 6 is outdated. I have Nero 9 and I also use VideoReDo.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

pdhenry said:


> I'm surprised that no one has mentioned VideoReDo TVSuite.


I believe that's what was being referred to in post #3.



bobfrank said:


> I would suggest the easiest would be to use VideoRedoSuite for one program to do it all. Cost $80.00.


----------



## bobfrank (Mar 17, 2005)

Yes it was. Thank you for the clarification.

I just pulled the name off the top of my head and just missed getting it 100% correct.

And to answer AbMagFab, VideoReDo TVSuite includes everything that VideoReDoPlus does, but does not include VRD+ as a separate program.. TVSuite adds DVD authoring and burning.

If you have DVD authoring and burning software that you prefer you can get by just find with only the Plus version. VRD TVSuite includes all these functions within one program.

Dan, who is one of the VRD developers, is very active on these TIVO forums.


----------



## ROSCOMMON (Apr 16, 2009)

I have downloaded the trial program to create DVD's from my TIVO recordings. I have wasted a few disks because only about 15 minutes gets copied. Is there a good instruction manual to show a step by step procedure. The program seems to assume that you know how to edit the file but I do not know the procedure. I tried not editing at all and just burn but no luck for a complete copy. Any assistance appreciated. 

Roscommon


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

geodon005 said:


> Easiest would be a stand-alone DVD recorder. I picked one up at Costco for under $100, and it works like a charm.


Those cant do widescreen hd. I think

but video redo tv will and it will take the ads out.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

You can take the ads out with a hard drive/DVD recorder.

(I admittedly am likely to try the 'transfer to computer' some more, though AFAIK there are no ways to *edit* the recordings on a Mac without transcoding them first.. which loses quality.)


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

ROSCOMMON said:


> I have downloaded the trial program to create DVD's from my TIVO recordings. I have wasted a few disks because only about 15 minutes gets copied. Is there a good instruction manual to show a step by step procedure. The program seems to assume that you know how to edit the file but I do not know the procedure. I tried not editing at all and just burn but no luck for a complete copy. Any assistance appreciated.
> 
> Roscommon


Did you do the (free) trial registration via the web? There is a 15 minute cripple if you don't.

Also, I would recommend creating ISO image files (.iso) rather than burning directly to DVD. Then you can test them in a software DVD player before risking burning a disk. Go to this VideoHelp page for links to DVD player software, free and not free. VLC Media player is excellent and both it and MediaPlayer Classic are free.

I don't know if VRD will then take the .iso and burn it but, if not, free program imgburn (or DVDdecrypter which I use) will do an excellent burn. Just Google to find either.

Also, the best forum for DVD creation and VideoReDo posts is "TiVo Home Media Features & TiVoToGo" on this site.

There are guides and FAQ's that will help you on the VideoReDo web site and forum. (Just google VideoReDo).


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

tootal2 said:


> Those cant do widescreen hd. I think
> 
> but video redo tv will and it will take the ads out.


DVD recorders won't do HD but they have no problem creating an SD widescreen image from an HD program so it fills the entire 16:9 screen when you play it back from the DVD. Assuming the original HD program had an aspect ratio that filled the entire 16:9 screen when broadcast in HD.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> DVD recorders won't do HD but they have no problem creating an SD widescreen image from an HD program so it fills the entire 16:9 screen when you play it back from the DVD. Assuming the original HD program had an aspect ratio that filled the entire 16:9 screen when broadcast in HD.


Not true. You can burn HD files to standard DVD-R discs that have been authored as HD-DVDs using Ulead's DVD Movie Factory 5 or 6 and your existing DVD burner. I believe there's a similar process for Blu-Ray home brewed discs as well. The discs will play back as HD-DVDs or Blu-Rays in a standalone player or compatible PC drive. The only downside is that most movies have to be split across multiple discs due to the size of the files.

There's a thread addressing this topic elsewhere in these forums. You can also check out the original threads over that the AVS Forums in the HD DVD Software section.


----------



## David Platt (Dec 13, 2001)

mr.unnatural said:


> Not true. You can burn HD files to standard DVD-R discs that have been authored as HD-DVDs using Ulead's DVD Movie Factory 5 or 6 and your existing DVD burner.


True, but they were talking about standalone DVD burners, so that process doesn't really apply in this case.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

David Platt said:


> True, but they were talking about standalone DVD burners, so that process doesn't really apply in this case.


Yes, I was talking about standalone burners. I have tired the HD DVD format on a DVD before but it's much easier just to transport the HD shows on a hard drive.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

geodon005 said:


> Easiest would be a stand-alone DVD recorder. I picked one up at Costco for under $100, and it works like a charm.





bobfrank said:


> I would suggest the easiest would be to use VideoRedoSuite for one program to do it all. Cost $80.00.
> 
> Slightly cheaper and slightly more hassle would be to use VideoRedoPlus to convert the .tivo files to .mpg and then something free like DVDStyler to create the DVD files. You they could use your favorite program to burn the DVD files to the DVD. Cost $50.00.


Obviously these are two completely different approaches, both of which can be considered cheap and easy. Almost all posters to this thread preferred the latter. A PC can do everything of course, and when used for TV, a PC can even provide DVR service instead of relatively expensive service such as TiVo's.

My preference is for not using a PC for anything connected with watching TV including recording programs to DVDs. 

HDTiVo allows for receiving and watching programming in high-def at the same time as sending the signal to a standard-def device such as a DVD recorder. (Moxi doesn't have such a capability. Its output resolution must be pre-selected from its menu and standard-def outputs are disabled when a hi-def resolution is selected. I don't know how flexible satellite DVRs are in this regard.)

A standalone DVD recorder is currently available which records to a 160 GB internal HDD or directly to DVD. When using its HDD this recorder creates a rolling 6 hour buffer which survives channel changes from either ATSC/QAM sources or NTSC sources. It can also record from a couple of composite/S-video line inputs, and a DV (Firewire) input.

Therefore it can be used either to record directly from an external source such as cable STB, TiVo, or Moxi, or supplement available sources from its own tuner. When used with TiVo it provides a 6 hour buffer instead of TiVo's skimpy one. It also provides a feature that no DVR has; the capability to advance through its buffer at 1.3 FF with normal pitched audio. It has adjustable SKIP/REPLAY settings which can be preset for 5/15/30/60/ or 300 secs.!

That's my DVD recorder of choice!

It's available from Walmart for $250: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=10104532

It's got a couple of A/V Forum threads:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=940657
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1054933


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

fallingwater said:


> Obviously these are two completely different approaches, both of which can be considered cheap and easy. Almost all posters to this thread preferred the latter. A PC can do everything of course, and when used for TV, a PC can even provide DVR service instead of relatively expensive service such as TiVo's.
> 
> My preference is for not using a PC for anything connected with watching TV including recording programs to DVDs.
> 
> ...


But... if you have a Tivo HD/S3 and just want to transfer to a DVD, most of the extra functionality in that (expensive) DVD recorder is unnecessary...

Either get a $100 DVD recorder, or do the easier (and cheaper delta) of buying Redo Suite for your PC (which likely already has a DVD burner).


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

AbMagFab said:


> But... if you have a Tivo HD/S3 and just want to transfer to a DVD, most of the extra functionality in that (expensive) DVD recorder is unnecessary...
> 
> Either get a $100 DVD recorder, or do the easier (and cheaper delta) of buying Redo Suite for your PC (which likely already has a DVD burner).


You hit the nail on the head inadvertantly. I don't 'just want to transfer to a DVD'.

I watch a great deal of TV 'live' or buffered (I'm a bit of a news junky) and use the buffer along with 1.3FF frequently. I also prefer to edit recordings before copying them to DVDs. The HDD DVD recorder can search for edit points both forward and reverse with frame-by-frame accuracy. I don't consider a DVD recorder with such capabilities 'expensive' for $250.

Many users reportedly use them as DVRs without an EPG. FWIW, if a Sony hi-def DVR is the source component it can be set to display its EPG on hi-def outputs only, leaving an S-Video connection to a DVD recorder unspoiled. My workaround is to use a ReplayTV 4XXX with _Bypass_ feature for no delay at the end of a signal chain beginning with TiVo. (TiVo→DVDR→RTV4XXX)

I really don't use a PC for much beyond this and other Forums; for Google; for email; for package tracking; occasionally for a youtube recording (mostly music); and for overseeing finances. I never use Facebook, Twitter, IM, and never rely on internet financial statements.

If a comet plows into the earth in 2012, changing life as we know it forever, I wanna' see it coming 'live'.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

fallingwater said:


> You hit the nail on the head inadvertantly. I don't 'just want to transfer to a DVD'.
> 
> I watch a great deal of TV 'live' or buffered (I'm a bit of a news junky) and use the buffer along with 1.3FF frequently. I also prefer to edit recordings before copying them to DVDs. The HDD DVD recorder can search for edit points both forward and reverse with frame-by-frame accuracy.
> 
> ...


But... you can watch Live TV on the Tivo (this is a question about transferring shows from the Tivo to a DVD).

Given that you have a Tivo, it would seem preferable to use the one device to watch Live and recorded shows. And if you're recording the show, there is an infinite "live" buffer (well, as long as the show is, and as big as the hard drive).

And a PC is a *much* more effective tool for editing videos, and VideoRedo makes this extremely easy.

I don't get your point... $300 for another CE device that is superfluous with a Tivo HD and a PC makes little sense to me...


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> I watch a great deal of TV 'live' or buffered (I'm a bit of a news junky) and use the buffer along with 1.3FF frequently. I also prefer to edit recordings before copying them to DVDs. The HDD DVD recorder can search for edit points both forward and reverse with frame-by-frame accuracy.


Editing with a DVD recorder is a bit like trying to surf the web on your Blackberry; you can do it, but it is horribly inefficient and you don't get the same experience. VideoRedo is superior in every way to the edit functionality you get with a DVD recorder.

Downloading also allows you to take advantage of your computer's powerful processor for automatic commercial detection and deletion. You might try kmttg, if you have not already.









Kmttg free download and commercial detection/removal tool.









VideoRedo TVSuite









VideoRedo TVSuite DVD Creation screen


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

You're essentially correct (I'm sure) regarding the sophistication of VideoRedo and computer processing. But have you edited with the recorder I'm refering to? It would be interesting to compare a DVD you edited with VideoRedo to one I edited on an H2160MW9.

The point of all of this is that I don't involve a PC with TV watching in any fashion. Yes, I'm not using a bunch of built-in hardware and software that's paid for. I'd never tell you what's most suitable for you but certainly will tell you what's most suitable and enjoyable for me and what enhances an experience for me.

The digital transition can all too often be a drag. Sure, it's a bean-counting technical paradise and _Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince_ in a theater looks so good I hope kids realize it's a fantasy, but even if _Pinnochio_ wasn't that persuasive an illusion who's to say which provides the superior experience.


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> You're essentially correct (I'm sure) regarding the sophistication of VideoRedo and computer processing. But have you edited with the recorder I'm refering to? It would be interesting to compare a DVD you edited with VideoRedo to one I edited on an H2160MW9.


I have not edited with that particular model. But I've done it on many others. That's what I did before I learned to do it on a computer.

Once you've learned how to edit on a computer, there's no way you'd go back to a DVD recorder, just as you'd never go back to a VCR after you've had a TiVo. The difference is _significant_, especially once you've learned the various shortcuts.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

AbMagFab said:


> But... you can watch Live TV on the Tivo (this is a question about transferring shows from the Tivo to a DVD).
> 
> Given that you have a Tivo, it would seem preferable to use the one device to watch Live and recorded shows. And if you're recording the show, there is an infinite "live" buffer (well, as long as the show is, and as big as the hard drive).
> 
> ...


TiVo is designed for watching almost all TV timeshifted into formalized recordings and is best by far when used that way. But I don't watch TV that way. I set a relatively few recordings KUID and don't delete them until they've been watched.

Since HDD space (no matter how large) is finite I never record in hi-def. DVD's aren't by nature a hi-def medium, but they are for me the perfect compromise between storage capacity and engaging imagery.

I often watch hi-def TV however. TiVo's recording buffer is IMHO substandard for watching buffered 'Live' TV but it's another in a long string of compromises which technology routinely mandates. (I have no interest in BDs unless and until they become routinely recordable and player[/recorder!] prices drop by an order of magnitude.)

The price you quote for H2160MW9 is too high; it's as if you'd quote HDTiVo @ $300. At any rate I enjoy using the recorder. It's not about being efficient; I laugh when anything related to watching TV gets lauded for being 'efficient'.



Mr. Rhee of Life: said:


> ........................
> _ Row, row, row your boat
> gently down the stream
> Merrily, merrily merrily, merrily
> Life is just a dream..._


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

bkdtv said:


> I have not edited with that particular model. But I've done it on many others.  That's what I did before I learned to do it on a computer.
> 
> Once you've learned how to edit on a computer, there's no way you'd go back to a DVD recorder, just as you'd never go back to a VCR after you've had a TiVo. The difference is _significant_, especially once you've learned the various shortcuts.


Your skills are admirable and helpful in many ways but there are limits to the degree that technical information relates to enjoying life's ongoing simple pleasures. I still use a couple of VCRs to replay cherished recordings although not as often as I once did.

It still would be interesting to compare DVDs of the same material that you edited with VideoRedo and I edited with a H2160MW9 or a much older analog HDRW 720.

The day before yesterday I actually re-discovered an old 'lost chord' musical recording on audio cassette  that I've been searching for for years. It made perfect sense where it was, but it wasn't where I thought it was. It's a _Mahogany Rush_ Jimi Hendrix tribute I taped from a record album, where the cassette ran out precisely and completely randomly at the point where Jimi met his en...

On a similiar note _Savoy Brown_'s *Hellbound Train* was released in a second version after buyers complained that the initial CD release was defective because they just didn't 'get it'. I'm downloading what I can find on youtube right now and will include both if I can find them. But I've got the first version recorded on an old cassette which segways into a perfect follow-up hosted by a forgotten DJ from L.A.'s long gone KWST:

(I can't find the original version on youtube.) Here's the later version.


----------



## dpw (Jul 21, 2009)

Guys, this is a very interesting debate because i love to burn my tivo shows onto dvd. I am all about getting the best picture quality available. I currently use VRD and am very happy with it and the quality of the output. 

FallingRiver, can your dvd player be used in conjunction with TivoHD? I have recorded shows thru my sony dvd recorder hooked up to my TivoHD and the quality is not as good as when i edit the show thru my pc.


----------



## dpw (Jul 21, 2009)

"Fallingwater".


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

fallingwater said:


> TiVo is designed for watching almost all TV timeshifted into formalized recordings and is best by far when used that way. But I don't watch TV that way. I set a relatively few recordings KUID and don't delete them until they've been watched.
> 
> Since HDD space (no matter how large) is finite I never record in hi-def. DVD's aren't by nature a hi-def medium, but they are for me the perfect compromise between storage capacity and engaging imagery.


I'm not trying to be judgemental, but perhaps you might be stuck in one method of using these technologies, and you're missing the forest for the trees, so to speak.

I can definitely say you aren't using them in a way that would bring *you* the most enjoyment, based on what you describe *you* want to do. This has nothing to do with me, my requirements, or my skills.

And using a PC to edit and transfer video has nothing to do with "*involving a PC in TV viewing*", as you aren't. You are simply transferring the show to the PC, then transferring it to a DVD on the PC. All in a *much* more efficient and *much easier* way than using a DVD recorder.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

dpw said:


> Guys, this is a very interesting debate because i love to burn my tivo shows onto dvd. I am all about getting the best picture quality available. I currently use VRD and am very happy with it and the quality of the output.
> 
> Falling(water), can your dvd player be used in conjunction with TivoHD? I have recorded shows thru my sony dvd recorder hooked up to my TivoHD and the quality is not as good as when i edit the show thru my pc.


It can, but I can't answer your ultimate question about quality differences between a standalone DVD recorder and a PC based burner.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

bkdtv said:


> Editing with a DVD recorder is a bit like trying to surf the web on your Blackberry; you can do it, but it is horribly inefficient and you don't get the same experience. VideoRedo is superior in every way to the edit functionality you get with a DVD recorder.


(1) It doesn't run on a Mac.
(2) You need to try an iPhone or iPod touch... Surfing the web on those is VERY close to surfing the web on a "regular computer" browser. Don't compare to a Blackberry.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

fallingwater said:


> TiVo is designed for watching almost all TV timeshifted into formalized recordings and is best by far when used that way. But I don't watch TV that way. I set a relatively few recordings KUID and don't delete them until they've been watched.
> 
> Since HDD space (no matter how large) is finite I never record in hi-def. DVD's aren't by nature a hi-def medium, but they are for me the perfect compromise between storage capacity and engaging imagery.
> 
> ...





AbMagFab said:


> I'm not trying to be judgemental, but perhaps you might be stuck in one method of using these technologies, and you're missing the forest for the trees, so to speak.
> 
> I can definitely say you aren't using them in a way that would bring *you* the most enjoyment, based on what you describe *you* want to do. This has nothing to do with me, my requirements, or my skills.
> 
> And using a PC to edit and transfer video has nothing to do with "*involving a PC in TV viewing*", as you aren't. You are simply transferring the show to the PC, then transferring it to a DVD on the PC. All in a *much* more efficient and *much easier* way than using a DVD recorder.


I'm glad to see your reference to 'the forest for the trees, so to speak'! I returned to TCF, not knowing about your (or dpw's) replies, realizing that in replying to earlier posts I had lost site of a most important 'tree' when focused on the metaphysical 'forest'.

First though, I'm curious as to how you envision with such certainty what my enjoyment may be, based on my description of what I want to do. Also, why do you suggest that I may be 'stuck' without equally considering that you may be as well?

My important omission is that the H2160MW9 is normally left on 24/7 connected to and buffering the source tuner. At any time any portion or all of its 6 hour buffer can instantly be turned into a recording, edited, and then dubbed at high speed to DVD. If a dubbed segment is 5 hours or shorter, depending on the original recording quality, dubbing can be as fast as 24X realtime.

When not being turned into a permanent recording any portion of the rolling 6 hour buffer can be watched, rewound and/or skipped through, or FF'd at 1.3x realtime with normal pitched audio.

PC based DVD recorder software doesn't offer those capabilities.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

bkdtv said:


> I have not edited with that particular model. But I've done it on many others. That's what I did before I learned to do it on a computer.
> 
> Once you've learned how to edit on a computer, there's no way you'd go back to a DVD recorder, just as you'd never go back to a VCR after you've had a TiVo. The difference is _significant_, especially once you've learned the various shortcuts.


I still use a standalone DVD burner for convenience. For shows I don't automatically transfer to the PC from the TiVo, the stand alone burner is quickest since it takes time to transfer to the PC anyway. But on the regular shows that I transfer automatically, it's easier and quicker to use the editing and burning software on the PC.


----------



## jeffw_00 (Sep 19, 2000)

you guys ignore the fact that taking a signal off the Tivo into a DVD recorder (even using SVIDEO) introduces analog degradation, primarily because of the questionable quality of A/D converters on the DVD recorder. I was looking for a PC-based solution, but

will VideoRedo take a show recorded on my TiVo off an *HD* channel and generate an SD (480p) image for the DVD?

/j


----------



## dpw (Jul 21, 2009)

Yes it will. VRD TVsuite can "downconvert" the HD signal to SD. Believe it or not, i will be working on a project this weekend where i will be "downconverting" HD to SD using VRD.


----------



## dpw (Jul 21, 2009)

Jeff, the analog degradation is precisely why i purchased VRD TVSuite. My end product of burning a dvd using this software is exactly like the original Tivo recording. Fallingwater has posted that there are dvd recorders on the market that capture the signal very well, but i just can't see it being better quality than a pc based software.


----------



## retired_guy (Aug 27, 2004)

I've got a Series2 Pioneer box (57H) with a DVD burner and it does a great job considering the technology is five years old. But I find that VRD TV Suite is so easy to use and has so many advantages relative to recording and writing on the 57H that I rarely generate DVDs any way other than with VRD on my PC. It generates a high quality SD DVD from original HD recordings and removal of commerical is almost trivial.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

tootal2 said:


> Those cant do widescreen hd. I think


In the ordinary sense, no DVD can, and the OP did specify DVD. Note there is actually a method to record HD content of limited duration on a DVD and play it back on a compatible Blu-Ray player, but IMO it's hardly worth the trouble. For the most part, if the OP is writing to DVDs, then he's limited to SD.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

I agree with the majority, here. VRD TV Suite is the best I've used. Depending upon your needs, you may occasionally come across a requirement to employ other software in the workflow, but for 90% or better of your TiVo => DVD requirements, I expect VRD TV Suite will do what you want.

I do not recommend TiVo Desktop to do your copying from the TiVo, however. To my mind, Galleon is a far better choice. Barring that, I would suggest using a web browser in preference to TDT.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> Obviously these are two completely different approaches, both of which can be considered cheap and easy. Almost all posters to this thread preferred the latter. A PC can do everything of course, and when used for TV, a PC can even provide DVR service instead of relatively expensive service such as TiVo's.


You need to re-read the OP's post. Although using a stand-alone DVD recorder hooked directly to a TiVo certainly can be done, the OP specifically stated he already has the videos on his PC. That excludes your notion from the outset.



fallingwater said:


> HDTiVo allows for receiving and watching programming in high-def at the same time as sending the signal to a standard-def device such as a DVD recorder.


Not as a digital stream, it doesn't. Such a setup inevitably results in two sets of conversion errors. PQ is significantly degraded.


----------



## dpw (Jul 21, 2009)

retired_guy said:


> I've got a Series2 Pioneer box (57H) with a DVD burner and it does a great job considering the technology is five years old. But I find that VRD TV Suite is so easy to use and has so many advantages relative to recording and writing on the 57H that I rarely generate DVDs any way other than with VRD on my PC. It generates a high quality SD DVD from original HD recordings and removal of commerical is almost trivial.


Retired_Guy, if you recorded the same show, one in HD and the other in SD, and used VRD to "downconvert" the HD show, would the output still be better quality than the original SD recording?

thanks


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

AbMagFab said:


> I'm not trying to be judgemental


Oh, go ahead! Enjoy yourself. Being judgmental is one of life's simple joys. 



AbMagFab said:


> but perhaps you might be stuck in one method of using these technologies, and you're missing the forest for the trees, so to speak.


I think you drove the nail all the way through the board on that one.



AbMagFab said:


> I can definitely say you aren't using them in a way that would bring *you* the most enjoyment, based on what you describe *you* want to do. This has nothing to do with me, my requirements, or my skills.


Unless what he really enjoys most is simply the fact of doing something differently than others - and perhaps bragging about it - I concur.



AbMagFab said:


> And using a PC to edit and transfer video has nothing to do with "*involving a PC in TV viewing*", as you aren't. You are simply transferring the show to the PC, then transferring it to a DVD on the PC. All in a *much* more efficient and *much easier* way than using a DVD recorder.


'Excellent point. Although editing out the trailers, commercials, and other undesirable content requires intervention, it is certainly quite possible to do basic copying and conversion without ever watching a single frame of video on the PC. Indeed, if one wishes to accept VRD's Ad Detective detection abilities, one can even remove ads without ever looking at a single frame of video on the PC. One could handle it all in a telnet session. As a matter of fact, other than hand correcting VRD's Ad Detective misfires, on my system the entire process is automated, although I don't copy to DVD.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mattack said:


> (1) It doesn't run on a Mac.


There are alternatives for the Mac. Although the term "PC" is often used generically to refer even to Macs, I suspect when the OP said he has a PC, that he is in fact on i86 platform.



mattack said:


> (2) You need to try an iPhone or iPod touch... Surfing the web on those is VERY close to surfing the web on a "regular computer" browser. Don't compare to a Blackberry.


1. That's utter nonsense! Unless there is an iPhone or IPod of which I am unaware which has a 120 key keyboard, a 14 button mouse, and a 24 inch 1920 x 1200 pixel screen, then it's *nothing* like surfing the web with a "regular" browser.

2. He was specifically speaking of a Blackberry, and comparing the experience of video editing on a stand-alone DVR writer to web browsing on a Blackberry.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> Also, why do you suggest that I may be 'stuck' without equally considering that you may be as well?


I cannot speak for AgMagFab since I do not know if he has ever used a stand-alone solution, but the fact bkdtv and I, as well as others, have used the stand-alone copier solution many, many times and have abandoned it demonstrates rather conclusively it is not the case.



fallingwater said:


> PC based DVD recorder software doesn't offer those capabilities.


Of course it does! VRD by itself does not, of course, but the fact you are unaware of the existence of PC based software which does everything you want does not mean it doesn't exist. It does, however, strongly suggest you haven't done any significant amount of research, and does add support to the notion your vision of the forest is obscured by trees.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> It still would be interesting to compare DVDs of the same material that you edited with VideoRedo and I edited with a H2160MW9 or a much older analog HDRW 720.


As a former video engineer for a CATV company, I can tell you precisely what the result would be, but instead I will simply cut to the chase with a deal breaker for the stand-alone solution. How does the stand-alone recorder you say you prefer handle frame accurate editing?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

dpw said:


> Retired_Guy, if you recorded the same show, one in HD and the other in SD, and used VRD to "downconvert" the HD show, would the output still be better quality than the original SD recording?


Well, it's not quite that simple. There is a limit to the quality of an SD recording (or an HD, for that matter). If the SD source material is essentially "perfect" (what we in the business called "short haul broadcast video quality"), then nothing else down-converted to SD will be any better. The simple act of modulating the video and (if it is analog) transporting it across a CATV system will degrade the quality of the video to some extent, albeit ideally not in any fashion detectable by the human eye and ear. This is true whether the source content is SD or HD (HD never being analog). In some cases, the act of digitizing the HD source can produce artifacts in the picture that are not produced when digitizing the source as SD. Finally, down-conversion also produces artifacts, although once again ideally not one detectable by the human eye and ear. This means it is possible for a down-converted HD video to look worse than the same content from an SD source. In practice, however, this is rarely the case, and for most situations the artifacts produced by an additional D/A and A/D conversion - no matter how good the D/A and A/D converters might be - are going to be far worse and much more noticeable than those produced by a digital conversion to SD from an HD source. Depending on how good the original respective SD and HD sources may be, the digitally converted HD source may or may not look better.


----------



## retired_guy (Aug 27, 2004)

dpw said:


> Retired_Guy, if you recorded the same show, one in HD and the other in SD, and used VRD to "downconvert" the HD show, would the output still be better quality than the original SD recording?
> 
> thanks


See Irhorer's answer to your question for a technical perspective which I can't provide. However, in my particular case using a Pioneer DVD recording TiVo, recording the DVD directly in SD mode means that I'm using a Motorola set-top box to convert the original cable signal to s-video, which is a digital to analog conversion, then using the Pioneer S2 to convert it back to a digital format (a higher bit rate DVD compatible resolution, not the normal S2 MP2 resolution), and then recording that on the DVD. To get two hours on the DVD, I have to use the "high" setting for recording, which means I almost certainly lose some resolution in the S2. The resultant DVD appears to me visually to be of lower quality (although still good) than the one I get using VRD, where the loss of quality is essentially only in the HD down-res process.

This leaves open the question of whether had I recorded the program originally from a SD digital channel on a HD or S3, and then transferred that program to the PC, would the DVD have been better? Don't know; the originator of the SD cable program probably introduced some artifacts in their down-res of the program, the cable company may have introduced some in their transmission to me and the VRD software perhaps would introduce some in it's conversion to SD DVD format in fitting the program on the disk. Uncertain whether all of those steps would have produced a better DVD than the down-res of a HD transmission or even whether the results would have been consistently better or worse. If asked to bet, I'd pick the HD VRD down-res as providing the best DVD.


----------



## jeffw_00 (Sep 19, 2000)

lrhorer said:


> You need to re-read the OP's post. Although using a stand-alone DVD recorder hooked directly to a TiVo certainly can be done, the OP specifically stated he already has the videos on his PC. That excludes your notion from the outset.


Ummm, no i didn't, but I did want to do the burning on the PC - I suppose when I want it enough to spend real bucks (sigh) I'll get the VideoRedo Suite. Right now I expect to do about 4-5 hrs/year, for which $80 seems like a lot 8-}

But that seems to be the right answer - thanks guys
/j


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

jeffw_00 said:


> Ummm, no i didn't, but I did want to do the burning on the PC - I suppose when I want it enough to spend real bucks (sigh) I'll get the VideoRedo Suite. Right now I expect to do about 4-5 hrs/year, for which $80 seems like a lot 8-}
> 
> But that seems to be the right answer - thanks guys
> /j


Have you done the free trial of VideoReDo TV Suite?
You can try out VideoReDo TV Suite free for 15 days.
You just have to get a trial registration key for full functionality.
I believe once you try it, you'll like it. (remember Mikey?  )
IMO, well worth the $$ even if you don't burn a lot of DVDs.
Also works great for archiving TV shows -- editing out the commercials and saving them to a PC hard drive which can be transferred back to the Tivo at your convenience.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

dpw said:


> Jeff, the analog degradation is precisely why i purchased VRD TVSuite. My end product of burning a dvd using this software is exactly like the original Tivo recording. Fallingwater has posted that there are dvd recorders on the market that capture the signal very well, but i just can't see it being better quality than a pc based software.


Nor do I, but 'very well' is a good description. Unless bits stay as bits and aren't converted to analog and back when copied no copy is as good as a digital recording converted to analog only during playback.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

lrhorer said:


> You need to re-read the OP's post. Although using a stand-alone DVD recorder hooked directly to a TiVo certainly can be done, the OP specifically stated he already has the videos on his PC. That excludes your notion from the outset.


You need to re-read the post you replied to. It wasn't offered as a solution for the OP but rather focused on the two methods of transferring TiVo content to DVDs which had been discussed in the thread by posters other than the OP.



me said:


> ...HDTiVo allows for receiving and watching programming in high-def at the same time as sending the signal to a standard-def device such as a DVD recorder....





you said:


> Not as a digital stream, it doesn't. Such a setup inevitably results in two sets of conversion errors. PQ is significantly degraded.


Why do you state the obvious as if it was a great revelation?

The point is that HDTiVo allows a user to watch a program in high-def, not that DVDs are of equal quality. No 'standard' DVD offers PQ that isn't 'significantly degraded'. Your post below covered that point.



you said:


> In the ordinary sense, no DVD can, and the OP did specify DVD. Note there is actually a method to record HD content of limited duration on a DVD and play it back on a compatible Blu-Ray player, but IMO it's hardly worth the trouble. For the most part, if the OP is writing to DVDs, then he's limited to SD.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

lrhorer said:


> ...Being judgmental is one of life's simple joys.


Does being monumentally stuffy and condescending bring you equal pleasure? 



AbMagFab said:


> I can definitely say you aren't using them in a way that would bring *you* the most enjoyment, based on what you describe *you* want to do.





lrhorer said:


> I think you drove the nail all the way through the board on that one.
> 
> Unless what he really enjoys most is simply the fact of doing something differently than others - and perhaps bragging about it - I concur.


I posted about my preferred way of using a DVD recorder (and/or DVR) at A/V Forum, when replying to a poster who asked how other posters used their DVD recorders:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16887168#post16887168
_Although my 'snakepits' in two rooms are probably much like but smaller than DigaDo's my usage is more on the scale of yours. (I do have a large number of HDD and DVDR recorders stashed away, not in use.) I have recorded several hundred (or more?) DVDs but don't record nearly as many now. I don't re-watch many recorded programs, but instead occasionally use their DVDs as references when searching for a (figurative) lost chord.

I mostly watch TV live or from a recording buffer now. The 2160's buffer is especially useful for its 1.3xFF with normal piched audio for reveiwing programs which don't have commercial breaks, like many PBS shows._
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post16855428 



lrhorer said:


> 'Excellent point. Although editing out the trailers, commercials, and other undesirable content requires intervention, it is certainly quite possible to do basic copying and conversion without ever watching a single frame of video on the PC. Indeed, if one wishes to accept VRD's Ad Detective detection abilities, one can even remove ads without ever looking at a single frame of video on the PC. One could handle it all in a telnet session. As a matter of fact, other than hand correcting VRD's Ad Detective misfires, on my system the entire process is automated, although I don't copy to DVD.


I'd never post that your way is 'wrong'...for you! Enjoy your automated approach to enjoying life's ongoing simple pleasures and experiencing reality.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

fallingwater said:


> Also, why do you suggest that I may be 'stuck' without equally considering that you may be as well?





lrhorer said:


> I cannot speak for AgMagFab since I do not know if he has ever used a stand-alone solution, but the fact bkdtv and I, as well as others, have used the stand-alone copier solution many, many times and have abandoned it demonstrates rather conclusively it is not the case.


You're still 'stuck' on what works best for you. It's about what works and provides pleasure to a user, not about being right/wrong.



me said:


> PC based DVD recorder software doesn't offer those capabilities.





you said:


> Of course it does! VRD by itself does not, of course, but the fact you are unaware of the existence of PC based software which does everything you want does not mean it doesn't exist. It does, however, strongly suggest you haven't done any significant amount of research, and does add support to the notion your vision of the forest is obscured by trees.


I oversimplified.

The sentence should have stated; 'PC based software probably offers such capabilities but would require that I then leave the PC on 24/7 and constantly involve it when casually watching TV; precisely what I don't want to do!'


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

fallingwater said:


> It still would be interesting to compare DVDs of the same material that you edited with VideoRedo and I edited with a H2160MW9 or a much older analog HDRW 720.





lrhorer said:


> As a former video engineer for a CATV company, I can tell you precisely what the result would be...


Actually you can't. Editing depends on more than bean counting, which I'm sure Redo does perfectly.



you said:


> I will simply cut to the chase with a deal breaker for the stand-alone solution. How does the stand-alone recorder you say you prefer handle frame accurate editing?


Sequentially (1+1+1+1) in each direction; noting that stepping backward involves going from an actual frame to the preceding one while forward frames are virtual reconstructions based on sequential actual frames. (If you'd use your technical background to provide a more precisely correct technical description I'd appreciate it.)

Here's one A/V poster's description followed by my admittedly funky reply! 
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16884220#post16884220


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> Actually you can't. Editing depends on more than bean counting, which I'm sure Redo does perfectly.


That's even more nonsensical than the rest of your posts. I don't know what you think you mean by "bean counting", but no definition of the phrase of which I am aware has anything to do with video production.



fallingwater said:


> Sequentially (1+1+1+1) in each direction; noting that stepping backward involves going from an actual frame to the preceding one while forward frames are virtual reconstructions based on sequential actual frames. (If you'd use your technical background to provide a more precisely correct technical description I'd appreciate it.)
> 
> Here's one A/V poster's description followed by my admittedly funky reply!
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16884220#post16884220


Once again, I don't know what you think you mean by "virtual" or "sequential actual" frames, but it seems abundantly clear from the dialogue between you and wajo in the conversation you reference that the DVD recorder you espouse does not do frame accurate editing, at all. More than likely, it does GOP editing. As to a more precisely correct technical description, I don't know how one could possibly be more precise. Frame accurate editing is just that. The user is able to select any frame as a start or stop point for removing from the edited video, and the utility will remove precisely that fame and nothing at all prior / subsequent to the start / stop frame. To do so requires the utility to be able to assemble every single picture subsequent to the GOP's I-frame to the end cut point and then recode the entire newly established GOP. Somewhat less in the way of computing is required for the start point, but stitching the two fragments together does require a recode at that point, and in general may not result in a DVD compliant GOP unless additional recoding is performed. If the DVD recorder is assembling strictly DVD compliant GOPs with a limit of 18 frames per GOP (which is fairly likely), then removing the entire GOP results in a maximum error of 300 milliseconds or so. If not then the error could actually be more than a second in some cases. One third of a second is not too bad of an error, but it is enough to be annoying, and it is absolutely terrible compared with the +/- 1.6ms error - the minimum possible for 60Hz video - inherent in frame accurate editing. It's also far, far easier for the user to perform such an edit when a large number (over 24 in my case, or almost half a second) of frames adjacent to the potential frame are displayed simultaneously on the screen.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

lrhorer said:


> As a former video engineer for a CATV company, I can tell you precisely what the result would be, but instead I will simply cut to the chase with a deal breaker for the stand-alone solution. How does the stand-alone recorder you say you prefer handle frame accurate editing?





me said:


> Sequentially (1+1+1+1) in each direction; noting that stepping backward involves going from an actual frame to the preceding one while forward frames are virtual reconstructions based on sequential actual frames. (If you'd use your technical background to provide a more precisely correct technical description I'd appreciate it.)
> 
> Here's one A/V poster's description followed by my admittedly funky reply!
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16884220#post16884220





you said:


> That's even more nonsensical than the rest of your posts. I don't know what you think you mean by "bean counting", but no definition of the phrase of which I am aware has anything to do with video production.


'Bean counting' refers to the way any digital process works. An extremely large yet finite number of bits of information must be kept track of for a digital process to work effectively.



you said:


> Once again, I don't know what you think you mean by "virtual" or "sequential actual" frames, but it seems abundantly clear from the dialogue between you and wajo in the conversation you reference that the DVD recorder you espouse does not do frame accurate editing, at all. More than likely, it does GOP editing. As to a more precisely correct technical description, I don't know how one could possibly be more precise. Frame accurate editing is just that. The user is able to select any frame as a start or stop point for removing from the edited video, and the utility will remove precisely that fame and nothing at all prior / subsequent to the start / stop frame. To do so requires the utility to be able to assemble every single picture subsequent to the GOP's I-frame to the end cut point and then recode the entire newly established GOP. Somewhat less in the way of computing is required for the start point, but stitching the two fragments together does require a recode at that point, and in general may not result in a DVD compliant GOP unless additional recoding is performed. If the DVD recorder is assembling strictly DVD compliant GOPs with a limit of 18 frames per GOP (which is fairly likely), then removing the entire GOP results in a maximum error of 300 milliseconds or so. If not then the error could actually be more than a second in some cases. One third of a second is not too bad of an error, but it is enough to be annoying, and it is absolutely terrible compared with the +/- 1.6ms error - the minimum possible for 60Hz video - inherent in frame accurate editing. It's also far, far easier for the user to perform such an edit when a large number (over 24 in my case, or almost half a second) of frames adjacent to the potential frame are displayed simultaneously on the screen.


While I did know that there appeared to be two frames per second going backward compared with 30 going forward I didn't know there are two types of difference frames.

As per your usual predilection for pontifical stuffiness, you phrased your technical expertise in (perfectly correct yet) obtuse terms for someone unfamiliar with the subject like me, but employing Google I now understand them.

I previously had Googled a source which didn't use the term 'GOP' but did define the different types of frames. You'd probably call it _DVD Storage for Dummies_:
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/question596.htm

_*The MPEG encoder that creates the compressed movie file analyzes each frame and decides how to encode it. The compression uses some of the same technology as still image compression to eliminate redundant or irrelevant data. It also uses information from other frames to reduce the overall size of the file. Each frame can be encoded in one of three ways:

1. As an intraframe, which contains the complete image data for that frame. This method of encoding provides the least compression.

2. As a predicted frame, which contains just enough information to tell the DVD player how to display the frame based on the most recently displayed intraframe or predicted frame. This means that the frame contains only the data that relates to how the picture has changed from the previous frame.

3. As a bidirectional frame. In order to display this type of frame, the player must have the information from the surrounding intraframe or predicted frames. Using data from the closest surrounding frames, it uses interpolation, which is sort of like averaging, to calculate the position and color of each pixel.*_

A more detailed description:
http://tangentsoft.net/video/mpeg/edit.html

_*MPEG video, in a nutshell, has one full "reference" frame (called an I frame, technically) for every 14 or so "difference" frames. These 15 or so frames are called a "group of pictures," or GOP. (If you're a Democrat, there's no need to feel uneasy, because it's pronounced as a word, /gawp/, not spelled out, gee-oh-pee.) The GOP length can vary, but it's always a single I frame followed by one or more difference frames. There's a lot more to MPEG video than this, but that's all we need to go into to explain why editing MPEG video is hard.

There are two types of difference frames.

The obvious type are called P frames, and they only depend on the previous frame in MPEG-2, or up to 3 frames back in MPEG-4. The P frame following an I frame simply describes what happened in the video since that I frame. The easiest change to describe is no change: areas of the frame that are substantially the same as in the previous frame just get copied. Next easiest is simple linear motion, so the decoder can just copy a block of pixels from one area in the previous frame to their new position in the current frame. Finally, any areas of the frame that are simply different relative to the previous one are re-encoded using the same technique used for the pieces of the I frame, called macroblocks.

You could encode the entire video as a single I frame followed by nothing but P frames. They did try this in the experimental stage of MPEG development, but it didn't work because MPEG only encodes the approximate appearance of video, in a further effort to keep the file size low. The errors in each approximation would thus build up until they became obvious, then ugly, then mud. They found that the best balance between video quality degradation and the high cost of I frames is to have one nice, clean I frame every half second or so. You will thus usually find that the GOP size is 15 frames when the frame rate is 30 per second, 12 for 24 fps video, etc. There are exceptions, such as truncated GOPs when the encoder does scene-change detection, or "long-GOP" encoding, where they deliberately put more difference frames between the reference I frames to get higher compression rates. The important thing is that a GOP is almost always a big fraction of a second long.

The other type of difference frame is called a B frame, which stands for "bidirectional." In MPEG-2 a B frame can describe differences relative to both the previous and the next frame. MPEG-4 gives B frames a little more reach, but the idea is the same. This ability to reach both forward and backward in time makes B frames even smaller than P frames, on average, a big win for file size. For technical reasons, though, you don't want too many of them, so the most common GOP frame pattern is IPBBPBB... (Actually, it's stored in the file as IBBPBBP... to make decoding easier.)

From an MPEG editing standpoint, the interesting question, once you introduce B frames, is what happens at the GOP boundary? The most common frame pattern looks like ...PBBIPBB..., so can that final B frame in one GOP refer to the I frame starting the next GOP? Yes, it can, but it doesn't have to. An MPEG video encoder is allowed to write out a B frame that only refers to differences in the previous frame, or it can change the frame pattern to force a P frame to be the last one in a GOP. This is called "closed GOP" encoding, because each GOP is self-contained, closed off from the others. The problem with closed GOP encoding is that it requires a slightly larger file to achieve the same quality level, because you lose out on the benefit of that final B frame. Because it's less efficient and more complex, closed GOP encoding isn't even an option in a lot of encoders, and is never the default when it is available.*_

So you're right; the standalone DVD recorder doesn't do frame accurate editing. I'd still like to see a DVD of yours compared with a DVD of the same source material that I edited.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

me said:


> ...My important omission is that the H2160MW9 is normally left on 24/7 connected to and buffering the source tuner. At any time any portion or all of its 6 hour buffer can instantly be turned into a recording, edited, and then dubbed at high speed to DVD. If a dubbed segment is 5 hours or shorter, depending on the original recording quality, dubbing can be as fast as 24X realtime.
> 
> When not being turned into a permanent recording any portion of the rolling 6 hour buffer can be watched, rewound and/or skipped through, or FF'd at 1.3x realtime with normal pitched audio.
> 
> PC based DVD recorder software doesn't offer those capabilities.





lrhorer said:


> Of course it does! VRD by itself does not, of course, but the fact you are unaware of the existence of PC based software which does everything you want does not mean it doesn't exist. It does, however, strongly suggest you haven't done any significant amount of research, and does add support to the notion your vision of the forest is obscured by trees.





me said:


> I oversimplified.
> 
> The sentence should have stated; 'PC based software probably offers such capabilities but would require that I then leave the PC on 24/7 and constantly involve it when casually watching TV; precisely what I don't want to do!'


I Googled repeatedly, using different criteria, for PC based DVD editing software incorporating 1.3 FF with normal pitched audio in its playback options and came back with nothing. So my original oversimplification stands unless someone posts another source to the contrary. There are a small number of DVD recorders with the 1.3FF feature, but the H2160MW9 is the only one I know of with a recording buffer too!

The closest Google result I found is VideoLAN's VLC media player, a different animal entirely. Still it wasn't a waste of time, as I found myself on the Twitter site (cached) for the first time. (Lucky me! )

Twitter: jameschens: (scroll to bottom)
_I just downloaded VLC 1.0. Awesome new features, but the crown jewel: *fast forward with pitch correction!!!* Finally!]_

(The 1.3FF feature isn't obvious in this feature compilation or CNET's review.)
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/features.html (slow download)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-10280845-16.html


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

'Sorry that it has been a while since I responded to your thread. I've been quite ill, and unable to engage in my normal level of activity in this forum.



fallingwater said:


> 'Bean counting' refers to the way any digital process works. An extremely large yet finite number of bits of information must be kept track of for a digital process to work effectively.


This is nonsense. Whatever it is you think you mean, you don't.



fallingwater said:


> While I did know that there appeared to be two frames per second going backward compared with 30 going forward I didn't know there are two types of difference frames.


'More nonsense. What you think you know, you don't. Standard NTSC video (including high def) is 29.97 frames per second. It's no different going forwards than backwards. A GOP contains 1 I-Frame and some number of B frames and P frames. Whether moving forward or backwards, to decode a specific frame somewhere in the middle of a GOP, one must analyze all the information in the entire frame preceding the frame of interest. This takes time - a considerable amount of time, and any media player which allows such trick-play features must take this into account. An alternative is to simply display successive I-frames. I-frames do not depend in any way upon preceding or successive frames. In simple terms, they are a static reproduction of the displayed video frame at that point in time.

The bad news is MPEG specs do not set any specific limit on the number of frames in a GOP, and that the more B- and P-frames per GOP, the greater the compression. Since broadcast video is not designed to be fast-forwarded or rewound, broadcasters generally take advantage of the variability of the MPEG spec to nearly its fullest extent within the limits of producing acceptable quality pictures. In practice, this means a GOP may in fact be several seconds long, and cutting on a GOP boundary can mean including as much as one or two seconds of unwanted video or else cutting out one or two seconds of video one does not wish removed. It also means that fast-forwarding and rewinding such media can result in very "jerky" video.

The DVD spec, however, is a little different. Although it is a subset of the MPEG-II specification, DVDs are intended from the get-go to allow trick-play functions, and with that in mind, the DVD spec limits GOP sizes to no more than 18 frames, allowing for much smoother trick play functions, at the cost of lower levels of video compression. It also means that GOP accurate editing of DVD-compliant sources may be considerably more accurate than GOP editing of MPEG sources in general. While the DVD spec calls for a specific limit on GOP size, most DVD players can handle much longer GOPs, which is why those of us who handle broadcast videos are usually able to record the content to DVDs without recoding.

I suspect the A/D converter in your recorder produces DVD compliant compression, which would only make sense. Those of us who deal with broadcast digital video do not have that option. Nonetheless, working with DVD-compliant MPEG sources and doing GOP accurate editing results in an editing error of about 1/2 second or less, which isn't too bad, but it isn't all that good, either.



fallingwater said:


> As per your usual predilection for pontifical stuffiness, you phrased your technical expertise in (perfectly correct yet) obtuse terms for someone unfamiliar with the subject like me, but employing Google I now understand them.


I am not your tutor. If you wish me to enter into a protracted tutoring class on video formats, then hire me and I will happily do so. Until such time, you are responsible for educating yourself, and I am disinclined to do much more than point you in the general direction you need to discover the same things I and millions of others have discovered for ourselves. You can label it being obtuse or whatever else you like, but I will not hold your hand and spoon feed you information.



fallingwater said:


> So you're right; the standalone DVD recorder doesn't do frame accurate editing. I'd still like to see a DVD of yours compared with a DVD of the same source material that I edited.


In which case, it's unacceptable. It's true that if the unit is producing DVD compliant video, then the inaccuracy inherent in a GOP accurate edit is limited to 1/2 second, but even that is unacceptable. The fact such a unit is limited to classical 480i video makes it even moreso. I haven't created a DVD in quite a long time, and I rarely produce 480i material. Virtually everything I do now (and for the last 2 years) is 1080i. Many years ago, the only consumer program for editing video produced by a (Series I) TiVo only offered a GOP accurate edit. It sucked. The moment a Frame Accurate 
editor came out, I dropped the old editor like a hot potato, and have never looked back.

You are free to use whatever setup you like for your purposes, but don't try to pretend it is technically superior to other offerings, when it doesn't even come close, as several of us have pointed out.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> I Googled repeatedly, using different criteria, for PC based DVD editing software incorporating 1.3 FF with normal pitched audio in its playback options and came back with nothing.


This is just another example of how it is you who are stuck in a logic-tight rut, not the rest of us. Most video editing software doesn't inlcude a FF function at all because it serves no purpose. In general, one does not *watch* the video when one edits it. At most, one may play back short snippets of video to check on one's position in the video. This fundamental truth seems to elude you, presumably because you are stuck on the notion of editing using a stand-alone recorder. If one is going to watch the video, then one should use a media player like VLC which employs trick play functions such as FF with audio. If you are going to edit the video, then use a video editor like VRD, which has little use for FF.



fallingwater said:


> So my original oversimplification stands unless someone posts another source to the contrary. There are a small number of DVD recorders with the 1.3FF feature, but the H2160MW9 is the only one I know of with a recording buffer too!


OK, so your bicycle has training wheels. Good for you. The rest of us are puzzled why you think we haven't ridden bicycles ourselves or why the rest of us prefer hauling lumber on a flatbed truck rather than using a bicycle.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> Does being monumentally stuffy and condescending bring you equal pleasure?


When dealing with utter morons, it does occasionally lend a bit of pleasure, yes.



fallingwater said:


> I'd never post that your way is 'wrong'...for you!


Then you are a fool. While there are often many different "right" ways to do something, and while there may in some (not all) cases no good way to distinguish which may be the "best" way from either an objective or a subjective perspective, this does not mean there are not wrong ways to attempt something.



fallingwater said:


> Enjoy your automated approach to enjoying life's ongoing simple pleasures and experiencing reality.


This is utter nonsense. There is nothing enjoyable about video editing. It is a means to an end whose existence is bettered the more limited it is. Only a complete idiot would avoid an editing solution which produced letter perfect edits of a complete video instantly by pushing a single button. Those of us (like me) who inject our own labor into the process do so only because it produces a superior product to the fully automated process. If you think you have actually made some point with such a fatuous statement as the one above, then you are sadly mistaken.

The bottom line here, is the rest of us have *tried* solutions similar to yours and have abandoned them for very objective reasons. You, OTOH, have not bothered to try any of what the rest of us all find vastly superior solutions, yet you claim your solution to be superior. Whether this is made as a personal assessment for yourself or not is irrelevant. The simple fact is this claim is not supportable on either an objective or subjective level until you actually try the other solutions.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> 'Sorry that it has been a while since I responded to your thread. I've been quite ill, and unable to engage in my normal level of activity in this forum...


Welcome back, and feel better!


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

Turns out that except for Orangeboy's last post, it's lrhorer all the way down to here after my previous post.

Don't know what to say really.

Several thoughts:

TV is supposed to be fun. There is no right (or wrong) way to watch it.

LR, you reply to me using the 'royal we' at times. You're perhaps frightfully smart but who else do you speak for? Perhaps the man from the big city summed you up best with this question:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7555464#post7555464

You're not an especially effective advocate for TiVo. I suspect your style turns people off. You certainly turn me off. Apparently a great deal of time you boast about saving with TiVo you spend here.

You've touched on having a serious medical issue involving mobility. Perhaps your style and outlook stem in part from having physical limitations which TiVo's electronic information gathering helps make irrelevant. 





TiVo used to have another exceptional fanman, no longer with us, who never talked about his health. During his posting days he provided as much support for TiVo as any poster ever has. He was detail oriented and used his skills to present every feature and advantage of TiVo as completely as was possible to do at that time. I always suspected that he had mobility limitations.

I'm referring of course to DrStrange. His posts at TCF and his various 'PVR' comparisons were legendary:
http://web.archive.org/web/20061115051206/http://www.pvrcompare.com/


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

fallingwater said:


> Please don't be arrogant when you, from the perspective of having notable and admirable skills as a digital savant, preach to me as to what I'd do in similiar circumstances as you. Your skills are admirable and helpful in many ways but there are limits to the degree that technical information relates to enjoying life's ongoing simple pleasures.


fallingwater,

There was nothing "arrogant" about bkdtv's post, nor was he preaching. He was basically saying to try something new, you just might like it.

I know where you are coming from. I have owned a total of four DVD recorders, starting with Philips' infamous DVR-985 "self-destructing" model (which would be comical had it not been for its original $1000 MSRP). At one point I actually had three, including two lauded Pioneer models, but have since downsized to two (sold one of the Pio's). With the inclusion of MRV on the TiVoHD, they have gotten very, very little use.

I too was very hesitant about editing on a PC, but VideoReDo makes it very, very easy. I enjoy editing with VRD better than on a DVD recorder. You have better control than even with the Pioneer units, and even without 1.3FF w/audio it's a lot faster as well. One thing it will do (assuming MRV is allowed) that is impossible with a DVD recorder is preserve the PQ of HD files.

The only time I use my DVD recorders is when copy flags are preventing me from using MRV. Otherwise they mostly gather dust.

Now if you want to continue using a DVD recorder for video editing, feel free to do so. But if you like to edit and archive a lot of videos, I personally think you are shortchanging yourself if you don't at least check out VideoReDo, which has a 15 day free trial (make sure to download the free trial key).


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

I appreciate your observations and hereby retract the 'arrogant' statement from July's post and have edited it out. Bkdtv has indeed been very helpful and has freely provided a great deal of information for TCF readers on a variety of topics.

I have 3 types of DVD recorders. Probably the one generally considered 'best' is a Panasonic DMR-E85H, but ones I like best are the Philips HDRW 720 you refer to, and the current Magnavox/Funai digital RH2160MW9 in both its original and 'A' versions. The Philips and Funai recorders incorporate rolling 6 hour recording buffers, any part of which can be edited and turned into a permanent recording and/or a DVD. In addition the Funai recorder offers 1.3FF with normal pitched audio.

TVGOS (Ver. 7) is the major reason why HDRW 720 has the bad reputation it does. I've disabled the guide, let the 720 buffer 24/7 and now it's quite stable and useful. The only recorder product I know of with a halfway good TVGOS is Sony's hi-def DVR which uses a later, much more advanced version (Ver. 8).

I no longer record and edit much. I've got hundreds of DVDs and recordings I've never watched. Unless there's a real scheduling conflict I prefer to watch TV programs within 6 hours of when they're 'live' or forget it. To that end I have four tunable video streams always available. 

My way is not the 'right' way; it's merely the way that works best for me.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

fallingwater said:


> I appreciate your observations and hereby retract the 'arrogant' statement from July's post and have edited it out. Bkdtv has indeed been very helpful and has freely provided a great deal of information for TCF readers on a variety of topics.
> ............


:up::up: Good job! Refreshing. (although a little belated. )

An ultimate form of "arrogance" is when one cannot even imagine the possibility they were wrong.


----------



## jza80 (Nov 23, 2008)

I started reading this thread since I also would like to know the simplest way to burn DVDs from my S3. I have a netgear powerline so data transfer to my PC should be relatively quick. The comments on different PC software to manage the files is very helpful. But, I'm a bit confused about using a standalone DVD burner...doesn't this require a 1:1 transfer from the tivo to the external HDD/DVR? This seems a very inconvenient way to go but maybe I'm missing something? If data can be passed quickly to the offboard DVR then I'd like to know more as the cost of the magnavox device mentioned earlier in this thread is not so much if it is convenient and quick. 

Another question - can HD shows be transferred to a PC using the tivo desktop (free or paid) program? Are there copy protection blocks? Just wondering before I start accumulating software if everything is going to work... 

Thanks,


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

The free version of Tivo Desktop is all you need. It will transfer any show (HD or SD) that is not copy protected. 
Copy protection will depend on how you get your TV. If you use OTA antenna channels, those have no copy protection. If you have Comcast or TWC, chances are all but the OTA channels have copy protection. FIOS is reported to be copy protection free.
Another thing you might not know...you have to go to your account at tivo.com and enable your Tivo for downloads/transfers.


----------



## JWThiers (Apr 13, 2005)

jza80 said:


> I started reading this thread since I also would like to know the simplest way to burn DVDs from my S3. I have a netgear powerline so data transfer to my PC should be relatively quick. The comments on different PC software to manage the files is very helpful. But, I'm a bit confused about using a standalone DVD burner...doesn't this require a 1:1 transfer from the tivo to the external HDD/DVR? This seems a very inconvenient way to go but maybe I'm missing something? If data can be passed quickly to the offboard DVR then I'd like to know more as the cost of the magnavox device mentioned earlier in this thread is not so much if it is convenient and quick.
> 
> Another question - can HD shows be transferred to a PC using the tivo desktop (free or paid) program? Are there copy protection blocks? Just wondering before I start accumulating software if everything is going to work...
> 
> Thanks,


And once you get the content to your PC, Videoredo TV Suite is probably the easiest way to edit and burn DVD's. but it does cost money but IMO well worth it.


----------



## RonDawg (Jan 12, 2006)

jza80 said:


> But, I'm a bit confused about using a standalone DVD burner...doesn't this require a 1:1 transfer from the tivo to the external HDD/DVR? This seems a very inconvenient way to go but maybe I'm missing something? If data can be passed quickly to the offboard DVR then I'd like to know more as the cost of the magnavox device mentioned earlier in this thread is not so much if it is convenient and quick.


Yes it is a real-time transfer, but for HD files in my experience it takes about the same time anyway.

The big issue is being able to preserve HD files, and I am unaware of any recorder other than certain D-VHS units and a few PC video capture cards that will do this.



> Another question - can HD shows be transferred to a PC using the tivo desktop (free or paid) program? Are there copy protection blocks?


Yes as long as there is no copy protection, and that is going to depend on your cable provider. The OTA's are not supposed to be copy protected, and the premium channels like HBO usually are, but everything in between is at the discretion of the cable provider unless specifically requested by that network.


----------



## jza80 (Nov 23, 2008)

RonDawg said:


> Yes it is a real-time transfer, but for HD files in my experience it takes about the same time anyway.


Thanks for all the replies everyone. After I posted, I installed the desktop software and tried a transfer of a HD show - it worked so I guess it all depends on the copy protection scheme (I use Cox as my provider). The time to transfer was really long as was noted...at 54mbs to my laptop the spftware stated over 3 hours! My desktop which has the Netgear wired connectoin was faster but it still took 45 min for an hour long show. I guess the key is to plan ahead and transfer shows in advance!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Yes, it's a realtime transfer.. but especially if you are using a DVD recorder *with hard drive*, you can do it whenever you're not using the Tivo.. For example, start a "Save to VCR" before you go to bed or before you leave.. and when you have enough things recorded to the recorder's hard drive, then burn them to DVD.

You can edit the recordings on the "DVD recorder"'s hard drive, so you won't have to have commercials or extra bits at the beginning/end of the recording on the DVD. (It's not so much DVD recording space, but convenience when watching the DVD.)


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> TV is supposed to be fun. There is no right (or wrong) way to watch it.


This thread is not about watching TV. It is about archiving content to a DVD - perhaps large volumes of it. No matter how one slices or dices it, it is a tedious, boring task, but it is a necessary means to an end.

As far as "fun" in general is concerned, that's a completely fatuous statement. If anything, enjoyable activities have more of a learning curve than more serious pursuits. That's why they pay me to teach my second most favorite pastime: scuba diving. It's also why virtually every pastime has many books written to enhance and refine the enjoyment of the respective activity. This includes my favorite pastime, BTW. If there isn't a wrong way to do something fun, then why are there so many sex therapists? Why was the Kama Sutra written?



fallingwater said:


> LR, you reply to me using the 'royal we' at times. You're perhaps frightfully smart but who else do you speak for?


I don't speak for anyone else at all, but I do speak in accord with the others in this thread who, like me, have tried both suggested methods of transferring content to DVD (or other media) from a TiVo.



fallingwater said:


> You're not an especially effective advocate for TiVo.


I am not an advocate for TiVo, at all. First of all, in this thread, no one at all is suggesting not using a Tivo. What I am is a stolid antagonist to two things: prejudice and willful ignorance. You admit yourself to not having tried any of the methods the rest of us have suggested, yet you claim your method is somehow best for you. That is nothing but prejudice. You have no cause to be making any determination of what is "best" for anyone, not even yourself, until you have actually tired the other methods and made a good faith effort to evaluate them all. That does not mean you are not free to refuse to try other methods, but it does mean you have no basis from which to judge, and any statements to any effect are nothing but prejudice. Once you have tried the other methods, then you have good cause to form an opinion concerning what works best, whether limited to your own use or applied more broadly as advice to others.

As to ignorance, everyone is ignorant to some extent in any area one might consider. Simply being ignorant of something is not in and of itself a matter for which one may be rightfully criticized. Put more directly, no one knows everything, and the fact someone does not know something is not a reason to criticize that person. Willful ignorance is a very different matter, however. The ethical individual will seek to learn about a subject before coming to public conclusions in the matter, or even private ones as far as that goes. Willful ignorance implies a person seeks to speak authoritatively on a subject concerning which significant amounts of information are readily available, yet the individual refuses to take the trouble to invest even minimal research into the subject before pontificating at length.

Prejudice and willful ignorance are evil twin brothers, and while technological prejudice and ignorance are not usually as damaging or unethical as racial, ethnic, or religious forms, they are cut from the very same cloth, and I despise all forms of them.



fallingwater said:


> I suspect your style turns people off. You certainly turn me off.


This relates to buning DVDs in what way? I don't care in the least whether or not I turn you on or off. I am not looking to have sex with you, just to mitigate the effect of your giving poorly considered advice to others.



fallingwater said:


> Apparently a great deal of time you boast about saving with TiVo you spend here.


As a matter of fact, yes. Indeed, the fact I do have time to spend here would suggest I am not wasting it elsewhere, would it not? This would include wasting time unnecessarily when converting videos for archival purposes.



fallingwater said:


> You've touched on having a serious medical issue involving mobility.


I would not call it serious. It could have been, but the remaining effects are not serious, only frustrating and painful. How does this relate to burning DVDs?



fallingwater said:


> Perhaps your style and outlook stem in part from having physical limitations which TiVo's electronic information gathering helps make irrelevant.


I would be thrilled if TiVo could eliminate my pain or regain the dexterity I no longer have, but unfortunately it makes neither irrelevant. My outlook with respect to this thread is drawn from only one thing, however: my having used numerous methods of removing content from a TiVo and placing it on a DVD or other media. I have been extracting video from one TiVo or another since early 2003, long before my problem occurred.



fallingwater said:


> TiVo used to have another exceptional fanman, no longer with us, who never talked about his health.


What has any of that to do with burning DVDs from TiVo sources?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> I appreciate your observations and hereby retract the 'arrogant' statement from July's post and have edited it out.


'Hardly a case of better late than never, if you ask me. Bkdtv is certainly not omniscient, but anyone who does not consider his opinions in this venue very carefully and at length is a fool. Any one who insults him for his opinions...



fallingwater said:


> I no longer record and edit much.


What does that say about the ease and utility of the process you advocate?



fallingwater said:


> I've got hundreds of DVDs and recordings I've never watched. Unless there's a real scheduling conflict I prefer to watch TV programs within 6 hours of when they're 'live' or forget it.


Then why bother with a DVR at all? A VCR would suit these needs better.



fallingwater said:


> My way is not the 'right' way; it's merely the way that works best for me.


No, it isn't, which is the point. It is merely all that you have bothered to try. The two are not the same thing, at all. Not wanting to try something else does not make it "better" even if limited only to your own use and experience.

'Tell me something. If you realized that what you are suggesting is only good for you, then why did you suggest it to the OP when he asked for advice on the best methods for all considered?


----------



## jza80 (Nov 23, 2008)

mattack said:


> Yes, it's a realtime transfer.. but especially if you are using a DVD recorder *with hard drive*, you can do it whenever you're not using the Tivo.. For example, start a "Save to VCR" before you go to bed or before you leave.. and when you have enough things recorded to the recorder's hard drive, then burn them to DVD.
> 
> You can edit the recordings on the "DVD recorder"'s hard drive, so you won't have to have commercials or extra bits at the beginning/end of the recording on the DVD. (It's not so much DVD recording space, but convenience when watching the DVD.)


That's a good point, with the 2 tuner units A show can be played to the offboard DVR while a second can be watched...


----------



## JWThiers (Apr 13, 2005)

lrhorer said:


> If there isn't a wrong way to do something fun, then why are there so many sex therapists?



Sex Therapy doesn't have anything to do with right or wrong ways of having sex. But this also isn't the proper forum to bring it up in either.


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7623232#post7623232
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7626233#post7626233
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7626261#post7626261

LR, you may be smarter than I, but you're not here to educate. At least Jim Parson's Sheldon Cooper is funny! You're stuffy and boring at best. Readers can judge the merits of your posts for themselves.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

JWThiers said:


> Sex Therapy doesn't have anything to do with right or wrong ways of having sex. But this also isn't the proper forum to bring it up in either.


Sure it does, or at least one major aspect of sex therapy does. From Masters & Johnson to Dr. Ruth, one very significant part of sexual research and information is education in the mechanics of sex, with the express intent of promoting better sexual experiences. The point, however is much broader than that. Walk into any bookstore, and you will find large numbers of how-to manuals, primers, and tricks-and-tips books concerning the most effective ways to accomplish fun tasks ranging the gamut from playing air hockey to playing a zither.

As Robert Heinlein (in the guise of Jubal Harshaw) pointed out, enjoyment is in the brain, not in the warming up exercises. Vincent Price in his book on art appreciation pointed out that true enjoyment requires understanding, and that the statement, "I know what I like" is just arrogance. The title of the book was, I like what I know. In particular, however, any element of an approach to an otherwise enjoyable endeavor that is not in itself enjoyable detracts from the enjoyment of the endeavor. One can be immersed in the most beautiful waters on earth, surrounded by a spectacular coral reef and countless beautiful and fascinating creatures, but if one has to fiddle with one's equipment, then one is distracted from experiencing the activity to its full extent. Every dive I spent in warm, sparkling clear water was enhanced manyfold by the many hundreds of hours I spent previously in cold, murky, muddy water methodically practicing my skills and teaching students how not to drown themselves.

Cutting to the deepest point, really and truly, however, the OP summed up his request himself quite well:



jeffw_00 said:


> ...Some are in HD, some are in SD. I have a DVD burner, and copy of Nero Express 6 on my PC. And want to put multiple shows on the same DVD (perhaps at different times).
> 
> What's the easiest, least-expensive (in terms of shareware cost) most straightforward way to do this?


1. He wants to work with both HD and SD.
2. He already has the hardware - a PC based DVD burner.
3. He already has some software.
4. He wants the easiest, least expensive, most straightforward way to accomplish the task.

As to the intent of this forum or my post, I see nothing inappropriate in one relative to the other. I wasn't trying to start a discussion on sex or the effective practice thereof. I was merely illustrating my point that no matter how natural, instinctive, or personally enjoyable an activity may be, it will be enhanced by experience, by instruction, and by trying new things. The notion something cannot be done improperly simply because it is intended to be fun is just nonsense.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

fallingwater said:


> TV is supposed to be fun.


Oh, by the way, only one aspect of television's intent is entertainment. You will have to explain to me how a broadcast detailing the murder of over 3000 individuals using several jumbo jets as flying bombs was "fun", how a program helping women to understand, identify, and perhaps even prevent breast cancer is intended to be "enjoyable", or how a broadcast warning of an impending hurricane is anything but deadly serious. Television at its finest is edifying, educational, and even lifesaving. Much of the rest is indeed entertaining, but the best of entertainment is also educational. That which is not is merely icing on a cake. There's nothing terribly wrong with icing, but one cannot live exclusively on it.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

jza80 said:


> That's a good point, with the 2 tuner units A show can be played to the offboard DVR while a second can be watched...


Not on Tivos.. I think you're referring to some DISH recorders.. right?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

mattack said:


> Not on TiVos.. I think you're referring to some DISH recorders.. right?


Well it can be transferred and watched while being transferred. I can transfer an HD show and start watching immediately and not have to wait for the transfer to catch up, even with skipping commercials. A one hour HD show transfers in 15 to 20 minutes.


----------



## bnbhoha (Nov 2, 2002)

Curious if this is possible. I read a while back that I can save up to an hour of HD video on a regular dvd disc (it would be in bluray format). Only the bluray player would be able to read it. Is this possible? Would video redo be able to put it on dvd in bluray format and retain the HD quality? Instructions? thank


----------



## fallingwater (Dec 29, 2007)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7627821#post7627821
(yawn...)

My first post in this thread was #23. The exchange of thoughts had already gone considerably beyond the OP's question:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7403078#post7403078

Connecting HDTiVo to the line input of a standalone DVD recorder, such as Funai's H2160MW9 with its rolling 6 hr. recording buffer, allows for watching (or recording) the program in hi-def while simultaneously enabling it in standard-def for potentially archiving to DVD or reviewing at leisure. A user's got 6 hours to decide if doing anything is better than doing nothing at all.

If s/he decides to archive to DVD, it can be as simple a process as start, stop, and finalize, or the DVD can be edited quite credibly. There of course is some signal degredation, but the resulting DVD looks pretty good!

No computer is required. Nothing has to be recorded. I add a ReplayTV45XX, with its Bypass feature, at the end of the signal chain for its excellent EPG, with no additional signal degredation or time delay. In unusual circumstances ReplayTV even provides an additional 12 hr recording buffer, which can actually be saved longer than that if a user chooses to pause it indefinitely.

Simplicity plus!


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> Well it can be transferred and watched while being transferred. I can transfer an HD show and start watching immediately and not have to wait for the transfer to catch up, even with skipping commercials. A one hour HD show transfers in 15 to 20 minutes.


Yes, but we were talking about burning to a DVD recorder.. Even if you do it on a system where you can edit later, you usually don't want to use the remote and such since obviously you get video overlays. So *typically* I just save to VCR and don't touch it.. (or if I do FF through, I FF only on commercials, and edit out later.)


----------



## nyy574 (Dec 29, 2009)

I have looked through these forums a lot and I think I have come up with the simplest way to burn your Tivo files to DVD, using all free software. I am not a technical person, so I hope this helps. I have successfully transferred shows many times with this method:

1) Transfer the show to your computer using Tivo Desktop 2.8 software.

2) Run the resulting .tivo file through DirectShow Dump Utility. Search these forums for a link to the software. This makes it an mpeg file.

3) Finally, I burn it to DVD using DVD Flick, a free program (dvdflick.net).

If you need to edit any programs, like taking out commercials or removing extra portions, do this in Windows MovieMaker after you've run the file through DirectShow. Save that new file as a .wmv file and burn it with DVD Flick. I've had some audio issues trying to burn it with MovieMaker, but DVD Flick works fine.

Hope this helps.


----------

