Vote: Transfer Rate Test vs. Scan.
| Disc Testing Methods and Software Discuss, Vote: Transfer Rate Test vs. Scan. at Blank Optical Media forum; OK, here is your chance to vote for one or the other. Assuming you have a good scanning drive such as BenQ, Liteon, or Plextor, and assuming that you can only have one test to determine whatever you want about the disc you just burned, which would it be. Remember, |
View Poll Results: Which test do you want to live with?
| Transfer Rate Test |     | 26 | 45.61% |
| Error Scanning |    | 31 | 54.39% |
Voters: 57. You may not vote on this poll
-
Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 1
OK, here is your chance to vote for one or the other. Assuming you have a good scanning drive such as BenQ, Liteon, or Plextor, and assuming that you can only have one test to determine whatever you want about the disc you just burned, which would it be. Remember, you will only ever be able to have one test based on your vote. __________________
Still a few bugs in the system...
- Today (MyCE Staff)
- Posts: 15,596
- Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 2
I always thought that both tests complete each other, so it is really difficult to vote for one only. Both tests are not complete if taken singularly in my opinion.
I never rely on the scan only, but I always run also a TRT to verify disc readability.
If I should forcibly choose one, however, I think that TRT is the one I would select because it give a real measure of disc readability. The scan gives other useful information, but to actually measure disc readability I think that TRT is the test to choose.__________________
Click here or here to download latest version of CD-DVD Speed
Click here to read more about DMA
User guide for CD-DVD Speed: English version - Versione Italiana
User guide for ImgBurn in BUILD mode English version - Italian version
Please do not ask questions via PM. Post in the forum instead. Thanks
Per favore, non chiedete consigli o suggerimenti tramite PM. Usate invece il forum (che serve proprio per questo).
KTPHTT - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 3
Lol I am guessing that our discussions inspired this thread somewhat?
Tough question really. Very tough.
Reasons scanning is better - I've had a number of MCC003 that my stupid LG 4167B rooted up when writing. So they scan with loads of PIF at the end. They never caused major playback issues but I would get the occasional skip or hang in some games. TRT are fine though, which would indicate these discs have other good traits about them that help through the errors. Eg, high reflectivity, low jitter etc. That's the only time I would be clueless as to why the disc would not work if I only used TRT. Scanning does give more insight into how the disc was burnt and is of course, way better for comparing media/drives/speeds against each other.
If I had to TRT with only one drive and no scanning, I would pick up an optiarc or any fussy NEC and have a go with that. From what I've seen and read, they are fussy enough to show TRT problems where jitter rises, or errors are just a bit too high. Anything that fails, you could assume may not be perfect. Anything that passes should work on a decent player. It's a bit basic but I do believe it would be difficult and uncommon to get caught out with perfect TRT and failed playback from using this method.
At the end of the day, some discs can scan like crap and TRT like crap but still play perfect, and others can scan great and TRT great but skip and stutter like crazy. It's a very hard subject but I think plenty of people would be better off just doing the TRT and stop being pedantic about their scans.
Sorry to say but I couldn't choose either in my day to day testing.
Here's two examples though - one of what I would call good scanning methods and one of bad scanning methods.
Bad = 4x scan liteon without jitter enabled. TRT with LG drive.
This is bad because you don't enable jitter, which can cause big problems when it's very far out of spec, and 4x is very forgiving for high jitter. Higher speed scanning may show large increases in errors over 4x with high jitter burns. TRT in LG is useless as they are able to read through mountains of shit without even slowing down.
Good = a 4x with jitter and perhaps a 16x without jitter to see if errors rise plenty or not. TRT with Pioneer/NEC/fussy drive. TRT with fussy drives is much better as they don't forgive you when a rubbish burn is tested.
Since I must vote for only one. I vote for TRT. I think most beginner cdfreaks would be better off with just TRT. Scans open up a can of worms too big for some people to understand. Many misinterpret the scans, use the wrong drives for scanning, throw out perfectly working discs etc etc. TRT is faster, simpler, and tests real world behavior better IMO. But only when it's a fussy reader. Using an LG for TRT is useless
Sorry for the long post
__________________
Best DVD media:
Verbatim MCC002 4x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC02RG20 8x DVD-R
DATASTREAM BRANDED CMC MAG E01 8x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC04 & MCC03RG20 16x DVD +-R
Ritek G05 media =
My writers: BenQ 1620 (thanks to terminalvelocd!), BenQ DW1800 x 2, LG 4167B, LG H22N, Pioneer 106D, Pioneer 109, Pioneer 111L.
- Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 4
Well saidQuote:Originally Posted by geno888I always thought that both tests complete each other, so it is really difficult to vote for one only. Both tests are not complete if taken singularly in my opinion.
I never rely on the scan only, but I always run also a TRT to verify disc readability.
If I should forcibly choose one, however, I think that TRT is the one I would select because it give a real measure of disc readability. The scan gives other useful information, but to actually measure disc readability I think that TRT is the test to choose.
Since I'd choose TRT if pushed, there are other tests I can do which aren't mentioned to complement it: making sure the data on the disc is copyable to my HDD on various drives, real-world tests such as watching on a standalone etc. __________________
Current drives: Samsung SE-S084C (TS02) + Samsung SH-S223F (SB03 RPC1 + other goodies) + TSST (Samsung) TS-H653F (DW10) + Samsung SH-S203N (SB02 RPC1 + other goodies) + Optiarc AD-5170S (1.12) + Litey LH-20A1H (LL0D) + Samsung SH-S182D (SB06 RPC1) x2 + LG E10N (JE07) + BenQ DW1650 (BCDC) + BenQ DW1640@164B (BEFB) + LG 4167B (DL13 TDB) + NEC ND-4551A (1.Z2) + LG GCE-8520B (1.00) + LiteOn SOHR-5239S (2S0B)
Retired: LiteOn LDW-851@SOHW-832 + LiteOn SOHW-1693S + LG 4163B + Pioneer DVR-115D
My Review PCs
How to delete your upper and lower filters : How to check/enable DMA by Womble
Click here to join MyCE.com and be part of our friendly community!
Smile...people will wonder what you're up to
- Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 6
It'll be hard to get responses with that being said.Quote:Originally Posted by chas0039Play fair guys. The poll says you only get one test for the rest of your life. This is not real world, this is strictly between these two tests.
I for one don't really rely on scans. I just put the backup in the player and if it plays good with no skips, pixelations and such it is called a good burn for me, scanning is ok but can become over rated too.
I do have the BenQ 1640 as well.__________________
To get the latest DVD neXt COPY update click HERE.
Please use the forum to get technical help by posting HERE
My Current System : ASUS P7P55D-E Motherboard, Intel Core i5-750 Lynnfield 2.66GHz, CORSAIR XMS3 8GB DDR3 DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800), XFX HD-Radeon HD 5770 XXX Edition 1GB 128-bit DDR5, Thermaltake Armor MX+, Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit Edition
PIONEER DVD-RWDVR-215D, TSSTCORP CDDVDW SH-S243N, HL-DT-ST BD-RE GGW-H20L, HL-DT-ST DVD-RAM GH22NS30 - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 7
TRT, then. And you should have made this a public poll, I'd be interested in who voted for whatQuote:Originally Posted by chas0039Play fair guys. The poll says you only get one test for the rest of your life. This is not real world, this is strictly between these two tests.
I must pick up on cd pirate's "using LG for TRT is useless" though - my 4163B (patched to 16x read speed with MCSE) was a hell of a TRT drive...in fact, it'd fail on just as many TRTs as it passed __________________
Current drives: Samsung SE-S084C (TS02) + Samsung SH-S223F (SB03 RPC1 + other goodies) + TSST (Samsung) TS-H653F (DW10) + Samsung SH-S203N (SB02 RPC1 + other goodies) + Optiarc AD-5170S (1.12) + Litey LH-20A1H (LL0D) + Samsung SH-S182D (SB06 RPC1) x2 + LG E10N (JE07) + BenQ DW1650 (BCDC) + BenQ DW1640@164B (BEFB) + LG 4167B (DL13 TDB) + NEC ND-4551A (1.Z2) + LG GCE-8520B (1.00) + LiteOn SOHR-5239S (2S0B)
Retired: LiteOn LDW-851@SOHW-832 + LiteOn SOHW-1693S + LG 4163B + Pioneer DVR-115D
My Review PCs
How to delete your upper and lower filters : How to check/enable DMA by Womble
Click here to join MyCE.com and be part of our friendly community!
Smile...people will wonder what you're up to - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 8
If I actually go to the trouble of running a scan these days it is the TRT, so this is an easy one for me to answer.
I will do a few quality tests on burns from my new Samsung when it comes in, but after the first few I doubt I'll do many more. Playing the disks and TRT are usually enough for me.
Edit: HEY 1000 posts! - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 9
CongratsQuote:Originally Posted by Kerry56
Edit: HEY 1000 posts! __________________
Current drives: Samsung SE-S084C (TS02) + Samsung SH-S223F (SB03 RPC1 + other goodies) + TSST (Samsung) TS-H653F (DW10) + Samsung SH-S203N (SB02 RPC1 + other goodies) + Optiarc AD-5170S (1.12) + Litey LH-20A1H (LL0D) + Samsung SH-S182D (SB06 RPC1) x2 + LG E10N (JE07) + BenQ DW1650 (BCDC) + BenQ DW1640@164B (BEFB) + LG 4167B (DL13 TDB) + NEC ND-4551A (1.Z2) + LG GCE-8520B (1.00) + LiteOn SOHR-5239S (2S0B)
Retired: LiteOn LDW-851@SOHW-832 + LiteOn SOHW-1693S + LG 4163B + Pioneer DVR-115D
My Review PCs
How to delete your upper and lower filters : How to check/enable DMA by Womble
Click here to join MyCE.com and be part of our friendly community!
Smile...people will wonder what you're up to - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 10
Same here and that's why I'm not voting.Quote:Originally Posted by cd pirateSorry to say but I couldn't choose either in my day to day testing.
@Kerry56: Congrats on the millennium. __________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup. - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 11
I really cannot choose but i chose scanning. It's all the pretty colors that made me decide - Posted:
17-08-2007
- # 12
I don't think a TRT says enough about the life length of a disc. Also some drives are too hard to fail while others fail too easy or fail without any obvious reason.
I agree with rolling56 about the nice colors __________________
Some forums have too many "Read first"
Game patches from www.patches-scrolls.de
Turn off any HDD of your pc: revosleep.realspooky.de - Posted:
18-08-2007
- # 14
My bad Arachne. I was meant to write about newer LG drives, my 4167B, H22N and LGs above all seem to be super readers.Quote:Originally Posted by ArachneTRT, then. And you should have made this a public poll, I'd be interested in who voted for what
I must pick up on cd pirate's "using LG for TRT is useless" though - my 4163B (patched to 16x read speed with MCSE) was a hell of a TRT drive...in fact, it'd fail on just as many TRTs as it passed
Was your 4163B an over speeded drive 12x to 16x? That would indeed make it a fussier drive since it was probably never meant to read burns that fast. That's kind of like my fussy liteon combo drive, however that was meant to be only an 8x reader and I made it a 16x one
Sorry to be critical, but absolutely nothing about a scan can truly ever predict media life. If you burn a MCC02RG20 really bad, it's going to stay that way for a long time. Something like a Ritek G05 can scan great and shows nothing about it going to degrade just from looking @ a scan. However it just degrades and that's it. TRT can pick this up as my Pioneer 111L simply gives LEC uncorrectable errors on all Ritek G05Quote:Originally Posted by talos_2002I don't think a TRT says enough about the life length of a disc. Also some drives are too hard to fail while others fail too easy or fail without any obvious reason.
I agree with rolling56 about the nice colors __________________
Best DVD media:
Verbatim MCC002 4x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC02RG20 8x DVD-R
DATASTREAM BRANDED CMC MAG E01 8x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC04 & MCC03RG20 16x DVD +-R
Ritek G05 media =
My writers: BenQ 1620 (thanks to terminalvelocd!), BenQ DW1800 x 2, LG 4167B, LG H22N, Pioneer 106D, Pioneer 109, Pioneer 111L.
- Posted:
18-08-2007
- # 15
Hehe no worries, I kinda guessed that, I was just being a painQuote:Originally Posted by cd pirateMy bad Arachne. I was meant to write about newer LG drives, my 4167B, H22N and LGs above all seem to be super readers.
Was your 4163B an over speeded drive 12x to 16x? That would indeed make it a fussier drive since it was probably never meant to read burns that fast. That's kind of like my fussy liteon combo drive, however that was meant to be only an 8x reader and I made it a 16x one
Yep, it was indeed overspeeded - so I agree with you about it probably making it fussier
(Hmmm....I wonder if I do the same to my 4167B it'll make it fussy...j/k, couldn't resist ) __________________
Current drives: Samsung SE-S084C (TS02) + Samsung SH-S223F (SB03 RPC1 + other goodies) + TSST (Samsung) TS-H653F (DW10) + Samsung SH-S203N (SB02 RPC1 + other goodies) + Optiarc AD-5170S (1.12) + Litey LH-20A1H (LL0D) + Samsung SH-S182D (SB06 RPC1) x2 + LG E10N (JE07) + BenQ DW1650 (BCDC) + BenQ DW1640@164B (BEFB) + LG 4167B (DL13 TDB) + NEC ND-4551A (1.Z2) + LG GCE-8520B (1.00) + LiteOn SOHR-5239S (2S0B)
Retired: LiteOn LDW-851@SOHW-832 + LiteOn SOHW-1693S + LG 4163B + Pioneer DVR-115D
My Review PCs
How to delete your upper and lower filters : How to check/enable DMA by Womble
Click here to join MyCE.com and be part of our friendly community!
Smile...people will wonder what you're up to - Posted:
18-08-2007
- # 16
sativa... indica... I dunno, sometimes you just feel like one or the other.Quote:Originally Posted by rolling56...it's all the pretty colors that made me decide
I think I'd rather have neither than just one.__________________
X3220 | IP35 Pro | 4GB Mushkin D9 | HD 2600XT | too many hdds | Vista Business
currently installed: DVR-115L, iHAP422 
Darth Tropic: "Whaddya mean the Dark Side of the Force is limited to 4x burning?!" - Posted:
18-08-2007
- # 17
Quote:Originally Posted by cd pirateSorry to be critical, but absolutely nothing about a scan can truly ever predict media life. If you burn a MCC02RG20 really bad, it's going to stay that way for a long time. Something like a Ritek G05 can scan great and shows nothing about it going to degrade just from looking @ a scan. However it just degrades and that's it. TRT can pick this up as my Pioneer 111L simply gives LEC uncorrectable errors on all Ritek G05
Don't worry for being critical. It can be good as long as it is in a civilized way and provides useful information or clears some misunderstanding of facts.
I really thought that if there is a part of a disc that scans bad, after some time that the disc will naturally degrade, that part will obtain even more errors making it possibly unreadable by some drives.__________________
Some forums have too many "Read first"
Game patches from www.patches-scrolls.de
Turn off any HDD of your pc: revosleep.realspooky.de - Posted:
18-08-2007
- # 18
As you could have guessed, I disagree. Disc errors increase over time. At some point, discs will have too many errors and will be come unplayable. The more errors you have from the date of burn, the sooner you will get to the point where the disc is unplayable. Pretty basic stuff. and the TRT will not give you any of this information.Quote:Originally Posted by cd pirate
Sorry to be critical, but absolutely nothing about a scan can truly ever predict media life.__________________
Still a few bugs in the system... - Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 19
Disc errors only increase when a disc has poor longevity. Verbatim and TY have been around for 4+ years and I have personally never heard of any degrading naturally. They all scan fine to this day also with almost zero increase in errors.Quote:Originally Posted by chas0039As you could have guessed, I disagree. Disc errors increase over time. At some point, discs will have too many errors and will be come unplayable. The more errors you have from the date of burn, the sooner you will get to the point where the disc is unplayable. Pretty basic stuff. and the TRT will not give you any of this information.
I think your theory is flawed. Once degradation starts, it doesn't stop and then it has a quick snowball effect. Discs do not slowly degrade and slowly increase in errors. Once they start, it would take less than a year to be almost unreadable as per Ritek G05, TDK003 etc.
The more errors now, the quicker it degrades theory is flawed IMO. It all depends if the disc is a quick degrader or not. And once degradation starts, it's completely random in how quick the disc becomes destroyed. So if you got a pack of G05 and one was burned with excellent low errors and one was burned with very high errors, assuming that all ritek G05 degrade and the one with more errors will die quicker is stupidity. The one with low errors could simply degrade quicker due to being more poorly bonded or anything really and your theory about it lasting longer would be thrown out the window.
I don't mean to be a pain with my differentiating opinions but this is coming from real world experience here with degradation of G05. All of mine regardless of being from the same or different batches and being stored in the same conditions all degraded completely randomly.
As for the theory once again about discs with higher scan errors becoming more unreadable as time goes on compared to ones with lower errors to begin with, there's zero evidence from what I've seen that backs this up.__________________
Best DVD media:
Verbatim MCC002 4x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC02RG20 8x DVD-R
DATASTREAM BRANDED CMC MAG E01 8x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC04 & MCC03RG20 16x DVD +-R
Ritek G05 media =
My writers: BenQ 1620 (thanks to terminalvelocd!), BenQ DW1800 x 2, LG 4167B, LG H22N, Pioneer 106D, Pioneer 109, Pioneer 111L.
- Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 20
I'm going with scanning. Since I have fairly reliable/robust readers [outside of my odd LH-20A1H] it's about my best bet for seeing anything wrong with the discs. If I had, say, an Optiarc, the situation would be different. My Xbox can only do DVD-R, and even then [for my use] it's hard to tell poor encoding vs. a "bad" disc. My standalone DVD player can do much better, and if you ask me to do a TRT with my Pio DVD-ROM, the 2x speed will kinda eliminate the purpose. __________________
Welcome to The Club! The Club depends on you to help make it great. Please do all you can!
- Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 21
Looking at your drives in your signature, yes I would say scanning is better for you also. Most of those drives are most likely far too good to even show slowdowns in TRT with mediocre discs like an NEC or Pioneer is.Quote:Originally Posted by wallace0134I'm going with scanning. Since I have fairly reliable/robust readers [outside of my odd LH-20A1H] it's about my best bet for seeing anything wrong with the discs. If I had, say, an Optiarc, the situation would be different. My Xbox can only do DVD-R, and even then [for my use] it's hard to tell poor encoding vs. a "bad" disc. My standalone DVD player can do much better, and if you ask me to do a TRT with my Pio DVD-ROM, the 2x speed will kinda eliminate the purpose.
That's kind of why this thread is 50/50 with the results. It all depends on your setup and what your drives are good for.__________________
Best DVD media:
Verbatim MCC002 4x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC02RG20 8x DVD-R
DATASTREAM BRANDED CMC MAG E01 8x DVD+R
Verbatim MCC04 & MCC03RG20 16x DVD +-R
Ritek G05 media =
My writers: BenQ 1620 (thanks to terminalvelocd!), BenQ DW1800 x 2, LG 4167B, LG H22N, Pioneer 106D, Pioneer 109, Pioneer 111L.
- Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 22
Quote:Originally Posted by cd pirateLooking at your drives in your signature, yes I would say scanning is better for you also. Most of those drives are most likely far too good to even show slowdowns in TRT with mediocre discs like an NEC or Pioneer is.
That's kind of why this thread is 50/50 with the results. It all depends on your setup and what your drives are good for. You've no idea the number of times I've gotten good TRT graphs, and scanning showed a bad interaction with the discs. __________________
Welcome to The Club! The Club depends on you to help make it great. Please do all you can! - Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 23
TRT for me, why?
Because its a repeatable test, it doesn't take long, there is no disputed method or speed that should be used, it's clear which brand of drives are the most useful for carrying out this test.
BTW: Any obvious slowdown, no matter how slight = a fail in my book.
PI/PIF scanning IMO has become to a large extent meaningless. To many points of view on what is the best scanning drive, best scanning speed.
It's now at the point where it becomes almost impossible for people to compare results, so i tend not to post many.__________________
We came to wreck everything and ruin your lives, God sent us
My Review PC & Optical Drives
To become a member of MyCE.com just click here to join
The Forum Rules | The SSD FAQ | The NEC/Optiarc F.A.Q. | Liggy & Dee's NEC/Optiarc Firmware Page - Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 24
Your experience with G05 is not typical for discs in general. There is no question that discs become more unreadable over time; 4-5 years is not long enough. There have been a number of tests from credible sources here is one and they indicate temperature, humidity and exposure to light as sources of degradation, as well as increased burn speed. As to proof of my theory, it requires no proof in the same manner as Pascal's Wager. If I am right and I seek out lower errors and I am wrong, it has cost me nothing. If I am right, I have gained significantly.Quote:Originally Posted by cd pirate...but this is coming from real world experience here with degradation of G05. All of mine regardless of being from the same or different batches and being stored in the same conditions all degraded completely randomly.
As for the theory once again about discs with higher scan errors becoming more unreadable as time goes on compared to ones with lower errors to begin with, there's zero evidence from what I've seen that backs this up.
Given that most disc degradation is correlated with the quality of the disc, possibly I will be correct because higher quality discs burn with fewer errors.
In any case, I lose nothing in seeking out higher quality burns and burning at lower speeds. Don't worry about the controversy, I am used to being in the minority here.__________________
Still a few bugs in the system... - Posted:
19-08-2007
- # 25
A brilliant post, very well putQuote:Originally Posted by Dee-27TRT for me, why?
Because its a repeatable test, it doesn't take long, there is no disputed method or speed that should be used, it's clear which brand of drives are the most useful for carrying out this test.
BTW: Any obvious slowdown, no matter how slight = a fail in my book.
PI/PIF scanning IMO has become to a large extent meaningless. To many points of view on what is the best scanning drive, best scanning speed.
It's now at the point where it becomes almost impossible for people to compare results, so i tend not to post many.
I post scans from time to time - for fun only these days, though __________________
Current drives: Samsung SE-S084C (TS02) + Samsung SH-S223F (SB03 RPC1 + other goodies) + TSST (Samsung) TS-H653F (DW10) + Samsung SH-S203N (SB02 RPC1 + other goodies) + Optiarc AD-5170S (1.12) + Litey LH-20A1H (LL0D) + Samsung SH-S182D (SB06 RPC1) x2 + LG E10N (JE07) + BenQ DW1650 (BCDC) + BenQ DW1640@164B (BEFB) + LG 4167B (DL13 TDB) + NEC ND-4551A (1.Z2) + LG GCE-8520B (1.00) + LiteOn SOHR-5239S (2S0B)
Retired: LiteOn LDW-851@SOHW-832 + LiteOn SOHW-1693S + LG 4163B + Pioneer DVR-115D
My Review PCs
How to delete your upper and lower filters : How to check/enable DMA by Womble
Click here to join MyCE.com and be part of our friendly community!
Smile...people will wonder what you're up to
