Any dvd-media out there with constant quality?

vbimport

#1

.actually i was swearing on mcc004, but lately they’ve gone china-cheapish-non-quality-wise-ware. todays taiyo yuden seems to go the same path, yuden003 i.e./g03, you can see it even from the outside. so actually it’s all a big gamble speaking of constant quality media. what do u guys use as reliable media these days and in terms of “cheaper, cheaper” is there any quality media left at all? is tdk any good? or do u guys swap to hd due to low costs already?

man, i’m sick of the current development. cheap media all the way. fuck cheap media :wink: i guess long term strategies of verbatim and taiyo yuden has failed.


#2

2nd Generation (i.e. 8x TYG02 and YUDENT000 02) where you can find it, is still good, even the valueline stuff can make nice burns.

Lightscribe DVDR media from Verbatim is guaranteed to be MCC and will most likely be Made In India (again good stuff there) or, to a lesser extent, Taiwan (ppl here seem to like MIT Verbies).


#3

[QUOTE=Ralle-Ralphy;2064739].actually i was swearing on mcc004, but lately they’ve gone china-cheapish-non-quality-wise-ware. [/QUOTE]What do you mean by that exactly? :confused: - are you talking about Verbatim-branded MCC004, or some el-cheapo brand selling discs with a MCC 004 code?

If regular Verbatim MCC 004 doesn’t work for you, time to spend more and go for the archival grade Verbatims or I-don’t-remember-what-line superior Maxells. Oh or Made in Japan 16X -R Panasonics too (A-grade TYG03).

Personally I have no issue with these 16X Verbs. 2 years ago the Made in India ones could be problematic, but it seems to be history now.

EDIT I don’t vouch for TYG02 personally. Never found these as good as the hype leads one to believe.


#4

Perhaps the OP takes a dim view of anything made in China.

And BTW with the results I’ve got burning even B-Grade 8x TY, burning at 8x exactly, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it.

The only time I get this kind of performace is with MCC 004. Edit: TYG02 is the only media I will break my +R preference for.





#5

[OT][QUOTE=SeanW;2064789]And BTW with the results I’ve got burning even B-Grade 8x TY, burning at 8x exactly, I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it.[/quote]That’s an old debate: you trust PIE/PIF scans as a good way to determine media quality as a whole, and I don’t! As simple as that. In my experience TYG02 (8X -R) is one of the lesser compatible media I’ve used, whatever the scans show it doesn’t compare to good CMC MAG E01, MCC 02RG20 or TTG02 (among others). YUDEN000T02 (8X +R), on the other hand, is IMO great media. :iagree:

A good looking PIE/PIF scan is no “performance”. Genuine performance is how a disc behaves in real-world. PIE/PIF scans are good to compare burning methods with a given media, NOT to determine media quality, despite the usual misguided general opinion about PIE/PIF scans. I could go on and on for hours on this subject, but as it’s OT here, so I’ll stop rightaway. :stuck_out_tongue:

EDIT Besides, you’re scanning with an Optiarc drive, :cop: so your scans mean about nothing: these drives don’t report according to ECMA standards and are notoriously looney scanners with inconsistent reported figures.
[/OT]


#6

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2064798]
A good looking PIE/PIF scan is no “performance”. Genuine performance is how a disc behaves in real-world. PIE/PIF scans are good to compare burning methods with a given media, NOT to determine media quality, despite the usual misguided general opinion about PIE/PIF scans.[/QUOTE]

[OT] I’ll stand behind what Francksoy said above PIE/PIF means nothing about real world “performance”.
I’ve had first hand experience with great/fantastic looking scans only to have playback problems on stand
alone players from the great/fantastic scanning discs.[/OT]

Back on topic:
If MCC 004 isn’t doing it for you than you should go ahead and try some YUDEN000T02 8X +R or maybe some
Verbatim MCC 003 8x +R or if you prefer -R than the MCC 02RG20 8x -R all of these MID’s is usually a safe bet. :iagree: :wink:


#7

[quote=Francksoy;2064798][OT]…
EDIT Besides, you’re scanning with an Optiarc drive, :cop: so your scans mean about nothing: these drives don’t report according to ECMA standards and are notoriously looney scanners with inconsistent reported figures.
[/OT][/quote]
Optiarc AD-7190/7191 series is rebadged LiteOn DH-20A3 series. :flower: Any other comments on PIE/PIF scanning, I’m leaving in the dedicated thread. :wink:

And I’m agreeing with [B]getit29[/B]; all of the MIDs listed have been fine for me for as long as I burned them properly. I prefer YUDEN000 T02 as my 8x +R and MCC 02RG20 as my 8x -R as a generally sure sign of compatibility and quality. :iagree: 16x media seems to be “letting a lot of people down” lately.


#8

Dunno, are people basing their experiences with Verbatim purely off PIE/PIF scans or what?

I think the whole scanning fiasco has reached a whole new level as I’ve seen an abundance of people lately bashing Verbatim and TY 16x media.

One question I have for all who are bashing away - does the disc actually play without errors on your DVD player?


#9

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2064901]Dunno, are people basing their experiences with Verbatim purely off PIE/PIF scans or what?

I think the whole scanning fiasco has reached a whole new level as I’ve seen an abundance of people lately bashing Verbatim and TY 16x media.

One question I have for all who are bashing away - does the disc actually play without errors on your DVD player?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, i’m not fond of pc tests from T03 or my TYG03 but i can’t say i have had any sort of readback problems in video players or pc drives. My concern is if they are suitable for long term backup and only time can tell.

I think most media is actually pretty consistant - both good and bad. At least what i have. These days i (still) use FF Verbatim 03RG20 for backups and PiData RITEKF1 (dirt cheap offer from svp) if i bring a movie to a friend. I never tried the old Ritek and i want to live dangerously too :wink: The Riteks scan avg to bad but constant and no playback issues yet… but i wouldn’t use them for personal backups :cool:


#10

[QUOTE=Albert;2064830]Optiarc AD-7190/7191 series is rebadged LiteOn DH-20A3 series. :flower: [/quote]Aaaaaargh! :doh: :o


#11

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2064776]What do you mean by that exactly? :confused: - are you talking about Verbatim-branded MCC004, or some el-cheapo brand selling discs with a MCC 004 code?[/QUOTE]

the original verbs.

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2064776]If regular Verbatim MCC 004 doesn’t work for you, time to spend more and go for the archival grade Verbatims or I-don’t-remember-what-line superior Maxells […][/QUOTE]

sounds interesting. are those available in .eu?

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2064776]Personally I have no issue with these 16X Verbs. 2 years ago the Made in India ones could be problematic, but it seems to be history now.[/QUOTE]

well, personally i feel a loss in quality with the regular 16x verb’s compared to those which had been on the market 2-3 yrs ago. and actually it doesn’t help the “quality reputation” of mitsubishi chemicals to throw MAC’s on the market, but then again, it’s just my opinion.

and btw. generally i’ve read a lot about all those pie/pif-opinions. i agree that those scans cannot be an 100 pc. indication that those discs will be good speaking of long term storage, but i’d guess it’s a good indicator if a disc is working well with your burner, together with jitter/transfer-rate and stuff of course. i mean what else can you do? wait 5 yrs and hope for the best? i don’t think so. of course disc with “not-so-good”/“bad” scans can be played on most devices at first. the question in this case would be, for how long.

p.s. i also have some verb branded yuden000t03 (2x50pcs) and my devices hate them. those yudent002 and tyg02 were great back in the days. too bad there’re hard to find these days.


#12

[QUOTE=Ralle-Ralphy;2065300]sounds interesting. are those available in .eu?[/QUOTE]

Something like these Verbatim MediDisc http://svp.co.uk/product/verbatim_medidisc_8x_dvd_minus_r_(jewel_cased)_3650 :slight_smile:


#13

LOL can someone please explain to me why all these new people complaining about the “drop in quality” are always saying going on about “5 years from now” etc etc?!

WTF has an initial scan got to do with degradation? As far as I’m concerned there is ZERO correlation at all. Please tell me, what part of a slightly worse scan screams out “I’m going to degrade quicker”?

If a a disc is going to degrade, how does having 200 total PIF reduce it’s chances of dying compared to one with 3000 PIF total? If they both equally degrade and have 500,000 PIF added to the total in 5 years time, then you are comparing 500,200 PIF to 503,000 PIF. Pretty small difference eh? They’d both be unreadable too thanks.

Rather than harp on about the ridiculous “drop in quality” what about checking for air bubbles in the hub of the disc, if the ends come apart easily because of poor bonding, looking under a strong light for defects? Also using scanning the way it should be used - to check for things like degradation after a few months of burning.

All PIF scanning can show you is WHEN a disc degrades, not IF it will degrade.


#14

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2065312]LOL can someone please explain to me why all these new people complaining about the “drop in quality” are always saying going on about “5 years from now” etc etc?!

WTF has an initial scan got to do with degradation? As far as I’m concerned there is ZERO correlation at all. Please tell me, what part of a slightly worse scan screams out “I’m going to degrade quicker”?

If a a disc is going to degrade, how does having 200 total PIF reduce it’s chances of dying compared to one with 3000 PIF total? If they both equally degrade and have 500,000 PIF added to the total in 5 years time, then you are comparing 500,200 PIF to 503,000 PIF. Pretty small difference eh? They’d both be unreadable too thanks.

Rather than harp on about the ridiculous “drop in quality” what about checking for air bubbles in the hub of the disc, if the ends come apart easily because of poor bonding, looking under a strong light for defects? Also using scanning the way it should be used - to check for things like degradation after a few months of burning.

All PIF scanning can show you is WHEN a disc degrades, not IF it will degrade.[/QUOTE]

Oh dear. Looks like I helped derail the discussion :o

[Off Topic]I rely on three tests, sequentially, to determine the current state of any kind of disc, be it CD-ROM, CD-R, DVD+R/-R or ROM, in order of importance.

  1. ScanDisc: Tells you whether or not the disc can be read and/or if the redundancy margin of checkbits has been eaten into by failures. The latter is important information for anyone who has ever had the misfortune of using CMC MAG media, but that’s another debate.
  2. A TRT: to determine the speed at which the disc can be read.
  3. [B][I]IF[/I][/B] both the previous tests showed no issues, [B][I]THEN[/I][/B] use a Quality Scan to get extra info. It is only on that basis that I’ll pay any attention to PIE/PIF or C1/C2 error rates.
    [/Off Topic]

My point was that the OP takes - what I consider to be - too gloomy a view of the current crop of medias.

For example, I have never seen a Chinese Lightscribe Verbie. So if you consider that Chinese = :Z , which the OP seems to do, there are ways to avoid MIC MCC 004.

I would also recommend most forms of 8X Tayio Yuden :bow: Obviously I would recommend the +R flavour, being a +R fan, but from what I’ve seen of TYG02, the -R version, it looks pretty good.


#15

[QUOTE=Ralle-Ralphy;2065300]i mean what else can you do? [/quote]What I’m preaching all the time and that I do myself: buy a drive dedicated only to scanning prurposes (to avoid fast aging), choose a couple of samples of each batch/burner/firmware/burning speed combination, save the scans, re-scan with the same drive on a regular basis (after 6 months, after a year…) and look for a possible a trend in degradation. Now that’s useful. There is nothing more than blind faith in thinking that discs with lower reported PIE/PIF will last longer, and cd pirate just explained very well why it’s kinda silly to sort out burns this way. You might as well use a crystal ball!

You know this whole degradation check stuff, I’m doing this since mid-2005, and I’ve learnt a lot from this. Among other things, that discs with low PIE/PIF reported can well degrade 10 times faster than discs with much higher PIE/PIF reported. Among the 430+ discs enrolled in my survey, I have found no indication whatsoever of a correlation between original scans and the degradation rate. None. Zero. This correlation so many are talking about is all talk, not facts.

Why do people refuse to learn the lesson of RITEK G05!? Sure beats me. :rolleyes:


#16

[QUOTE=Ralle-Ralphy;2065300]well, personally i feel a loss in quality with the regular 16x verb’s compared to those which had been on the market 2-3 yrs ago. [/QUOTE]You still don’t explain what you’re referring to when mentioning a “loss in quality”.


#17

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2065312][…]
WTF has an initial scan got to do with degradation? As far as I’m concerned there is ZERO correlation at all. Please tell me, what part of a slightly worse scan screams out “I’m going to degrade quicker”?[/QUOTE]

none. but as far as i know there are specs out which specify the limits of pie/pif. speaking of this, this should be a less = better quality situation of a writing on the burning device? no? other devices might have a different approach on this media though, but as you’ve got this hardware already you can find the best solution for yourself. and this is quality wise not long-term-wise. if you think straight this might have been an equal basis though :wink:

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2065312][…]Rather than harp on about the ridiculous “drop in quality” what about checking for air bubbles in the hub of the disc, if the ends come apart easily because of poor bonding, looking under a strong light for defects?[…][/QUOTE]

i did. whether ty or verb meet those criterias (some even did 2-3yrs ago). so what?

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2065312]All PIF scanning can show you is WHEN a disc degrades, not IF it will degrade.[/QUOTE]

so basicly you’re saying many spikes @pie 5000 and pif’s over a hundrets of 20’s can be readable whatsoever. i’d sign that. nonetheless you’re missing the point of finding the media fitting to your drive the best.

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2065344][…] Among the 430+ discs enrolled in my survey, I have found no indication whatsoever of a correlation between original scans and the degradation rate. None. Zero. This correlation so many are talking about is all talk, not facts. […][/QUOTE]

might be true at your side. you’ve give no further details on your so called statistic and test circumstances (aka: drive/media/speed/…). but that is of no interest anyways, as i’d still pick my media by the fact which correspondes best with my drive and that you can see i.e. by pie/pif/jitter/tft. if it will last for the next hundret yrs dunno. at least i know the best corresponding hardware. do you know the best corresponding hardware? without any tests? after 5yrs, disc is good => must be a great media? well, …

[QUOTE=Francksoy;2065344][…]You might as well use a crystal ball![/QUOTE] …there you go :wink:

p.s. oh, and btw. can anyone stick back to the initial topic please? thanks


#18

[OT]
@Ralle-Ralphy: I suggest we stop discussing this here, as there are threads dedicated to these discussions about PIE/PIF scanning. Let me just tell you that there is a whole wide world out there concerning homemade scanning, that you seem not to be aware of. No offence intended. I’m just trying to help you out of the usual prejudice, myths and misconceptions about homemade scanning, as you seem to be a victim of the usual home scanning brainwash, as I once was. All you believe are things I also believed several years ago.:wink:
[/OT]


#19

@Francksoy
agreed, but how do you find good media then? that i’d be interested in still.
@all
any good constant media in use? post here please. thanks


#20

SeanW gave you an answer in the first reply: Yuden000 T02
These 8x +R TY disks have been good for a very long time now. And are still readily available in the US at online shops.