Different MCC004 types (like printable top), different quality?

Blank Media
#1

Aren’t all Verbatim MCC004 discs created equal? :slight_smile:

The latest MCC004 package I got was printable-top because they were somewhat cheaper. So far, while readable, all discs have an unpleasant gradual increase in PIE counts towards the disc end. I tried using various write speeds and upgraded to latest firmware to no avail.

While I get (on a NEC ND3520) a gradual increase in PIE errors with almost all Verbatims, it is usually much more mild.

Is there a way to be somewhat certain of the quality before buying? (Maybe the printable-top variant is to blame here?) I miss the predictability of CD media… or maybe it’s just the writer to blame and not the media?

So what do you think of this PIE trend?

Images below show:

1: A typical “normal” MCC004 (although there are better ones).

And two scans of the latest printable package – PIE starts out great but gets sub-par (and sometimes out-of-spec) once approaching the end:

2: Has higher PIF than other discs from the pack.
3: Possibly the best PIF scan I ever got.

#2

PIE is rising near the end to be sure, but I’d be more concerned in this instance with PIF. The third scan doesn’t show any increase in PIF at the edge so it would probably be fine for playback, but to be safe you might want to try burning them at 12x. As for all MCC004 being made equal, um…that’s how it [B]should[/B] work, in theory. In reality, the discs are made for Mitsubishi by three different manufacturers so there is going to be variability.

#3

With todays prices i wouldn’t (don’t) use a NEC for scanning(/writing). Use Benq or LiteOn (or Plextor). MCC004/CMC/White printables are way the better media i’ve got from Verbatim. Don’t put too much in those scans. Also NEC’s should scan @ 5x but i wouldn’t bother :slight_smile:

#4

^ But the first batch scans better. Would be good to compare with a Benq / Lite-on (or other Mediatek) scanner I guess.

I haven’t had any MCC004 that burns that much worse than average. (whether Verbatim Prodisc / CMC or non Verbatim branded). It really shouldn’t have anything to do with it being printable top - I’d say you just lucked out with this batch. I’d try returning them or contacting Verbatim (would they be interested? I wonder).

#5

What do TRTs of these discs look like?

#6

The first “bad” scan does show somewhat high PIF levels, but that’s an exception. The rest are generally decent, typically <1000 per disc. Some of them with minor buildup near the end. They all read fine, though.

but to be safe you might want to try burning them at 12x.
They weren’t written at 16, but at 4 or 6 mostly (maybe one at 8).

If I get a new drive at some point, it may very well be not a NEC. I’m not all that happy with it’s poor -R abilities (and I hear other models suffer from that too), and I read a few people reporting on newly purchased bad drives, which was also the case with my initial ND3520. (Among other minor annoyances).

MCC004/CMC/White printables are way the better media i’ve got from Verbatim
CMC from Verbatim? And by “white printables”, do you mean the MCC004 type I have now? In fact, I tried one pack of TDK/CMC MAG E01 which were more consistent than the MCCs. I may have considered switching to these, if it weren’t for some strange high PIF spikes that turned out better on a 2nd scan (see two attached scans).

Don’t put too much in those scans. Also NEC’s should scan @ 5x but i wouldn’t bother
Maybe it’s a problem with some drives, but mine seems rather consistent (with the exception of the above CMC, although besides the severity of the 2 spikes it looks very similar, especially PIF).

What do Prodisc and CMC have to do with Verbatim? I thought they are all MCC/MKMs. And which non-Verbatims use MCC?

I’d try returning them or contacting Verbatim (would they be interested? I wonder).
I may be able to replace them, but only if I return the whole pack, and that’s not gonna happen anymore. :slight_smile: As for contacting Verbatim, I guess they wouldn’t give a damn, or just tell me to replace it locally.

You like trasfer rate checks, it seems (saw you mention it in other instances on the forums) :slight_smile:

That was the only indication before I had drives that could scan (last one was a Yamaha CRW8824), but for more modern drives I consider it just a rough indication to what can be examined in detail thru C1/C2/PIE/PIF scans.

I do, on the other hand, verify checksums after writing, so I do get to see how fast they read. Some of these high-PIE ones slow down a bit near the end, but not all of them. And I think some are “slow seekers”, which I still don’t understand, but I’ve seen that with CDs too, so I guess the disc quality can somehow affect seeking speed.

Maybe I could get to test writing on this pack on a Pioneer DVR-108. Wonder how well that will work…

Anyway, I suppose from now on I’ll stick to buying 'em 10pcs at a time (this was my first lapse). :wink:

d045.png641Ă—524 18.6 KB

d047.png641Ă—524 19.7 KB

#7

Hehehe…along with scans, of course, because I find them interesting to look at. :iagree:

There’ll be some debate about the last part of the paragraph, I think - whether or not TRTs are necessary has been a big talking point here :smiley:

#8

Wow. That was a quick reply. Even assuming you hit it right when it was posted, how did you read it so fast? :slight_smile:

As for read speed, for me there never was a discrepancy between what error scans show and the actual read speed. I’m not gonna graph the read speed in addition to the current testing methodology… it’s tedious enough having to error scan + checksumming (+ cataloging). :slight_smile:

#9

I dunno…right place, right time? LOL :wink:

I know what you mean. In addition to the actual scan, sometimes I don’t even bother with the TRT unless someone specifically requests it.

However, I do tend to TRT really important stuff (archives etc). But then, I don’t do the checksumming part. :wink:

#10

A lot. Mitsubishi only owns one optical disc manufacturing facility, and that’s in Singapore. Prodisc and CMC (along with Moser Baer in India) have an ODM relationship with Mitsubishi whereby they are supplied with the equipment and know-how to manufacture MCC/MKM media and Mitsubishi oversees the production.

#11

Is there a way to tell them apart? I guess they don’t show as CMC/Prodisc.

If Prodisc DVDs are of similar quality as their CD-Rs, at least the ones I tried, then I’m game. :slight_smile: And CMC might not be too bad, actually, as well. But it’d still be nice to know.

#12

Yo-

As someone mentioned before - the NEC 3520 is NOT a reliable Disc Quality Tester - and may very well be giving you false results-

You should do the tests on a friends LiteOn 1693s or later to get more accurate test results - a LiteOn 160P6s from Newegg is less that $40 shipped and frequently goes on sale - and would give you a good reader/ripper - burner and quality tester-eh!

#13

Having assumed MIDs identify the real manufacturer, and realizing as of late that this isn’t the whole story (weren’t CDs absolutely identifiable according to the ATIP mfg code?), I can now confirm these discs are probably MBI, since the package reads Made in India. I’ll try to avoid them from now on.

On the other hand, the previous few packages were also MBI and were decent.

On the even other hand :), I think the best package I’ve had was Made in Taiwan. But I don’t think these are available anymore. :-/

#14

Hub codes and/or packaging.

Phthalocyanine MBI CD-R is awful :Z