Finally found Verbatim MIT made by CMC

I was having a 4 day vacation in Hurghada to get away from this PC/DVD/Media headaches but I ended found the only media that everybody here seem to have 100s of it and I only had 2 LS discs bundled with Asus 1612BL drives.

It was in Radioshack which had the 25 packs of MIT CMC PAPA (TNR LOCK----OPEN) and with date of 2004 , the regular price was 155LE (28$) :eek: but they had a sale of 13.5$ per 25 pack :smiley: I bought one to test and it was pretty well actually just one notch lower than my Panasonic TYG03 .

A friend of mine will go there next week and I will ask him to get me another 4 packs

Nice find! :clap:

Hope scans and TRTs will be forthcoming :smiley:

I just burnt a disc with a borrowed NEC AD-7170S SATA burner and scan is very good aside from the famous spikes :

I will be burning with LiteOn 20A1P . Pioneer 111L and Benq 1640 to see which one will be the best :slight_smile:




Wow, nice burn! :clap:…thanks for that :flower:

Very consistent burns with all of my burners , almost identical numbers :slight_smile:

I was just hoping for <100 PIF , <10,000 PIE and <8% Jitter :bigsmile:



You may play around with your 1640 settings. :wink: - If the discs are pristine, you can burn with SB OFF / WOPC OFF and get lower PIF counts and lower jitter. No guarantee, though. :slight_smile:

About jitter, maybe the Litey never reports lower levels. All drives have a “minimum” jitter reporting and you just can’t get lower than that. Have you tried a jitter scan in the 1640 itself?

2004 DataLifePlus, that’s the ones you want :iagree:

Hmm I thought the same since I could only get around the 7.5% mark for absolutely great burns in my 111L on MCC004 @ 8x. My other scanning drive almost always scans with .2 - 1.0% more jitter. So a burn with 7.5% average might get 7.7 - 7.9% average in the other scanner. The better the burn (I guess) the less variation in jitter there is.

However, when I got my hands on some CMC MAG AE1 and burnt @ 6x with the 111L, I got consistent 6.5% average jitter levels :eek: Both drives agreed also with almost no variation between the two.

If you find the right discs + drive + speed combination, I believe you can possibly get jitter in the 6’s. However this is rare and I can only get it with certain drives and media etc.

Yes [B]pirate[/B], but jitter reporting also varies between [I]units [/I]of the same model. :wink:

For example, one of my 1650 units consistently reports 0.5 to 0.7 higher jitter than the other unit.

Our end-user drives are not utlra-precisely calibrated drives (that’s an euphemism :bigsmile: ), and the slightest change in the optics precision has of course an impact on the “perceived” jitter.

My point was that maybe minaelromany’s [I]unit [/I]can’t report lower jitter than that. Of course, only himself can check this. :slight_smile:

You are right Frank , my LiteOn can’t get lower numbers for Jitter than ~8%+
However , the Benq’s scan for the same burn shows higher Max jitter which is just the opposite of what I experienced before because Benq 1640 always reported lower jitter than LiteOn 20A1P :confused:

@Cressida : that’s why I will buy 3 or 4 more spindles , very rare DLP Verbatim 2004 media :bigsmile:

Here is the Benq’s scan :


Just curious, Transformers is released? :wink:

I never took these sudden small jitter “jumps” in Benq scans very seriously, personally. It shows here @~1.7GB and is partly hidden by the PIF peak. This jitter jump is what makes the max. reported jitter higher than it would be without it (probably about 8% from my experience with the scale in CDSpeed). I would take such jumps seriously only if they occur at a re-linking point (if that).

Whatever. The Lite-On and Benq scans are rather consistent for this disc, which is a good sign in my book (my book: a really good burn is a burn that scans well in many drives, not a burn which shows great scans but only in a given drive… :wink: ) - good discs, or so it seems… :cool: Too bad the NEC creates these infamous PIF re-linking spikes, but according to [B]DrageMester [/B]those produced by this NEC model aren’t evil, unlike the ones produced by older NEC drives like the 3550/4550.

Maybe he’s “backing up” the old TV series. :wink:

It is released in Egypt :stuck_out_tongue:

Frank , you are right (as always :flower: ) The jitter jump is above the spike and it caused the higher max jitter .

My Panasonic TYG03 scan little bit better and it can be burnt@up to 20X with excellent results but as Verbatim can be had for the same price why not buying them :slight_smile:
Just hoping for the other spindles to be better :bigsmile:

:disagree: :disagree: :disagree: - It’s very kind of you, but I’ve had my share of goofs on the board, and more than one blonde moment. :o - ask [B]Dragemester [/B]:bigsmile: - he caught me writing nonsense a couple of times. :stuck_out_tongue:

[Off-topic]

I might have said something like that at some point, but my current experience is that the 5170…7173 series drives produce relinking points that are not as evil as those produced by the 3550…4551 series - but they can still be “semi-evil”.

Fully evil relinking: TRT failure and possibly also unreadable sectors in some drives
Semi-evil relinking: TRT slowdowns in some drives.

The evilness of these relinking points seems to depend on what kind of media is burned (DVD+R vs DVD-R), the media code, and also the burn speed.

In other words, with some media at some burn speeds in my AD-7173A (now dead), AD-7170A and AD-5170A, there are relinking points that cause TRT slowdowns in some picky drives e.g. BenQ DW1655.

I’m going to assume that the burned Transformers DVD is a legit copy of something acquired in a legal manner. If the opposite should be the case, I would have to close this thread.

I hope I made myself clear. :wink:

[Even more off-topic]

Are the spikes from 2510~3540 evil or semi-evil? :flower:

[Off-topic]

In that range I only have the NEC ND-3500AG. As a consequence of when my various drives were bought, I haven’t tested NEC 3500 burns extensively on my BenQ and LiteOn drives, but with the few tests that I have made, I haven’t found any evidence of NEC 3500 relinking points being evil or semi-evil.

After my NEC 3500 began making scuff marks on discs at random, I rarely use it.

Others would have to comment on whether relinking points on 2500/2510, 3520 and 3540 drives are good or evil in their experience, but this thread is probably not a good place for that discussion (unless the original poster wants to discuss it here).

If you discuss this somewhere else, [B]evilboy[/B], drop me a PM, I know the 3520 and 3540 pretty well :wink:

Thanks for the (not so good) news [B]Dragemester [/B]:slight_smile: