SmartBlu media

**deanwitty** · 15-04-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvdit

Thanks. What is so good about this burn is not only the burn speed but the scan is done with Samsung SH-B123L, which always gives higher LDC & BIS numbers compared to a Lite-On. I wonder what the scan result will be like if it was done on the 112-29.

Yeah, I was thinkin' the same thing.

Be careful now. You don't want to spank Jim too hard. He's too good at this and he WILL come back and smack you down proper

.

dvdit · 15-04-2012

I did a backup of the discs that did not burn well on the Lite-on with the Pioneer and here are the results. Glad I sent that lemon back. I will try 6x & 10x times next.

Smartblu Branded 4x BD-R
MID: TDKBLD-RBB-000
Media: 4x rated BD-R 25GB
Burner: Pioneer BDR-205
Firmware: v1.12
Burned @8x
OPC = OFF

dvdit · 15-04-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by deanwitty

Be careful now. You don't want to spank Jim too hard. He's too good at this and he WILL come back and smack you down proper

.

Bring it on !!

Jim has one a heck of system synergy. His burns are too hot to handle

**deanwitty** · 15-04-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by dvdit

I did a backup of the discs that did not burn well on the Lite-on with the Pioneer and here are the results. Glad I sent that lemon back. I will try 6x & 10x times next.

Sweet! So often that "improved write quality" listed with firmware updates turns out to be less than thrilling. First SmartBlu burn for me with Pio 205 1.12 firmware looks like they did improve it where I need it

. The jitter for an 8x burn is nothing short of outstanding. My 205 is going back into service

SmartBlu 4x white IJP burned at 8x with Pioneer BDR-205 1.12

15-April-2012_ATAPI_iHBS112___2_Disc_quality_TDKBLDRBB_(000).png
LTNjitter.png

*bobmitch* · 16-04-2012

Deanwitty...

Great burn. My 10X burn on the 205 was good, but nothing like that. Next time I do a burn...gonna try it on my 205 at 8X and see if I can get near that. I, too, have 1.12 firmware on mine and have always wondered about it.

**deanwitty** · 16-04-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobmitch

Deanwitty...

Great burn. My 10X burn on the 205 was good, but nothing like that. Next time I do a burn...gonna try it on my 205 at 8X and see if I can get near that. I, too, have 1.12 firmware on mine and have always wondered about it.

Thanks

. That burn was done with ImgBurn. "OPC" and "BD-R verify not required" NOT checked.

opieant · 06-05-2012

Hi. I just made the jump from JVC/TY DVD-Rs to SmartBlu BD-Rs and when I did some test burns the results weren't promising at all. Scans are attached. Some details are provided below as well.

After being burned to full capacity, all of the SmartBlu 4x BD-R (TDKBLD-RBB-000) branded discs have dim patches of varying length and width. The scans are getting worse at the end of each disc, so the patches grouped together around about a quarter of the outer rim are concerning me. However, since some discs with patches have nearly normal scans I don't have confidence in the burners either.

I've tried two different burners, a Lite-On iHBS112-04 and a Pioneer BDR-207D. The 112-04 is simply bad, at least as a burner, but it has problems similar to the 207D at the end of discs.

The first attached scan is from a disc burned with the 112-04 at 4x. The second scan is an 8x burn with the 207D. Plenty of burning and scanning speed combinations have been attempted as well turning OPC on and off for both burners. I've wasted a bunch of discs already and at this point I'm wondering if anyone getting good scans is seeing the same dim patches on their discs or not. I would really like to find out if the 207D, discs, or both should be replaced.

*bobmitch* · 06-05-2012

The Manufacturer on mine say TDK, yours say 000. That doesn't seem correct

*jamescooley1* · 06-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobmitch

The Manufacturer on mine say TDK, yours say 000. That doesn't seem correct

ODC 1.51 will not display the MID correctly.
@opieant, did you purchase those discs from MegaMediaMall?

opieant · 06-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamescooley1

@opieant, did you purchase those discs from MegaMediaMall?

Yes indeed, less than a week ago.

**deanwitty** · 06-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by opieant

Yes indeed, less than a week ago.

I've never seen anything like the "dim patches" you speak of. Is it possible that your power supply is getting weak or under-powered/marginal for your rig? Possibly having trouble supplying power for the blue laser. These are visible dim patches that occur with both burners? Could you post an Imgburn burn graph(they can be opened and saved with ODC)? Does a transfer rate test show any slowdowns?

Use ODC version 1.50 . Try using 4x for scanning w/ the Lite-on. Enable streaming in ODC options.

Are you burning files/folders or ISO's with Imgburn? Try burning an ISO at 6x w/ the Pio with OPC and Verify not required unchecked, then test with both checked.

opieant · 08-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by deanwitty

I've never seen anything like the "dim patches" you speak of. Is it possible that your power supply is getting weak or under-powered/marginal for your rig? Possibly having trouble supplying power for the blue laser. These are visible dim patches that occur with both burners? Could you post an Imgburn burn graph(they can be opened and saved with ODC)? Does a transfer rate test show any slowdowns?

Use ODC version 1.50 . Try using 4x for scanning w/ the Lite-on. Enable streaming in ODC options.

Are you burning files/folders or ISO's with Imgburn? Try burning an ISO at 6x w/ the Pio with OPC and Verify not required unchecked, then test with both checked.

Hi! Thanks for your reply and suggestions. It should be very safe to rule out the power supply since I'm seeing the same problems with the 207D in two computers. The patches seem to be part of all of the discs. They mostly blend in on discs made with the iHBS112 and are more obviously dim on discs from the 207D. No slow-downs during the transfer rate tests that I've run so far.

Based on my reading and experience, scanning at 4x on the iHBS112 artificially makes the scan results far more favorable than they should be. A number of other drives appear to be more sensitive to problems at the same speed. While this suggests that the iHBS112 may me better at reading flawed discs (or worse at reporting errors), I want problems to be shown more clearly. So, while I did the 4x scans you requested, I also did 8x scans for comparison.

I don't have a large ISO to test with, sorry. I'm burning one 25GB archive created on an otherwise empty partition for these tests. Reads from the partition are all well over 60 MB/s according to HD Tune.

Just some random thoughts/notes:
- The BDR-207D is made in China
- ImgBurn reported that OPC failed with the 207D on one burn attempt when OPC was enabled. It worked on the next attempt without complaint
- The BDR-207D initially had no problems burning the SmartBlu media at 10x, but now it drops to 8x shortly before the end of the disc for no apparent reason. The more discs I burned, the sooner it dropped from 10x to 8x until it dropped to 8x as soon as it hit 10x.
- So far the only burning configuration that has produced almost decent results multiple times is 10x with OPC off (and when it was actually staying at 10x). It's as if the burner (or the discs?) behave less and less as expected as the end of each disc is reached
- The 207D burned a TY 8x DVD-R at 4x without a problem and the scan was normal

The first three attachments are for a burn on the 207D at 6x with OPC and Verify Not Required unchecked.

The fourth and fifth attachments are for the same except OPC and Verify Not Required are checked.

The last attachment is at 10x, OPC off, Verify Not Required on, but the drive ran at 8x for almost all of the time it should have been at 10x.

**deanwitty** · 08-05-2012

Thanks for the info

.

With quality scans like that first one and no TRT slowdowns, you have nothing to worry about

. On the subject of quality scans, please remember that our commercial drives do not have the ability to scan as accurately as manufacturer level scanners like BD-ODU costing thousands of dollars. I've seen comparisons of consumer drive scans vs factory scans on the same discs, and consumer drives report higher levels of errors than the much more accurate factory scanners. You are not "artificially" making the scan results better at slower speeds. You are pushing the drive well beyond its capacity to give you anything close to accurate scans by scanning at higher speeds

. The slight rise in error level at the end could be a scanning quirk in your 112, the batch of discs, or a few other things. If these are the worst burns you ever get, you are in great shape

. I'm tempted to tell you to try some other BD-R's in this price range for comparison, but I don't wish to see you wasting your money

. I prefer to use discs with a known high quality factory level spec like these FTI/SmartBlus. I find that 4x scanning more accurately reflects/predicts the SAP playback results I see with different BD-R media.

Use Imgburn's "Create image file from files/folders" function to create an iso of the data you wish to burn. Burning an iso is the surest way to test media quality without hardware limitations interfering. Add your folders/files in the top left box, choose your destination on the hard drive. Choose "mode1/2048, UDF, and 2.50 on the options page. Give it a label on the label page. Click the build button and burn ISOs with the "write image file to disc" mode.

opieant · 08-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by deanwitty

The slight rise in error level at the end could be a scanning quirk in your 112, the batch of discs, or a few other things.

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I considered it being a "scanning quirk" early on but that explanation doesn't fly since the drive consistently reports much better results at 8x when the results at 4x and 6x are also decent compared to when dealing with more troubled discs/burns.

Speaking of the batch of discs, I'm unpleasantly discovering that the top and bottom discs of both of the 25-packs of SmartBlu discs I've opened came with scratches and other obvious damage. Also, one disc that I've already used in the first pack has a sort of bubble defect in it. So, maybe 22-23 undamaged discs per pack. Not too bad, but not the level of quality control I was expecting considering the rave reviews for these discs. I mean, I'm used to the bottom discs of DVD packs having some flaws, but why are there scratches and marks on the data side of the top discs as well? Also, all of these SmartBlu discs come straight off the spindle with bits of dust or something stuck to them. This wouldn't be a problem except it's not all tiny bits and a fair amount of it sticks to the surface instead of easily being blown off by a can of air. Shame.

Anyway, between the disc defects and the highly inconsistent burn or disc quality I'm only getting scan results every 2-3 discs that I would consider acceptable for archival. I suspect the 207D is the source of the worst of my problems so I'm going to try out a 206D and see if that goes any better. At the very least I hope to stop seeing unexplained drops in the burn speed on this SmartBlu media. Last night I tested if reading data from a second hard drive that starts at about 120 MB/s (according to HD Tune) while burning at 10x caused any kind of conflict or slowdown and neither speed flinched. The burner still ended up dropping to 8x before the end anyway though.

**deanwitty** · 09-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by opieant

Speaking of the batch of discs, I'm unpleasantly discovering that the top and bottom discs of both of the 25-packs of SmartBlu discs I've opened came with scratches and other obvious damage. Also, one disc that I've already used in the first pack has a sort of bubble defect in it. So, maybe 22-23 undamaged discs per pack. Not too bad, but not the level of quality control I was expecting considering the rave reviews for these discs. I mean, I'm used to the bottom discs of DVD packs having some flaws, but why are there scratches and marks on the data side of the top discs as well? Also, all of these SmartBlu discs come straight off the spindle with bits of dust or something stuck to them. This wouldn't be a problem except it's not all tiny bits and a fair amount of it sticks to the surface instead of easily being blown off by a can of air. Shame.

Anyway, between the disc defects and the highly inconsistent burn or disc quality I'm only getting scan results every 2-3 discs that I would consider acceptable for archival. I suspect the 207D is the source of the worst of my problems so I'm going to try out a 206D and see if that goes any better. At the very least I hope to stop seeing unexplained drops in the burn speed on this SmartBlu media. Last night I tested if reading data from a second hard drive that starts at about 120 MB/s (according to HD Tune) while burning at 10x caused any kind of conflict or slowdown and neither speed flinched. The burner still ended up dropping to 8x before the end anyway though.

Dust and scratches? You need to contact MMM about this. There was clearly some serious mishandling in storage or shipping. FTI's manufacturing facility uses clean room technology from start to finish and I've never seen a speck of dust on their media. The discs are also highly scratch-resistant. Never seen a scratch or dust on any of the hundreds I've used(or any of FTI's media). Anyone else seen anything like this?

Its the hard drive's small file read speed that can cause a hiccup in the B-ray burn process. This is why burning a large iso is more stable. If the 207 is being too fussy, does checking "BD-R verify not required" help avoid the slowdowns? This is the purpose of that setting. Perhaps its not working right for this new Pio?

*LIGHTNING UK!* · 09-05-2012

Off topic but worth mentioning as I keep seeing references to it... the 'BD-R Verify Not Required' option only does something if the drive's hardware defect management is active (that's what makes it perform automatic write/verify) - and it only appears to become active for BD-R discs if they're formatted with spare areas enabled (which reduces the available capacity a bit).

ImgBurn doesn't format BD-R discs at all before it burns, it's something you have to do manually if you want it.

Test the option out for yourself. Burn a disc with it enable and one with it disabled - both discs should burn at exactly the same speed.

Then format (full erase with spare areas enabled) 2 BD-R discs and repeat the test. You should find the formatted BD-R that's burnt with 'BD-R Verify Not Required' disabled burns a little bit slower and possibly the drive sounds like it's spinning a bit faster than it would normally be - as it the case with my iHAS112 (I think it does that to speed up the whole process). The formatted one burnt with 'BD-R Verify Not Required' enabled should burn at the same speed as the unformatted ones.

opieant · 09-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by deanwitty

Its the hard drive's small file read speed that can cause a hiccup in the B-ray burn process. This is why burning a large iso is more stable.

As I mentioned, I'm burning a single 25GB archive from an otherwise empty partition. No fragmentation, no seeking delays, or any problems like that, and definitely no problems related to reading small files.

Regarding the dust/scratches, the packs were sealed, so I can't reasonably fault MMM for anything there. The latest disc I pulled from a few discs down into the second pack also has a bunch of little scratches on it. There's nothing there that the disc could be scratching against, so I can only fault the manufacturer for a problem like that. I'll find out later whether or not there are large spikes in the scan when I burn that disc like there have been with all of the other scratched ones.

A bit of an update: the 206D has arrived and there is good news and bad news. The good news is that so far the test burns all have good quality scans, even when scanning at 8x on the iHBS112. The bad news is that the 206D seems to interact much differently with the SATA controller on the motherboard than the 207D causing much worse slowdowns than before. The slowdowns have been narrowed down to the SATA controller on the motherboard since they persisted when I moved the other SATA devices away to an old PCI SATA controller and when I put the 206D alone on the PCI controller (with the other drives back on the motherboard) the problems vanished. Very odd that on the motherboard controller the hard drives don't get slowed down when reading or writing but the burners get slowed down when writing.

Also, the dim patches are still present on all of the new burns with the 206D, but I can't worry too much about that now that the scans look normal.

opieant · 09-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by LIGHTNING UK!

Off topic but worth mentioning as I keep seeing references to it... the 'BD-R Verify Not Required' option only does something if the drive's hardware defect management is active (that's what makes it perform automatic write/verify) - and it only appears to become active for BD-R discs if they're formatted with spare areas enabled (which reduces the available capacity a bit).

ImgBurn doesn't format BD-R discs at all before it burns, it's something you have to do manually if you want it.

Test the option out for yourself. Burn a disc with it enable and one with it disabled - both discs should burn at exactly the same speed.

Thanks for the clarification on this. I read some of your posts on this feature as well as the comments on it in the ImgBurn documentation prior to touching the checkbox for this feature earlier. I wasn't surprised when the burn speed was exactly the same, but it sounded like it couldn't hurt to try just in case something different happened without setting up an area for spares first. Between my quality scans on every disc and the fact that I plan to create all of my BD-R discs from archives that include redundancy/ECC data I don't really have a need for a feature like this anyway. Still, it's nice to know that it's there and should work if the disc has been prepared to use it.

**deanwitty** · 10-05-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by opieant

As I mentioned, I'm burning a single 25GB archive from an otherwise empty partition. No fragmentation, no seeking delays, or any problems like that, and definitely no problems related to reading small files.

Regarding the dust/scratches, the packs were sealed, so I can't reasonably fault MMM for anything there. The latest disc I pulled from a few discs down into the second pack also has a bunch of little scratches on it. There's nothing there that the disc could be scratching against, so I can only fault the manufacturer for a problem like that.

A bit of an update: the 206D has arrived and there is good news and bad news. The good news is that so far the test burns all have good quality scans, even when scanning at 8x on the iHBS112. The bad news is that the 206D seems to interact much differently with the SATA controller on the motherboard than the 207D causing much worse slowdowns than before. The slowdowns have been narrowed down to the SATA controller on the motherboard since they persisted when I moved the other SATA devices away to an old PCI SATA controller and when I put the 206D alone on the PCI controller (with the other drives back on the motherboard) the problems vanished.

Sorry I misunderstood your use of "archive". I don't automatically assume that archives would be in the form of a zip file.

It does not seem likely that FTI experienced a massive sandstorm that overwhelmed their air filtration systems

. I can easily imagine a box of spindles being crushed or dropped and damaged in shipping or storage and a reseller re-spindling those discs in their own facilities resulting in dusty scratched discs arriving in a sealed spindle. They may have underestimated the level of damage to those discs. I do think an E-mail to MMM detailing the condition of your order may be worth your time and effort. It couldn't hurt, might get you some recompense.

I've also found that a PCI-SATA controller can be the easiest way to get my drives to play nice with each other. Good solution

.

**deanwitty** · 10-05-2012

My new LG WH12LS39 is following in the LG tradition of doing very well with the TDK/SmartBlu discs

WH12LS39
SmartBlu 4x BD-R inkjet hub printable burned at 8x with Imgburn

rockphantom · 14-05-2012

I've been browsing through the thread and truly appreciate all of the effort put into monitoring the overall quality of SmartBlu BD-R discs.
I have recently burned through 40 SmartBlu 25GB BD-R discs. With the exception of 2 discs that had physical defects, every disc burned successfully at 4x (and in some cases 2x). I've used SmartBlu discs to back up my live concert recording FLAC collection. While burning with my reliable LG WH12LS30 Burner, the drive was pulling data from both internal and older external drives, on the fly. This morning I read that most of you create ISOs of large amounts of data before burning to BD-R media. Unfortunately, I didn't do this while backing up my FLAC collection. Is it possible that my SmartBlu BD-R burns are of lesser quality since I burned everything on the fly? I really don't want to burn everything again. However, any guidance would be appreciated.

Thank You,

Milan

**deanwitty** · 15-05-2012

What are the sizes of some of the smallest files in that flac collection? I doubt that any of them would be small enough to run into hard drive small file read speed problems.

If you wish to be sure, use a program like ATTO disk benchmark to test the read speeds on the drives you were reading from. You need 18 MB/sec minimum for smooth data flow burning at 4x.

I seriously doubt the hard drives had any problem keeping up with the burner in your case. Test them to be sure. Folks burning at higher speeds are more likely to benefit from ISO burning.

rockphantom · 15-05-2012

Howdy Dean,

Some of the items burned were FLAC Finger Print (FFP) text files which were under 1kb in size, and cover artwork files which were 20kb-70kb. All other files burned were well over 5MB in size.

I did accidentally burn one disc at 8x. The burn process completed successfully.
However, I burned a second copy at 4x to be sure.

I'll test out my discs soon.

Thanks for your feedback!

Milan

rekd0514 · 13-09-2012

This thread deserves a fresh bump.

ZDVP · 18-09-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by rekd0514

This thread deserves a fresh bump.

I'm getting some SmartBlu's in tomorrow and will test with a couple of LG's, but don't have a way to run quality checks yet (that I know of).

And out of curiosity, I'll also be checking the thickness of them with a digital micrometer, since some are saying they feel thin.

16-04-2012	#205
bobmitch MyCE Resident Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Dallas, TX Area Posts: 563	Re: SmartBlu media Deanwitty... Great burn. My 10X burn on the 205 was good, but nothing like that. Next time I do a burn...gonna try it on my 205 at 8X and see if I can get near that. I, too, have 1.12 firmware on mine and have always wondered about it.

06-05-2012	#208
bobmitch MyCE Resident Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Dallas, TX Area Posts: 563	Re: SmartBlu media The Manufacturer on mine say TDK, yours say 000. That doesn't seem correct

08-05-2012	#213
deanwitty Moderator Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: The 10th city outside the 2nd City, U.S. Posts: 2,698	Re: SmartBlu media Thanks for the info . With quality scans like that first one and no TRT slowdowns, you have nothing to worry about . On the subject of quality scans, please remember that our commercial drives do not have the ability to scan as accurately as manufacturer level scanners like BD-ODU costing thousands of dollars. I've seen comparisons of consumer drive scans vs factory scans on the same discs, and consumer drives report higher levels of errors than the much more accurate factory scanners. You are not "artificially" making the scan results better at slower speeds. You are pushing the drive well beyond its capacity to give you anything close to accurate scans by scanning at higher speeds . The slight rise in error level at the end could be a scanning quirk in your 112, the batch of discs, or a few other things. If these are the worst burns you ever get, you are in great shape . I'm tempted to tell you to try some other BD-R's in this price range for comparison, but I don't wish to see you wasting your money . I prefer to use discs with a known high quality factory level spec like these FTI/SmartBlus. I find that 4x scanning more accurately reflects/predicts the SAP playback results I see with different BD-R media. Use Imgburn's "Create image file from files/folders" function to create an iso of the data you wish to burn. Burning an iso is the surest way to test media quality without hardware limitations interfering. Add your folders/files in the top left box, choose your destination on the hard drive. Choose "mode1/2048, UDF, and 2.50 on the options page. Give it a label on the label page. Click the build button and burn ISOs with the "write image file to disc" mode. __________________ Currently installed for testing: Lite-on DH20A4P-04(9P54) + Sony Optiarc AD-7200A(1.Z3) x2 "You want WHAT? OK, I can do that". + AD-7200S(1Z2) + AD-5280-CB-PLUS(1.Z7) + BenQ DW1650(BCIC) + BenQ DW1640(BSLB) x2 + Lite-on iHAS324-08 A(BL1H) + Asus DRW-24B1LT@iHAS424(ZLC1) + Asus DRW-24B1ST@iHAS324(BL1H) + Plextor PX-760A(1.03) + LG BD-RE WH10LS30(1.00) + Lite-on iHES208(8LOC) + Sammy SH-BO83L(SB01) + Pioneer BDR206(1.05) + Lite-on iHBS112-29(CLOK) + Pioneer BDR-205(1.12) + LG WH12LS39(1.00) + Lite-on iHBS212@Plextor PX-LB950SA(1.02)

09-05-2012	#216
LIGHTNING UK! Author of DVD Decrypter & ImgBurn Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: UK Posts: 1,074	Re: SmartBlu media Off topic but worth mentioning as I keep seeing references to it... the 'BD-R Verify Not Required' option only does something if the drive's hardware defect management is active (that's what makes it perform automatic write/verify) - and it only appears to become active for BD-R discs if they're formatted with spare areas enabled (which reduces the available capacity a bit). ImgBurn doesn't format BD-R discs at all before it burns, it's something you have to do manually if you want it. Test the option out for yourself. Burn a disc with it enable and one with it disabled - both discs should burn at exactly the same speed. Then format (full erase with spare areas enabled) 2 BD-R discs and repeat the test. You should find the formatted BD-R that's burnt with 'BD-R Verify Not Required' disabled burns a little bit slower and possibly the drive sounds like it's spinning a bit faster than it would normally be - as it the case with my iHAS112 (I think it does that to speed up the whole process). The formatted one burnt with 'BD-R Verify Not Required' enabled should burn at the same speed as the unformatted ones. __________________ The Official ImgBurn Website

15-05-2012	#222
deanwitty Moderator Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: The 10th city outside the 2nd City, U.S. Posts: 2,698	Re: SmartBlu media What are the sizes of some of the smallest files in that flac collection? I doubt that any of them would be small enough to run into hard drive small file read speed problems. If you wish to be sure, use a program like ATTO disk benchmark to test the read speeds on the drives you were reading from. You need 18 MB/sec minimum for smooth data flow burning at 4x. I seriously doubt the hard drives had any problem keeping up with the burner in your case. Test them to be sure. Folks burning at higher speeds are more likely to benefit from ISO burning. __________________ Currently installed for testing: Lite-on DH20A4P-04(9P54) + Sony Optiarc AD-7200A(1.Z3) x2 "You want WHAT? OK, I can do that". + AD-7200S(1Z2) + AD-5280-CB-PLUS(1.Z7) + BenQ DW1650(BCIC) + BenQ DW1640(BSLB) x2 + Lite-on iHAS324-08 A(BL1H) + Asus DRW-24B1LT@iHAS424(ZLC1) + Asus DRW-24B1ST@iHAS324(BL1H) + Plextor PX-760A(1.03) + LG BD-RE WH10LS30(1.00) + Lite-on iHES208(8LOC) + Sammy SH-BO83L(SB01) + Pioneer BDR206(1.05) + Lite-on iHBS112-29(CLOK) + Pioneer BDR-205(1.12) + LG WH12LS39(1.00) + Lite-on iHBS212@Plextor PX-LB950SA(1.02)

14-05-2012	#221
rockphantom MyCE Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 114	I've been browsing through the thread and truly appreciate all of the effort put into monitoring the overall quality of SmartBlu BD-R discs. I have recently burned through 40 SmartBlu 25GB BD-R discs. With the exception of 2 discs that had physical defects, every disc burned successfully at 4x (and in some cases 2x). I've used SmartBlu discs to back up my live concert recording FLAC collection. While burning with my reliable LG WH12LS30 Burner, the drive was pulling data from both internal and older external drives, on the fly. This morning I read that most of you create ISOs of large amounts of data before burning to BD-R media. Unfortunately, I didn't do this while backing up my FLAC collection. Is it possible that my SmartBlu BD-R burns are of lesser quality since I burned everything on the fly? I really don't want to burn everything again. However, any guidance would be appreciated. Thank You, Milan

15-05-2012	#223
rockphantom MyCE Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 114	Howdy Dean, Some of the items burned were FLAC Finger Print (FFP) text files which were under 1kb in size, and cover artwork files which were 20kb-70kb. All other files burned were well over 5MB in size. I did accidentally burn one disc at 8x. The burn process completed successfully. However, I burned a second copy at 4x to be sure. I'll test out my discs soon. Thanks for your feedback! Milan

13-09-2012	#224
rekd0514 New Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Sioux City, IA Posts: 17	This thread deserves a fresh bump.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SmartBlu BD-Rs on Sale at MediaMegaMall	jadburner	Bargain Basement	5	04-06-2011 20:22
Please Help: Optiarc AD-7170A: Doesn\'t recognize DVD media, CD media only	aquastrm	CD, DVD and Blu-ray Writers	0	13-08-2008 20:32
Ritek Media Failure: Best Burner Recommendation to Read Error-Prone Media	Dampier	CD, DVD and Blu-ray Writers	5	20-03-2006 23:03
DVD Media Brand --> Media code(s) translation list. HUGE!	Wesociety	Blank Media	0	02-04-2004 08:26
Pioneer 105 DVD-RW media 2x media only writing at 1x	KING	CD, DVD and Blu-ray Writers	3	28-06-2003 22:53