Coster or keeper? (NEC vs. LiteOn Scan)

Should I reburn a DVD like this one?
Same disc scanned with NEC and LiteOn using Nero CD-DVD Speed 4.07. Same scale on both scans.
Using the LiteOn scan I’d like to keep it but NEC says trash it! :confused:
TIA!

I’d say you should reburn that disc. If you don’t, you may have problems reading/playing that disc on drives, that don’t read discs as well as the LiteOn does.

try a transfer rate scan in both and see what happens.

Yo-

I would trust the Lite-On scan more than I would the NEC scan-

You could also use the Lite-On to do a Kprobe scan to verify the 4.07 scan-

Mike

liteon has made its fair share of scanning failures… try a transfer rate scan.

Well, did the scans/xfr tests and I’m just as confused :rolleyes:

  • The Kprobe scan confirms the 1.4gb hickup reported by Nero CD-DVD Speed on both drives, see first post above.
  • The NEC xfr test confims it to.
  • The LiteOn xfr test does not.
    Thx for your comments!




Your NEC is a terrible reader, I would trust the Liteon more. It has far more accurate reading.

NEC 3540 is a decent reader, search on the forum, I’m not the only one who say this

Omg what a difference,thats no good

I would reburn and I would switch to a better media, as G05 has turned into crap for a lot of people. If you choose to keep it, I would rescan every few months and at the first sign of deterioration I would reburn.

I just checked a Ritek that started to turn to trash after 2 months. Now, at 7 months I get an error message: “no disk in drive”. That pretty much sums up the value of my G05s.

Yeah, that’s my story to with the bulk order of G05’s I got early this year. I’ve already taken all data, personal pics and video, off it and just use it for backing up my movies. If/when those burns turns bad I can always reburn from the original. Thx for all your comments!
Btw. my 3540 is always on DMA 2 with burst rate of 25MB/s, that normal?
(I’ve svapped IDE cables, reinstalled MS drivers, gone from CS setting to master etc and it’s always the same story)

25MB/s is more than enough for 16X burning so I wouldn’t worry. It generally seems that the higher DMA settings are not really any faster (between different drive types). There may be some manufacturing reason but my guess is it mainly marketing.

in light of the tranfer rate scans it is pretty funny you say that.

nothing i own rips SL better than my 3500s and 3540

Here’s a few interesting scans…
Disc was burned a few days ago.

PI’s are very erratic on the NEC…

Any thoughts and/or opinions? This is a huge difference… I am wondering myself: Which drive is ‘correct’?



Well, fwiw, I find it truly disturbing that the NEC returns shuch a scan from a YUDEN. Going just on the YUDEN MID this is just not right on the NEC. I would have thougt my scans using the G05 some what questionable on the NEC since the G05 is surely not the “defenitive” standard. But looking at this I’m thinking the NEC is a useless scanner. Perhaps there’s a way to prove this beond any doubt using a superb media and comparing those. I’ll be doing some serious shopping in the morning, mind you, just one or two of each quality media but it should be enough. Later.

Yes, these are genuine TY. TG001159 batch.

Clearly, I think either my 3540 is bad, or … the NECs just suck at scanning. :doh:

If I had another drive, I would scan it again… But alas, these are the only two drives I have.

Make your own conclusions… :rolleyes:

This does it for me, just did a burn using the LiteOn 1693 with a G05. EVEN the NEC 3540 sees the better burn here by the LiteOn when I scan this questionable G05 media. My findings; The 3540 simply blows chunks.





I don’t understand. All these discs are mentioned as burnt by the Sony… :confused: Have I missed something??

About this whole 3540A scanning thing, people, please don’t forget that PIE/PIFs are NOT on the disc per se, but are generated during the reading process. The better the reader, the less errors. That’s one of the reasons why the LiteOn scans always look much better.

No scanner actually reports “accurate” PIE/PIF, simply because there is no such thing. So one just has to get accustomed to the way the drive reports errors. First thing to do is to scan some commercial pressed DVDs to have a reference for the drive. This is the ABC of scanning, and I’m always surprised that most members actually never do this. :rolleyes:

As long as a drive scans in a consistant fashion (i.e. doesn’t report different results from scan to scan with the same discs, like the Pioneer drives and the new Nec 4550A do :Z ) and you learn how to interpret the results, it’s a useful scanner.

Personally I prefer the 3540A, because it’s less optimistic in the way it reports errors. My former Benq 1620 showed magnificent scans with discs that stuttered in real-world, and had problematic reading curves on other drives… :a

I think there is a trend here (I mean on this board, not in this thread specifically) with people wanting “perfect looking” scans, and in my opinion this is -at least partly- burrying one’s head in the sand.

:iagree: Yes, that’s my experience too, and it’s very confusing. The 4550A is even faster at ripping, though it’s actually more picky than the 3540 and 3500 with reading curves and scans! Go figure… :rolleyes:

But, how do you explain the peaks and valleys in my scans then?

None of these showed up on my LiteOn scans… You’d think it’d even marginally show up y’know?

shrugs