DVD Dye - The Darker the better?

I had some BenQ 8x DVD-R whose dye was made by DAXON. I recently got some Ritek G05 8x DVD-R, and the writing side is much darker purple compared to the DAXON.

I also have some TY 8x DVD-R whose dye is also dark.

Is a darker dye generally better, and more specifically better for:

  1. Writing quality
  2. Reading quality
  3. Archival quality (ie. how quickly it deteriorates)

No

Dye types are far less important than the quality of the manufacturing process and the quality of the materials. There are equal examples of good and crap media in all dye types.

I wouldn’t agree to that, not really.

While it is true that all dye types can have crap media, your AZO dyes tend to do better than organic mixes and cyanine-based dyes. The light-colored cyanine-based stuff, like the one used in Princo media, is probably bottom of the barrel.

Dye quality is one of several determining factors in what is or is not good media.

Dye quality is one of several determining factors in what is or is not good media.

Of course it is. But to take your example of “AZO” (which really means very little in the DVD world). MCC coded DVD’s made by CMC, MBI and MCC can vary wildly in quality, all using the same dye. If you buy media based solely on the alledged dye type, you will soon be disappointed. Getting quality media more often than crappy media is only accomplished by sticking with one quality disc maker.

High speed DVD media (ala 16x), is very dependant on the use of a near-perfect stamper with dye being perfectly distributed over the stamper, then the final sandwitching of discs and coatings is also critical. The dye is therefore only one component of 5 or 6, any one of which can make a crappy disc. Even high quality dye can be ruined with low quality application. Handling and storage temperatures also have an effect.

High quality manufacturing will produce high quality discs, regardless of the dye type used.

AZO is a metallic dye. It means something. It’s a patented Mitsubishi technology too.

Yeah, but a large amount of DVD manufacturers are using AZO-based dyes these days…

You can have a good cyanine-based disc, and you can have a bad azo disc. It really does depend on the manufacturer. In fact, it’s probably more dependant on the batch; the manufacturer is just a consistency guide!

Places like CMC, MBI, RiTEK even Lead Data are more than likely capable of producing discs of quality that rivals TY’s, if they thought it was in their best interests.

We’re speaking in generalities here, not absolute truths. Generally your AZO dye ends up in better discs. Why? Well, it probably does have to do more with the quality of the dye, and less with luck. AZO dye also has pretty much the best reflective surface. And AZO dye is not used in all that many medias.

I’ve never bought into the “bad batch” stuff. These chemicals and processes are used non-stop for hundreds of thousands of discs. The “bad batch” thing is often used as a poor excuse for media that doesn’t perform well, and is unstable in quality, where you can end up with one spindle being fine and the other one not being fine. The “batch” is not that small. What can happen is you sometimes end up with a few duds, but it has nothing to do with a batch, it’s just a series of atypical duds. Even the best media, MXL, TY and others, can have bad discs from time to time. For some companies, however, duds are the norm, not the exception.

CMC, MBI, RITEK and Lead Data probably could make better media, if they slowed up production a little, if they had better QC systems, if they hired more attentive employees, if they used better materials … basically anything that can be changed would need to be changed. What they do currently is sloppy, quantity instead of quality.

Am I being naive here. Woudn’t it be great if the various manufacturers found a dye that worked to the best as technology allowed both in terms of burn quality at the time and longetivity. Then set up a manufacturing process that ensured that every disk went out the door to the best standard possible.

If demand for that disk was so great that their production could not match it then so be it, demand simply wasn’t met - until the production facilities could be increased WITHOUT compromising quality.

I really don’t understand the marketing sense in throwing something substandard out the door. With The Internet people WILL get to hear about and a company will lose out more than it gains.

The adage if it ain’t broke don’t fix it I would have thought applies here. For example at one stage Ritek seemed to be a highly sort after brand. Then look at it - because of the need for high production the quality has dropped off and I and others are now looking at replacing 200+ disks and will NEVER go near Ritek again.

One look at this forum will show that people want quality and reliability. The technology and dyes are there so why not provide it and charge a price that matches that.

The same way I have not a clue why anything above x4 media exists. Unless you have to produce a large no. of disks so what if a burn takes a little longer. Most of us will have spent a long time preparing what is actually going to go on the disk - if it takes 20 mins - so what - go and make a brew why you are waiting, whatever. You see the point, each time the speed increases the manufacturer has to reinvent the wheel

The main thing here is that the reason why we all like DVD’s over VHS is there compactness and there (hoped for) longetivity/reliability. Why is ANYTHING getting in the way of this.

Think about it. If the manufacturers produced disks that burned at no more than x4 say but we knew the quality would never change and they would last the decades as claimed we would still be buying those disks (baring an increase in capacity - which IS a gain) we would still be buying these disks in the same no.s five years from now.

I just do not undertsand why we have this problem and I can’t be the only one.

You’re not the only one.

The problem is computer nerds. I don’t mean people that use the tech, or know a lot about it … they’re fine. I’m referring to those stupid dorks that just don’t know when to quit. The ones that think the world revolves around “faster” and “more powerful”.

As long as those kind of people are giving the advice to the business decision makers, we’ll continue to have quality sacrificied for the speed/power needs of some nerd somewhere.

Toss in a little corporate greed (cutting corners on quality materials), and there you go.

I like my dyes dark purple they look nicer than the Princo, Ritek and others that use a light shade of red :slight_smile:

I don’t think it’s the colour that is the ONLY factor - you should rely on the formulation on the equal spread and on the proper manufacturing and QC of the discs - Call it luck, but I personally have had better luck and better scans with dark purple dyes but I still don’t think that is the only indication of quality.

I tend to judge media based on where it was made and how it scans/how long it lasts, more than the actual colour :slight_smile:

Amen to that! :slight_smile:

The extra speed can be useful if you need something in a hurry but don’t plan on keeping it as your main backup. Appart from that, it’s the quality/longevity which is most important to me.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: First your “we’re spoiled” comments (about DVD prices), now this, bravo, brava! :clap: :clap: :clap:

It’s a double-edged sword. If there was little competition and drive to create higher speed burns and higher capacity discs, we’d still be using 1x discs and paying $10 a disc, DL discs would never become a reality, etc. It’s the same with any technology. Obviously media manufacturers are straddling the line between production output and low costs and sacrificing quality in the process. And obviously they have crossed the line into sacrificed quality, hopefully they don’t continue any further into this direction. I’m more than happy to limit my burns to 4-8x, that’s plenty fast for me.

@the original post, no the color of the dye doesn’t have much to do with the compatibility of the disc. If that were the case Ritek would be among the best media in the world. TY is lighter than Ritek but ask anyone who has done any research as to which one is more reliable on a regular basis.

TY’s are gods among insects!!! :wink: I don’t buy anything but TY’s. FujiFilm just blew it by switching suppliers. I’m sure they have lost many customers who believe in quality media!!!

If presented with a situation where two DVD-R’s are laid on a table, one with a blatent sign saying “ULTRA HIGH QUALITY MADE BY TAIYO YUDEN” and the other saying “ULTRA LOW QUALITY MADE BY IMATION”, I would guess most consumers with half a capitalist mind would call upon their knowledge of the 3M/Imation brand, and select it over some crazy asian-sounding name.

Therein lies the real problem - Fujifilm could sell princo and still people would think it was good media!

Sad but true. I have had many a person on other forums tell me that media isn’t a issue because they are using top quality media such as Fujifilm, TDK, ect. I then have to go through the painstaking task of explaining outsourcing and manufacturers with varrying quality under the same label.

Yes, but just as a sidenote, TDK’s own media IS of high quality :wink: - the problem being the outsourcing labyrinth, just like with Verbatim, Sony and Maxell. If these brands sold only (respectively) MCC, Sony and Maxell media, we wouldn’t be confronted with so much trouble. :bigsmile:

Disagree - I have used RITEKS, their dyes are a light shade of red whilst the TY discs are a dark purple, much like the RICOHJPN dyes…

The DVD+R Genuine TYs I use when comparing side by side with my old RITEKs, are a dark purple.

New G05 Ritek dye is darker than New TYG02 DVD-R dye. Both are dark purple in colour.