That's kinda expected with these Liteys, with good burns of good media: samples are dropped at higher speeds (check the statistics) and that's what I came to consider as the reason why higher speeds showed lower errors in several scanning drives, but I stress the point: with very good burns.
When the disc or the burn is problematic, the higher speed putting more stress on the reading process, errors tend to raise, mainly near the outer edge.
That's just a theory, though. :shrug: - works for me anyway. In the end that's all I'm interested in.
Different drive models can have very different behaviours in this area, though: Recently I started scanning with a 16P1S DVD-ROM, and its pickiest scanning speed in terms of burning quality seems to be @8X. 4X, 10X, 12X, 14X and 16X give me false negatives (showing good scans of discs that stutter in my standalones and have troubled TRTs), except a the very end of the disc (assuming there is actual data burned there of course). So this model breaks the mould that I've been used to with Benq 1640/1650, NEC 3540A and LiteOn 1693S. There must most probably be others....!
So all this is far more complicated than it seems.
Inputting this because these considerations explain why, personally, I'm not requesting 12X or 16X scanning speeds as standards in reviews, :disagree: because it raises too many variables (number of samples, behaviour of the drive etc..). With Liteys, a 4X or 8X scan combined with a TRT in a different drive is OK with me. As Dakhaas mentions, multiple tests in different drives would definitly be a plus.
But if only 4X in LiteOn is used as scanning method, I can see no reason why jitter should not be reported in testing reviews. Thus the "count me in".