7201A PI Error, PI Failures & Jitter

What is the classification for PIE, PIF and Jitter?
How little is normal, good, excellent and how much is bad?
I have a Optiarc 7201A with 1.09 Firmware and burned a verbatim DVD-R @16X and Nero DiscSpeed shows that average PI Error are 49.57, maximum 127 and total 886898.
PI Failures average 0, maximum 6 and total 367.
Isnt this extremly bad?

And the C1/C2-P1/P0 scan at maximum speed shows:
good: 99.8%
damaged: 0.2%
bad: 0%

Altough the scan shows bad as 0% there are 4 red bad squares in the scan.
Is this a good scan?

please provide a screen shot.


using the Optiarc for quality scanning has produced the higher levels. do you have a Lite-On DVD writer or BenQ 1620/1640/1650 drive to perform disc quality testing? quality testing should be performed at 4x or 8x speed.

the ScanDisc portion is probably getting reported correctly. looks like you have some damaged areas and possibly a bad area? this could be due to handling of the disc, are there small scratches, dust, fingerprints ect… ?

No I dont have a Lite-on or Benq drive, I just got this one after my forth or fifth plextor started failuring like all the others. The disc is perfect. If I burned a DVD movie and for example and 4 bad squares just like that scanes comes will it “lagg” or something on the movie where does squares are? And does the damaged ones do the same? or is it just something you dont notice in normal use? Or maybe its allso much up to the stand alone player you watching it on? Some players are more pickier than others about media.

doing the surface scan in cd-dvd speed is a test ive only performed a hand full of times. so im not really familiar with. since you do not have a lite-on or benq to perform proper PIE, PIF and jitter testing i would use the ScanDisc in Read mode, also performing a Transfer Rate Test in the Benchmark tab. these two test will give you a better idea of actual readability and playback quality.

ive not had any bad sectors in a surface scan. i would assume damaged or bad surface areas would lead to data loss. just small areas i would not believe to cause playback problems.

the PIE, PIF, Jitter Quality Test is best for comparing how well a particular dvd writer performs when setting different burn speeds or using different write strategies on the same media. Quality test is best for comparing the writing quality of different drives for the same media. Quality Test is not an actual measure of the readability or disc surface quality.

the read test is ok.


I would say your first scan does not look that bad. At 16x read there are no red clusters in PIF. Only one spike at 6, few at 4.
Try to read at 8x or slower. If it is a DVD video I think it will perform well.
DVD player read 1x speed, higher is for data only.
I would be worried more about [B]troy[/B]'s big cluster at the beginning reaching 8.

This is good summary by [B]Drage Mester[/B]

If you’re scanning for PIE per 8 ECC blocks (e.g. Plextor, LiteOn, BenQ scans) then a maximum of 280 is within acceptable limits according to ECMA-337 specifications.

If you’re scanning for PIF per 1 ECC blocks (e.g. Plextor, LiteOn scans) then a maximum of 4 is within acceptable limits according to ECMA-337 specifications. A disc with a maximum of 10 PIF might be readable but it might also be a coaster.

If you’re scanning for PIF per 8 ECC blocks (e.g. BenQ scans) then a maximum of 12-16 is within acceptable limits according to general consensus, but it’s not possible to translate directly to the ECMA-337 specification.

In my experience however, a PIF maximum of 10 per 8 ECC blocks is closer to the limit of 4 PIF per 1 ECC blocks, so I would use 10 as the equivalent limit but that’s just my opinion.

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

Scan 8X.
Now there is missing squares. What does that mean?

[QUOTE=CDuncle;2211863]I would be worried more about [B]troy[/B]'s big cluster at the beginning reaching 8.[/QUOTE]

thats the same disc tested with both the optiarc and the benq. i also did a 16x speed with the benq and the PIF cluster was not present. :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=troy512;2212191]thats the same disc tested with both the optiarc and the benq. i also did a 16x speed with the benq and the PIF cluster was not present. :)[/QUOTE]

It’s OK. Sorry for misunderstanding. I was using that scan as an example, where I would be concerned.

[QUOTE=Kung Boa;2212048]Scan 8X.
Now there is missing squares. What does that mean?[/QUOTE]

It show damaged sectors. Burning software should pass them, but it show that the media is not that grate.
You may see glitches during playback in stand alone player.

I understand that yellow ones means damaged but theres gray squares. squares thats not there. Is that the same as yellow ones?
Well the quality of the file is not great. Its a two and a half hour long movie compressed to a DVD5. But I dont want glitches.

The disc should be perfectly fine. The Optiarc can successfully read the disc; just about every other drive can get past those yellow “damaged” sectors you get when you run PI/PO scanning. All that does is tell you that the error correction of the drive is being applied for that part of the disc. All discs will have a bit of yellow if you use PI/PO scanning–and possibly might have a bit of red–and still be of more than acceptable quality.

Now, about the gray areas. My guess is that either the drive or DiscSpeed dropped samples while scanning the disc. This doesn’t necessarily mean that your data isn’t there; it just means that, during the process, the drive or the software “skipped” over reporting “quality data” for that part of the disc. It is probably green, though.

I have attached a screenshot of a scan, and you’ll note that there is a big block of gray at the beginning–before & in between the black. The disc is still flawlessly read, however, and I have no concerns about its quality. The gray comes from the fact that the drive was spinning up to its full speed and, thus, wasn’t reporting any data for that part of the disc.

The important thing is that the drive was able to complete the Transfer Rate Test successfully, and it did the READ TEST for the ScanDisc in all green. That means your data is there, and can be read back perfectly fine. And doing the PI/PO test for the ScanDisc tab is, to me, less informative than just doing a Disc Quality scan [though they report the same thing, just in different ways].

I burned the same DVD with 20X and 16X and scanned with maximum speed and the 16X burned scanned wih 16X and checked quality test and the result shows that the 20X burning has less PIF than the 16X.
the 16X has 2 PIF at 7 isnt that bad?
How can that be?
Doesnt this show that the 20X burned media is better than the 16X burned?
I allways thought that burning slower made better quality.

Do not worry too much about these things. As long as the scan does not show too many PIF in the cluster, you should be OK.
You burned enough discs by now, why do not you put one in your stand alone player and see how it play. That is the ultimate test.

I would just like to now the reason why the faster burned media has better quality than the slower burned.

I wish I could tell you that, but if you read more about burned media, you will see that it all depend on too many things, like burner, firmware, media itself, in some cases even burning software and other little details like batch of media you get and producing country.
Sometime I think it also depend if it is sunshine outside. :slight_smile: