Help! H42N coasterer, quality 0, scan inside

Hey guys,
This is the first time i do a scan, and compared to the scans i see here… mine are a joke…

The burner is LG H42N firmware RL01
The scanner is NEC ND-3550A 1.05
The media is TY03 hub TH000034 (i believe they are original, made in japan >PP< FIC1-A, and bought at office depot)
The disc has no scratches on it what so ever, was kept in a jewelbox and not touchen. The disc was burned a few days ago, as you can see from the scan.
…I burnt the disc at 8X speed…

What could be the cause of such thing? i have heard that T03 is TY’s least good media, and yet, it is not some junk i bought… so i doubt the media is at fault. The firmware does support T03 (i checked it with MCSE).

Edit: one more thing… I have watched the divx avi files i put on this media at apex811, and there was no problem at all, even when i forwarded it 16x and 32x speed it was very good, even rewinded it and it shows up perfectly.

NEC drives in general are not trustworthy scanners and can show wildly varying results depending on which scanning speed is used.

You might be lucky to find a useful scanning speed for your NEC drive or it might be crazy at all scanning speeds. My NEC 4551 is OK at 12x scanning speed while my NEC Optiarc 7170 and my dead 7173 aren’t useful at any scanning speed.

Unless you find a scanning speed with your NEC 3550 that produces sane scans with known good discs, I wouldn’t bother using it for DVD quality scans at all.

thanks for the comment

How bad could it be? I have heard that liteon are good scanners, but how much variance could it be with a different scanner (the NEC for ex.) a result like i have attached to the previous message is a defective one, would a liteon show much better results? i doubt it, but would like to hear your comments on it…

Do you know any article or forum thread that i can look at, perhaps there is something wrong in the way i burn… for example the speed i need to burn (i burn 16x media at only 8x. should i do it 16x or maybe 4x?), the running processes (should i keep computer alone, with only nero running or can i surf?), is windows xp better for the burning? since i have also vista. Or should i buy a new dvd burner?

How bad can a NEC drive be as a DVD scanning drive? Really bad! Look here (posts #177 - #181) for my own example, which isn’t necessarily the worst such example.

A LiteOn DVD burner is far more consistent and useful as a scanner.

Basing decisions about good/bad burns on scans from a crazy scanning drive is worse than basing your decisions on a coin toss - at least the coin will be right 50% of the time.

Ok, youv’e made your point :slight_smile:
i just need to know how a scan works. i mean
if i scan at 1x speed and get excellent results, does it mean that the disc is good for sure? this question is very important, as perhaps 1x speed makes every disc better result. or is it just improves the error of scanning? (making it a more accurate one) and, is it true or not, that i can take the best scan out of 10 and judge the quality of the media according to that one scan? or can a scan show better results than there really are, in that case, i can’t do that.

I would also like to know this : when i look at a PIF graph that i scanned now, it is :
PI MAX 15 and total 252 (i am now scanning at 5x speed, scan seems much much better). the thing is that the max 15 is only one time at the 1GB mark, the smallest spike you can imagine, and yet nero has got the quality result to 91 mainly because of that.
did he do that because it means that its likely the dvd player will fail to read at this mark? what exactly does PIF and PIE errors mean in day to day?

Sorry for all the questions, im a little confused,
answer what you care to, if you can please

Most of the questions you ask are very difficult to answer with any certainty, as people on these forums have been discussing this for years without coming to an agreement.

There are some interesting threads on the subject in this forum:

Media Testing/Identifying Software

There’s also this sticky thread in the Blank DVD Media Tests forum:

Interpreting PI/PO error scans

There’s also this article:

Home PI/PIF scanning article - Who to believe?

I suggest you change the Advanced settings for Disc Quality scans in CDSpeed so that your NEC uses a 1 ECC scanning interval instead of an 8 ECC scanning interval.

your are so much correct about the NEC
at 5X i got PIF : 14 max 252 total
now i did on the same disc, 8X speed i got
PIF 5 max 157 total

can i say that this is the scan the represents the disc? (the best one?) this question is very important to me, if it is debated, i would like to hear your comments on it

Please post actual scans saved as images (PNG format is much preferred) as that will give us much more information than just the max/total numbers.

I think i know what was the problem with the first scan and then the better ones. i have now scanned like 3 times and got the same results - that is after i have upgraded the firmware to 1.07 (from 1.05). Do you believe that this was the problem? i was told that the firmware is reliable to counting the errors.

One question : in nero cd-dvd speed, the PI errors (avg 13, max 88) those are related to the standart which says maximum 280, right? (so 88 << 280 = good?)

here is the latest scan (i dont know what more there is to look at, but sure why not)

another scan, using 1ECC
results are better but quality is a little less, i assume that it takes into consideration the fact thats its 1 instead of 8?

It can be but it can also be something else. My NEC 4551 started out as an OK scanner for the first day, then it became crazy, and after a long time it became reasonably OK again but only when scanning at 1x or 12x. The firmware version didn’t seem to have any influence on this behaviour for my drive.

One question : in nero cd-dvd speed, the PI errors (avg 13, max 88) those are related to the standart which says maximum 280, right? (so 88 << 280 = good?)
This is mostly correct, but NEC drives don’t report Parity Inner Errors (PIE) per 8 ECC blocks as the ECMA standards specify, but rather Bytes in Error per 8 ECC blocks. This reported number will always be equal to or higher than actual PIE, so you can’t use the 280 limit directly.

If the (mis)reported PIE maximum is lower than 280, then the actual PIE seen by the drive will also be lower than 280. The reverse is not true, however.

another scan, using 1ECC
results are better but quality is a little less, i assume that it takes into consideration the fact thats its 1 instead of 8?
Yes, the “Quality Score” calculation takes into account the selected scanning interval. I personally ignore the QS and look at the graphs and other numbers instead as well as using Transfer Rate Tests in addition to scans.

If you click on the “floppy” icon in Nero CD-DVD Speed, you can save an image of the scan in PNG format instead of JPG, which for this type of image will be smaller as well as better quality.

a long story short, i do not need to change the burner or the discs,
this was the main dillema here. that, and the question as to what speed should i burn my dvd’s at, this burner can burn up to 18x, the media is 16x certified and i usually burn at 8x. should i burn at an other speed?

Your results look fine to me, although I always say that with the disclaimer that you need to verify actual readability with a Read Transfer Test.

I burn almost all my DVDs at 8x because for most drives that’s the “safest” burning speed - even for modern drives and 16x rated media.

thank you very much for your help