Bought an ihbs212 today... (nero disc quality help)

vbimport

#1

I’ve only been able to find LTH blu-ray media so far in my state and online. I burnt a full disc of 700mb avi’s as a test, at 4x, with a verbatim 6x disc. The read and write buffers went up and down a little bit, I have no idea why since the drive is connected to a sata 2 port, with a sata 2 cable, but anyway, here’s my nero disc quality result:

Looks pretty bad, doesn’t it? I’m in the middle of doing a burnt disc inside of nero diskcheck. My quality result should be somewhat like that in the review for the ihbs112, shouldn’t it?


#2

This was using the create disc feature at 6x… terrible results, buffer kept dropping towards the end: http://i48.tinypic.com/2eds0so.png


#3

The 112 and 212 are very different drives with different chipsets. Results with those two drives will be different. Discspeed scans should not be compared to scans around this forum using Opti Drive Control, which is a newer program and handles Blu-ray better. Do not use Discspeed or ODC for Blu-ray burning. They are both very poor for this. Use Imgburn to burn your discs and quality scan them at 4x speed with ODC.

Scans of LTH media have commonly been not as good as good quality HTL BD-R’s. Where are you located that you don’t have access to anything but LTH?

Your buffer issues are almost certainly a result of Discspeed’s poor burning ability.

You can use the info in this post to view your burn info graph using Imgburn for burning.


#4

[QUOTE=deanwitty;2640495]Where are you located that you don’t have access to anything but LTH?

Your buffer issues are almost certainly a result of Discspeed’s poor burning ability.[/QUOTE]

Rural Australia. I’ve flashed the firmware for the drive and, using Nero, which has cut my LDC results in half. I’ve already burnt off several discs using Nero, would the quality difference with using imageburn be enough to justify reburning those discs?


#5

[QUOTE=hxclespaulplayer;2640507]Rural Australia. I’ve flashed the firmware for the drive and, using Nero, which has cut my LDC results in half. I’ve already burnt off several discs using Nero, would the quality difference with using imageburn be enough to justify reburning those discs?[/QUOTE]

Recently talking to another member from your neighborhood about your limited choices over there. Its a shame. You may want to watch Ebay for a good price on HiDisc 4x BD-R’s(INFOMER30, scans in the Infomedia BD-R thread) which have been burning really well in the 212. What did you pay for those LTH?

Glad to hear things are moving in the right direction for you :). If a transfer rate test on those burns doesn’t show any read-back slowdowns, they may be OK. Don’t know how important the burned material is. Your call.

Imgburn has been the most reliable software for BD-R burning. Utilize the verify after burning function for higher confidence in a good burn. Take advantage of its ability to save a burn graph and remove the need for Discspeed burning.


#6

I don’t know if is related, but you are scanning these discs at full speed. Usually (at least for DVD), liteon drives give reliable scans at 4.

I know that scanning a full disc at 4x can be a long wait, but is anyway a waste of time if the scan at full speed is unreliable :frowning:


#7

Burning a 6x rated at 4x, who told you that???


#8

[QUOTE=deanwitty;2640495]The 112 and 212 are very different drives with different chipsets. Results with those two drives will be different. Discspeed scans should not be compared to scans around this forum using Opti Drive Control, which is a newer program and handles Blu-ray better. Do not use Discspeed or ODC for Blu-ray burning. They are both very poor for this. Use Imgburn to burn your discs and quality scan them at 4x speed with ODC.

Scans of LTH media have commonly been not as good as good quality HTL BD-R’s. Where are you located that you don’t have access to anything but LTH?

Your buffer issues are almost certainly a result of Discspeed’s poor burning ability.

You can use the info in this post to view your burn info graph using Imgburn for burning.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=deanwitty;2640510]Recently talking to another member from your neighborhood about your limited choices over there. Its a shame. You may want to watch Ebay for a good price on HiDisc 4x BD-R’s(INFOMER30, scans in the Infomedia BD-R thread) which have been burning really well in the 212. What did you pay for those LTH?

Glad to hear things are moving in the right direction for you :). If a transfer rate test on those burns doesn’t show any read-back slowdowns, they may be OK. Don’t know how important the burned material is. Your call.

Imgburn has been the most reliable software for BD-R burning. Utilize the verify after burning function for higher confidence in a good burn. Take advantage of its ability to save a burn graph and remove the need for Discspeed burning.[/QUOTE]

The lth’s cost $30 for 10-pack. My prior nero burns seem to be ok when it comes to transfer rate tests, however using imgburn hasn’t solved my buffering problems. I have a compilation that I’m trying to burn which includes a folder with about 200 files making up a total of 6gb. Not only does the buffer (both read and device buffers) regularly dip to zero when burning this part of the disc, it also does so when burning a 6gb iso image! I don’t have anything like antivirus or spyware scans set to run at a certain time, in fact I’ve found that it’s best to turn off antivirus full stop when burning files (better results in optidrive control, at least that was the case a long time ago with dvd’s). I have no idea what could be accessing the hard drive so much as to slow down the burn. This one cimpilation (tried burning it twice now) takes over 30 mins to burn at 4x, instead of the 21 or so when the buffer “behaves”.


#9

$3.00/ea. for a real BD-R’s poor cousin is just ridiculous. You may want to consider $2.00/ea. 4x Panasonics off E-bay next if that’s an option for you.


http://www.ebay.com/itm/5-Panasonic-blu-ray-disc-BD-R-blueray-25GB-4X-bluray-/270702095976?pt=US_CD_DVD_Blu_ray_Discs&hash=item3f071a2e68#ht_1977wt_926

You’re saying that an ISO created from the same set of files results in the same buffer issue when burned? My first inclination would be to have you check your hard drive with HD Tune for problems, but this doesn’t sound like the problem. You may want to post the issue in the Imgburn forum.


#10

There is a simple rule for LiteOn BD-Burners:

Don´t burn a LTH with a LiteOn!

There is a good reason why Verbatim doesn´t recommend its LTH blank discs for LiteOn burners.

http://www.verbatim.de/pdfs/BD%20Writer%20Compatibility_1.pdf


#11

[QUOTE=deanwitty;2640495]The 112 and 212 are very different drives with different chipsets. Results with those two drives will be different. Discspeed scans should not be compared to scans around this forum using Opti Drive Control, which is a newer program and handles Blu-ray better. Do not use Discspeed or ODC for Blu-ray burning. They are both very poor for this. Use Imgburn to burn your discs and quality scan them at 4x speed with ODC.

Scans of LTH media have commonly been not as good as good quality HTL BD-R’s. Where are you located that you don’t have access to anything but LTH?

Your buffer issues are almost certainly a result of Discspeed’s poor burning ability.

You can use the info in this post to view your burn info graph using Imgburn for burning.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=katraine;2640874]There is a simple rule for LiteOn BD-Burners:

Don´t burn a LTH with a LiteOn!

There is a good reason why Verbatim doesn´t recommend its LTH blank discs for LiteOn burners.

http://www.verbatim.de/pdfs/BD%20Writer%20Compatibility_1.pdf[/QUOTE]

This is what seems to be an average burn the liteon and verbatim LTH:

Out of about 40 burnt discs with the liteon, I’ve only had 2 coasters (as in put them back in and the disc couldn’t be read from). I noticed that my results are “only” about twice as bad as this guys’ burn, which another member said was a good quality scan, for 12x write. Should I burn a test disc with opti for you guys?

Thing is, when I started out with dvd’s, I had no idea about quality then, either. No-name burner, no name discs. When I learned about disc quality tests, I went back and scanned them, and the results were 10 times worse then anything I’ve seen with these verbatims. Yet I’ve never had any of them fail on me, even years after.

I’ve basically had about 60 LTH’s given to me, so I guess if these scans really are that bad, I can just swap drives to a more compatible brand, however, would it still be ok to re-burn the data off of the liteon discs? I mean, will the burn result be any different than burning the data off of the hard drive again? (Which would be a real pain, since the files are in other locations now and I’ve ditched the compilation files)


#12

The scan looks not that bad…but the MID??


#13

[QUOTE=chef;2641581]The scan looks not that bad…but the MID??[/QUOTE]
Seems to be a bug in ODC. I have the same issue on my PC.


#14

[QUOTE=chef;2641581]The scan looks not that bad…but the MID??[/QUOTE]

It is a known and rather annoying bug in version 1.51. Most people have reverted back to the previous ODC 1.50 version because of it.


#15

[QUOTE=chef;2641581]The scan looks not that bad…but the MID??[/QUOTE]

VERBATIMu.


#16

[QUOTE=hxclespaulplayer;2641397]

Out of about 40 burnt discs with the liteon, I’ve only had 2 coasters (as in put them back in and the disc couldn’t be read from). I noticed that my results are “only” about twice as bad as this guys’ burn, which another member said was a good quality scan, for 12x write. Should I burn a test disc with opti for you guys?

Thing is, when I started out with dvd’s, I had no idea about quality then, either. No-name burner, no name discs. When I learned about disc quality tests, I went back and scanned them, and the results were 10 times worse then anything I’ve seen with these verbatims. Yet I’ve never had any of them fail on me, even years after.

I’ve basically had about 60 LTH’s given to me, so I guess if these scans really are that bad, I can just swap drives to a more compatible brand, however, would it still be ok to re-burn the data off of the liteon discs? I mean, will the burn result be any different than burning the data off of the hard drive again? (Which would be a real pain, since the files are in other locations now and I’ve ditched the compilation files)[/QUOTE]
Judging by this post and the one before it, you may do best burning your remaining LTH at 4x.

With LTH media, I think that your TRT is a very important measure of quality. More so than with HTL. While I have very good correlation between HTL quality scans and read-back tests, it seems that error rates reported by our consumer drives can go higher with LTH discs before showing up as a read-back problem. It seems likely that the differing physical characteristics of the two media are affecting error reporting, and they may require different baselines for what is bad, good, excellent.

Looked at from an LTH baseline, your burn does not look bad enough to assume it might be a problem. I would mark a couple of the discs that gave you the worst looking Q-scans and perform TRTs on them at 4-6 month intervals to watch for deterioration. Use Imgburn’s “create image file from disc” function to rip one of the worst-looking burns back to your hard drive. Take a look at the Imgburn rip graph for slow-downs. This real-world disc test can tell you if those discs are 100% readable today and likely to remain so for a bit. Yes you can use a rip from your burns to re-burn if Imgburn reports no problems in the process.

More than a few sources have stated that the LTH dye is not as durable as the HTL. But that is not to say that they can’t last 5+ years.


#17

[QUOTE=hxclespaulplayer;2641676]VERBATIMu.[/QUOTE]

Thanks. :flower: