General discussion about DVD-media-quality and scanning

I mostly use patched CDSpeed for scanning DVD/CD, but jitter-scan isn´t possible with my 124 F.

A scan in ODC looks like this:

I guess it should be take the same time for a jitter-test and PI/PIF, but if you look at the time of 12:25 you can be sure a full scan + jitter-scan takes more time.

My burns on Princo and Interaxia are a experiment, all the data on this media is stored elsewhere or is temp data which will be only a short time actual.

And some Princos looks like stay readale for some years

That jitter looks OK to me, I had that “seesaw” pattern on some of my 2009 MBI-made MCC discs when burned on CLV strategies (yours could be just an artifact of DL media layer break difficulties). The jitter scan takes <30 seconds usually on my Lite-On drives (CDspeed) and happens after the PI/PO scans are complete, unlike with the BenQ as I mentioned.

Nevermind, noticed you said the jitter doesn’t work with the patched version. It’s odd, since it would still work with the B revision, of course there has been a lot of changes since then (different OPU, only 512kb buffer).

Anyways it’s getting pretty late out here, I think I’m gonna hit the sack. I’ll reply tomorrow/later next time.

The thing is these are all pretty horrible scans. It’s noteworthy that the first part of the CMC spindle (80 UI) was capable of achieving 1000-1500 total PIF (max 2-3) and 7% jitter with the MBIPG101 R05 strategy, which is pretty decent even compared to 10 years ago (check my 2009 disc vs the one directly below it). But that doesn’t seem to be possible on the 79UL discs which are produced 3 months later than the 80UI batch. The variation within a spindle has definitely gotten much worse. I’m just glad I was able to backup up my digicam data on the good part of it.

Yours look a lot like what I achieved with the CMC discs (80UI) and Samsung’s default MCC 004 strategy. Another interesting thing to note by the way, is that the hub code on the 79UL discs is of a distinctively different font (blockier, also easier to read) which makes me think they are coming from a different production line (still PAP6 though), perhaps one that is inferior.

Will take a look at my Printable and tell you the HUB/Stamper

In the begin of MCC 004 I had to much 8x-media like MCC 02RG20, T02 and MXL RG03, so I don´t know much about the old batches, except this one, HP-branded

Actual I´m pleased if I have Q-Index of 93 or higher, PI total <2000 if I scan with a Liteon

Nice results! I need some MCCs

This HP media was bought 2005 or 2006, will be hard to find old batches.

My results with Piodata and Ritek-media are mostly better than actual MCC

Codes of my MCC Printable, hope I read it right

HUB: PAP691VD 1206060290

Stamper ZE6383-DVR-T47D

Made by CMC on 04/12/2017.
Was there a space between 91VD and 1206xx, as you wrote? The lower quality discs (79UL) in addition to having a different font did not feature a space in that location, the parts were combined (there was one between PAP6 and 79UL).

The significance of this is that we may have a new way to identify quality “grades” of CMC-made MCC media akin to the old PAP6 vs PAPA method, based on the font and spacing of the serial fragments. The QC on the 79UL discs is abhorrent or nonexistent, evidenced by the degree of dye and bonding defects not present on 80UI discs.

Sorry, I take a closer look and saw theres no space between the HUB.

So this media is really newer one, I remember to read horror-stories about newer MCC, no matter if it was produced by CMC or MBI, so I´m surprised by this scan-results

Well that wrecks my theory of quality grading by the serial arrangement. :doh:
I still believe it is undesirable to receive the latter type with the more boxy serial font, as the difference in the QC is evident and may affect longevity (at least in terms of the bonding issues, CMC used to be excellent in this regard).

I don’t consider 2500 PIF total good, but then again I’ve been using MCC 004 for about 10 years and I remember the days when people would post 0 total PIF holy grail burns with this media… boy are we past those days! It’s probably still acceptable and given the physical characteristics (bonding etc.) are adequate, this media should be suitable for long-term archival even despite the ~2000 PIF results, simply due to the renowned and proven dye stability, it doesn’t really degrade in normal conditions.

EDIT: Another thing: always favor lower and stable (flat line) jitter results over obsessing about the PIF’s (as long as they’re max 4 or less) as it is a physical feature (pit formation) of the burn and is more critical under degrading conditions. DVD’s should have a jitter of 7-8% (9% OK for bad discs) and the maximum should stay at or below 10%.

0 PIF sounds like many tries with burning and scanning, maybe both with very low speeds and a scanning drive which was forgiving :wink:

Were these old media also made by CMC? Or maybe Prodisc? Not sure whether Mitsubishi made 16x-media by their own, even the 8x-MCC I remember were made in Taiwan, only my old Sony DL 2,4x and Verbatim -R DL 4x were made in Singapur

You´re right if you say 2500 PIF total isn´t good, but if I compare with awful MBI and FTI media is it awesome.

If I compare with older media like my T02 or actual Ritek it´s not good. Can only hope the longevity is similar to older media, but I don´t trust MBI-made in this point, my MBI-made FUJIFILM03 is one of the worst media in this case

Can´t say much to the jitter, have many scans made with drives which don´t support jitter-scan. Any my experince is if the PIF increase the jitter als increase. No idea if the PIF max increase because jitter increase or conversely.

Most Singapore-made SL Verbatim’s were low-speed media, if my memory serves me right, these “holy grail” burns were only possible on CMC PAPA MCC 00x and early production TYG02. I have seen < 5-10 of 0 PIF results so this was a very rare thing to accomplish, however there were batches of PAPA that produced typical PIF results of 10-50 total.

And you make good with what you got. There is no other way, and staying within the constant mindset of “grass is greener on the other side” is a miserable way to live life. The current media is within the realm of acceptability and we ought not to worry too much about the scans, there is only so much in our control, if you know what I mean.

In my experience when scanned on desktop DVD writers (post-2005) the jitter tends not to affect PIF as much as it does PIE and even then only when it is excessively high (12% etc) that you get the tsunami effects. PIF can deteriorate but more often I’ve seen it stay the same as the jitter increased (between different burns, on the same burn it’s usually visible if there is variation, hence my emphasis on the stability of the jitter).

There is no direct correlation however and you should be scanning with jitter enabled as it’s supported on your BenQ and most Lite-On’s as well. Old Lite-On drives required 4X scans in CDspeed, and newer ones need a patched version but with it the jitter scan works perfect even on my iHAS B rev. drive (my newest Lite-On), not sure if it’s possible on rev F.

And if you have time then you could also analyze pit formation in much higher detail with TA Jitter scans.

My 124 F can do jitter-scans with ODC, but should I trust that? It´s to fast for a real scan, it´s like a quick-scan

I have some Benq 1640 and massive differences (>Q90 on one, POF on other 1640) on some media, so I use my Benqs only if I had bad/strange results with the Lite

I also used the 124 for scan >800 DVDs, so I wanted to stay with it because it´s better to compare.

The best scan I found in my collection was a T02 with PIF total 55, max 1, burned with the 1640 at 2005. But this is an exception, even with other old good media; I have also some with PIF total <200, but nothing with 0

These results are nice, but the more important thing is that the media is long time readable; but this is not easy to predict. But most of my DVD-media, even my burns from 2004 are in good condition, only FUJIFILM03 MiI and INFOMER30 seems to degrade fast. PRINCO and VDSPMSAB 001 still have to prove the longevity.

I don’t know about OptiDriveControl but on regular patched CDspeed and newer Lite-On you could run a utility that sets the jitter scan speed separate to the regular scan speed (Lite-On drives scan jitter after the PI/PO scan unlike BenQ). I have found BenQ scans to be consistent with Lite-On the vast majority of time, however the media I use is probably more stable than yours (I don’t like junk media, like Princos).

In the past 15 years of consumer DVD±R burning there has been like 3-5 people who have posted 0 total PIF burns so it’s hardly something you should expect to achieve. Anything <100 is absolutely excellent and is by itself worthy of addition to the burning hall of fame topics. I simply mentioned the thing as evidence to how things have changed in the past 10 years, these days you’d have very little chance to even get to lower 3 digit PIF’s with any currently manufactured media.

I think there is ample evidence that’s one of the worst media ever produced. I don’t think the latter was sold here but at least Princo CD-R’s degraded within months and their DVD’s have had such reports as well. If it were me, I’d throw them away and reburn any data that is on them, while you still can.

P.S. We really should move the discussion into PM’s or a new topic, since discussions in the scan topics are still against the section rules I assume…

I think as long we talked about MCC DVD+R it´s OK for this topic

I start a new topic here, but maybe we don´t have much to say atm :wink:

I think the reason for that rule was mainly the fact that it gets tedious to scroll through the chit-chat when you’re looking for scan results rather than relevancy to the topic at hand.

To that effect, @pepst if you see this, could you please move replies starting from #730 (below my last scan) to Tester’s new topic, if it’s not too much effort?

Posts moved.


Yep, 30s for jitter-scan could be. But this would mean it only measure jitter on some points of the disc or get I something wrong?

This is my only one I find atm scan with Liteon and jitter

But I don´t remember how long the jitter-scan took

The Jitter scan on my 624B is quite fast. ~15 sec I think for a full SL DVD.

In ODC you can set the Jitter Speed

My thought is that a full jitter-scan should be need same time as a full PI/PIF, so 15s can only be a partial scan.

The Benq measure jitter at the same time it scans PI/PIF/POF, dunno how it made this. Maybe it also measure only some points?

And how reliable a partial scan could be?