How can I improve my burn?

How come I always cannot get a good burn on my Liteon 1213s? I have tried most of the Disc, but still cannot result a standard burning quality. I have just upgrade my PC to Celeron D320 (2.4G) with 512M Ram, Win XP Sp2 is installed. Here is a scan of the Verbatim 4x DVD+R, burning a 4.37 GB movie in 4x speed by Nero, and I can play it in my PC, just the scan is so bad.
What should I do to improve my burning quality? I have read some post in this forum that some DVD writer may have a better result on higher speed burning rather than lower speed as they are design for high speed burning. Should I buy some 8x DVD+R for testing? Is it important to have a good power supply?
Please advise. :confused: :confused: :confused:


I had the same problems! in fact the scan was bad because of all the soft running in back !! Shut of everything (Virus scan, messenger …) and scan your disc again !

@ bedo
This disc will play in your PC?!? Are all your scans like this? Do all your discs that scan like this play fine? If the disc plays fine with no freezing or pixelations, then I would guess that your burner is not a good scanner(‘understatement of the year’ nominee). You could also try to scan in nero cd/dvd speed (go >nero/nerotoolkit/cd-dvdspeed/Extra/Disc Quality Test) to ‘compare’ results. I don’t know if I can give other advice at this time concerning improving burn quality as we aren’t sure WHAT burn quality you are getting. These discs should give excellent results at 4x burn speed. I would wait until we can figure out HOW to test before trying different media, although if you have some lying around, you could try a burn and scan to compare. It is important to have a good power supply, however if you are having power supply problems, I doubt bad scans on good discs would be a result, bad burns and/or bad rips…maybe, bad scans on good discs…doubtful.

edit-oops…posted before seeing bichonn’s reply…give his idea a go first, although I can usually do stuff while scanning.

here is a scan with PCCILLIN and messenger running in back:

here is an other scan with exactly the same disc but without anything running in back:

@ bichonn, bedo
The bad scan was at ‘max’ scan speed and the good scan was at ‘4x’ scan speed. That may have made a bit of difference, especially concerning the high max read speed of the 1633. Not to contradict your point, however, you may be correct. I just think the impact may not be as great as depicted by the graphs alone. let’s see how much it helps bedo