3520A this BAD of a reader?

anybody else’s drive showing such bad results? :Z
this is same disc scanned with NEC 3520A and LiteOn 1613
any ideas what would cause such a big difference in results? :confused:

thouse scans are almost identical, dont forget the nec scanned at 5X not 4X which will make a difference.

Both of your scans are good. But I know what you mean in the difference. I have scanned discs burned on my 3520 with both the 3520 and Lite-On 832s, and the scans are always better on the 832. Sometimes the scans are very bad on the 3520, but good on the 832.

you cant realy compare scans done from different drives even the same model, is all the scan tells you is how that drive is seeing pie/pifs.

if you have more than 1 drive that can scan then assign 1 drive for scanning.

You have bad scans?
Look at mine… :rolleyes: :confused:
This is bad scan!!!
Poor reader? Yes it is!!!

popzz: Or maybe poor discs ? =)

Just a crappy burn, not that the drive cant read.

I’ve scaned a pressed DVD-ROM… not a burned one

Like a pressed DVD can’t be bad =)

When you try on a pressed DVD and another you think you have 2 bads and later try others and always have same results… What do you think?

Well I woudn’t think nothing unless I would also try burned disc. =)

Ouch! Quality Score of ZERO! :bow: :bow:

Look on the bright side: at least it’s not negative. :bigsmile:

you cant realy compare scans done from different drives even the same model, is all the scan tells you is how that drive is seeing pie/pifs.

I know you can’t compare scans, but to an extent, you are looking at a difference of almost 300,000 PI error difference. But the PIF difference is almost the same. I just would not expect to such a large difference between two drives. All of my scans suck like that on the NEC as this is one of my better ones. I don’t see how some people are getting PI error scans in the 1 and 2 range. I guess I got a real lemon for a reader. :a

i havent been able to do any nec scans yet as ive got a 3500, but maybe the nec might turn out to be unreliable when scanning pie/pif.
i read a post by Zebra yesterday commenting about the pionner scanning being unreliable because this feature was forced through the firmware.

I think NEC 3520 delivers much better scan results than Pioneer 109/A09.
At least multiple scans of the same DVD deliver same results which was not always the case with my Pioneer.
Pioneer also shows huge differences when changing scan speeds, way more than NEC 3520.
NEC 3520 sems to be quite sensible though, i.e. delivers more PIE/PIF than other readers/burners which in my opinion is a rather good approach.


I asked this long ago, but, come on, how can major names sell drives that offer p**s-poor read performance - why would you need to find another drive that can read discs well, because an NEC or other drive cannot read a dvdr properly (or dvd)?

Reading should be the single most easy task for a drive to perform, and one you would expect a drive to perform well at - reading media is what you need as well as burning. This is silly - NEC and co. should hang their heads in shame for churning out such crap - it seems the only decent NEC of late is the 3500 - new models should be better not worse than older models.