Confused by burn


I did two burns of the same movie backup file - one at 2x and another at max (4x?). The results are very confusing…

On the 2x, I get a total PI error count of 82759 (avg: 5.73) and a total PIF error count of 703 (avg: 0.05)

On the max (4x) burn, I get a total PI error count of 25446 (avg: 1.76) and a total PIF error count of 2155 (avg: 0.15).

My question is, from these results, which burn was more successful? Which one should I use in the future to burn (2x or max?)…

PIF is more important than PIE.

PIE are Parity Inner Errors (correctable and uncorrectable). PIF are the PI Errors that could not be corrected by the PI Error Correcting Code. The PIF must then be corrected by the Parity Outer ECC, or if they fail that you have a POF (Parity Outer Failure), which means that the drive will have to try to re-read that sector or produce a real error.

The PIF maximum should also be taken into account, not just the sum.

None of the PIE and PIF numbers you quote are very high, so you could burn your next couple of DVDs at 2x and 4x and scan those also.

If you get a consistent result of one speed giving lower PIF-sum and the same or lower PIF-max, then you can use that speed in future burns.

Lemme guess, DVD-R media?

The numbers alone do not make it a good or bad burn, we need graphs for that.

I’ve redone the scans and uploaded them to my account. Check out my site:

Look under “KPROBE SCANS” for the two graphs.

Looking at these two graphs, which one would you say is the best burn?

You should scan at 4x, and turn off the graph label thingies. Apart from that, they both look like pretty good discs. I would call them both acceptable. As a rule, the Maxell media likes being burned at it’s rated speed, not slower than rated speed. This is true of many -R media types.

Umm…could you explain to me why I should scan at 4x? BTW, what are these Write Speed Performance Descriptors? HOw do they work?