BenQ DAXONAZ3 is amazingly crap media



Sorry to the daxon lovers here but I am not enjoying this media at all anymore.

I have burnt about 40 of them. Some had big PI clumps in one singular spot, however some did not, here’s some of my results:

I’ve been using them as giveaways to friends. All discs were burnt with DVD-ROM booktype. I also used 4 different writers. LG H22N & 4167B, Pioneer 111L and LiteonLH18A1P. The problem lies with their standalone compatibility.

I gave out discs to multiple different people. About 4 so far have reported that the discs won’t work in their DVD player. Some skip, some don’t play at all. I have not just given one disc to each person, we’re talking 2 or more discs per person at a time, most of the time the discs were burnt at different speeds and in different burners but still failed on my friends standalone players. Some discs worked alright, but it was a very “hit and miss” situation.

You can go ahead and say that their DVD players don’t like +R media but you’d be very wrong as all of these people have reported my MCC003 and 004 have worked brilliant. You could also say the PI clumps caused the discs not to work, I will answer with: Why have the discs without the PI clumps, low PI/PIF, good jitter levels, perfect TRT tests also failed?

I definitely would not recommend Daxon AZ3 for video. Data seems alright though.

This is another example of how media can look fine in PI/PIF tests and even TRT but still fail in standalones.

Feel free to disagree with me about daxon media, it works well on all my standalone players however, on my friends it has proved to be a difficult media whereas verbatim has not. :flower:


You now know you ring a bell here… :wink:

I don’t think the dogma [great scan = great media] will die anytime soon on this board because the main “federating” occupation here is scanning, but it’s nice to see that some people try and think differently, relying more on real-world behaviour than questionable raw numbers to make their opinion about media quality. :slight_smile: - way to go, [B]cd pirate[/B]! (IMO at least ;))


As replies to questions in the media test forums are not welcome, I’m going to reply to this here.

CD-DVD Speed has a proprietary way of adding “recorded by…” to not only DVD-R (supporting this natively) but also DVD+R, and also the write speed curve is written into something at the end or stuff like that if you do Create Data Disc or burn an image :slight_smile:
If you copy this disc burned with CD-DVD Speed with an unaware burning software, it will keep the old data.

I would prefer MCC 03RG20 over DAXON AZ3 even if it has inferior scans. The experience just shows that MCC is more trustable :iagree:


Agreed. :slight_smile:


Once again I’ll mention what I consider as legit uses of homemade PIE/PIF scans:

  • checking media consistency (between discs of the same MID)
  • checking media condition (PIF clusters => dye defects, particles on the surface…)
  • comparing burners results for a given disc model / MID
  • comparing burning methods for a given disc model /MID
  • checking for degradation (re-scanning after some time and comparing with initial scan - but then the consistency of the scanner is paramount!)

All other purposes (unless I’ve forgotten to include one in my list… I can stand corrected! :)) are IMO highly suspect and unsound. Judging of a given MID quality by its results in homemade scans is wishful thinking, unless maybe these tests are conducted in several different drive models, and with lots of caution and re-thinking when drawing conclusions… which still have to be cross-checked with real-world behaviour!

I’m a nuisance :stuck_out_tongue: LOL


You may consider yourself a nuisance :bigsmile:…but I feel like I’m stalking you - stop posting stuff I agree with!! :stuck_out_tongue: :bigsmile:


LG burners are crap.
Cats are ugly and unfunny animals.
Posting in the living room is a total waste of time and only morons post there.
MBIPG101R04 is the worst MID ever.
CDFreaks is a dreadful place where moderators have no humour, specially in the blank media section.
This post is on topic.






Generalization is crap :wink:

I ,for one, am very happy with AZ3 media , maybe it is not the best QS wise , but it is very decent media for everyday use and even for long term use for not so important data .

I know that the OP based his judgement solely on “crappy” standalone players compatability , but I have no standalone player at all :bigsmile:


Just in case someone doesn’t read the whole thread and wonders why I’ve been posting such offensive nonense, this was a humorous reply to [B]Arachne[/B]'s request :wink:


I’d like to know how I was generalizing? The media is failing on quite a few separate players. And you called the standalone players crap? I’ve had discs that my standalone could play flawlessly yet none of my writers could read the scratched part of the disc. I wouldn’t call that crappy.

I could probably do heaps of testing and prove that AZ3 media doesn’t work on many standalone players, but I do have a job and a life :flower:

The fact of the matter is that AZ3 media has stuffed up on several players now and possibly more since I burnt some things for yet another different person. On the BenQ spindle it boasted about “picfect” technology and whatnot and it doesn’t achieve any of it’s claims to an acceptable degree in my opinion.

I got back one of the non working discs today. I’ll post the original scan and the scan I’ll do today. I’ll also test in all my standalones if it works and i’ll post back here soon.


Well not much point to waste the bandwidth since the disc scans pretty much the same and in the standalone test I found it worked in:

2 different Sony PS2
Teac standalone player
Zensonic Z330

That’s all of mine and no problem with it but problems on other people’s players unfortunately.


Hi CD Pirate
I agree. In my experience, Daxon AZ3 is worse than AML/UME (burned by BenQ 1640, 1655, 1650 and 1625).
My testing DVD player is an old Toshiba I bought in 1998 (if the DVDs I burn work in that player, they also work in almost all [95-97%] my brothers’ and cousins’ players).
Another MID I hate is CMC M1 but that would belong in another thread.


As always, I agree with everyone saying real world tests are more important then the PIF/PI tests. Before I start using media to store data, I test it and find the best burner/burning speed to burn it at.

I test new media on many drives, making sure I get full speed, including:

Pioneer 115 (my very original DVD-ROM drive … still works wonderfully)
Benq 1640 (I do my PI/PIF scans on this one … making sure my drive likes it well)
LG 4163
Pioneer 108
Laptop drive

I ussually find burning at faster then 8 speed on any media causes problems somewhere.

One thing that I pay particular attention to is jitter. This seems to really affect readability in many devices. I don’t pay a lot of attention to PIE, but uneven PIE ussually suggests that the burner isn’t coping with the media well and I need to slow it down. PIF is good for finding defects in the media, more then any other test.


:iagree: The main reason why I DO like a lot my Benq 1650 scans despite what’s often said on this board (“Benq scans are unreliable” - I couldn’t disagree less): the jitter figures* that I get in these scans ARE predictive of real-world behaviour in many instances. Not all, sadly. :frowning: - there’s no “one-fits-all” testing method. :doh: :sad:

*(> 11% is not-good-enough in my book, and I want < 9% which is easy to achieve, actually, with good media and proper burning methods :cool: )


Average or Max.?


That would be max … A disk is only as readable as its worst sectors.


More or less constant. :bigsmile: If jitter has too much variation, nearly near the end, it’s also “not good enough” in my book (I’m picky with jitter and TRTs, much more than I am with PIE/PIF figures :bigsmile: ). The question of max values is extremely complicated as these drives show lots of artificial peaks that are irrelevant so max values reported are often wrong. Difficult to discuss this without actual scans as examples, but as this thread is about Daxon, we could find another thread to discuss Benq jitter scans and post graphs… :slight_smile:


Well , I meant no offense cd pirate :slight_smile:

When I said “generalization” I meant that : you based your statement of AZ3 being crap only on “unreadability” problem with “some” standalone DVD players , I’ve sent my brother in TN some AZ3 discs (booktyped to DVD-ROM) and they play perfectly fine with his crappy Insignia DVD player :smiley:

BTW : I’ve noticed that AZ3 jitter is high , and maybe this is the cause of unreadability with some players .


That would seem to be more likely the reason for playback issues on standalones as the physical analysis results from DAXON AZ3 doesn’t show any consistent issues with reflectivity that I can see.