I have been working under the assumption that a good PI/PF was a good indicator of the general quality of a disc’s burn. I fully understood that it depended on the reading drive to some extent. I had thought, though, that an excellent burn when read on the burning drive would at least correspond to a ‘good’ burn on other drives. This seems to be mistaken. Case in point:
This burn was performed by my BenQ DW1620/B7P9:
A little high on the PIF side, but with a PI error average of 9.07 it seems to be a really good burn. I would have looked at that and think, I will have no problems with this media in the future.
But then, scanning the same disc on a LiteOn(JLMS) HD166S/DS1C drive:
A PI error average of 752.94!! That’s two orders of magnitude difference in detected errors.
Being a LiteOn drive, I used KProbe to double-check:
The error graph is almost identical. So it’s not the scanning software at fault.
Being one who burns DVDs because I want to use them, It seems to me that what this is saying is that PI/PF scanning can’t tell me anyhting about how well a disc is burned. Sure, one drive might give a great scan. But that seems to not necesarily mean that any other drive will like it. And it’s not like I can yank the drive out of my standalone DVD player and run a PI/PF test with it to compare the results.
It also seems to me that the DVD burner wars, where different DVD burner advocates post scans of some burn made on their drive to show that their drive is better than another drive - seems to me that this is completely meaningless too.
I’m not trying to attack the methodologies used here - I guess I’m just looking at this and asking people who know more than I do to please help me understand in light of this how PI/PF scanning is meaningful at all.