How Reliable are NeroCDSpeed Scans?

vbimport

#1

I’m starting to wonder what’s the point of scanning a disc for quality. I have read that after a couple of months after burning the scan will show more PIE’s and PIF’s than the original scan. What does this show? Why do you get more errors after months pass by? I have retested discs with NO scratches on them, and have gotten more errors. What’s the cause? (The discs are genuine TY’s by the way or MCC’s)

Second, I have had scans with a 0 score midway through but the disc plays fine. What does a 0 score mean anyways?

Third, I just scanned a disc 5 months after the original burn. The disc is free of any scratches. PIE’s are over 2million, PIF’s are over 4000. Almost 10x worse than the original burn. YET, get this, I got a score of 97!!!

Here’s the scan. BTW the disc plays fine, no skips or jitters or loss of sound and picture pixelation.

Samsung HT22U burner
8x burn
MCC03 media


#2
  1. The discs degrade over time to simple things such as light and humidity and temperature. Slow degradation is normal, it is the rate that you are trying to observe in scanning the disc.
  2. Don’t rely on Quality Score alone to judge a scan, a quality score of 0 can be caused by ONE LARGE SINGLE SPIKE which is not there, but a scanning glitch (as they occasionally happen). The disc would still be good and most things will read it fine. Another reason is DVD Players tend to read slower and can handle a lot more errors/mask some errors.
  3. That scan can almost certainly be explained by a bad burn strategy. Notice how the JITTER has increased a lot. Jitter on a good disc according to ECMA should be 9% or about there, yours is about 12% (although benq have been rumored to produce scans +2% to cats). High jitter is usually a result of degrading dye (stored in exposure to light/heavy use) or a bad burn strategy/overspeed burning. The errors do take time to settle in, and some cheap discs scan OK straight after (PI<100) but after a day will register (PI = 1200). It is still a valid result in my eyes.

#3

While that scan is pretty bad, You are still pretty much under limits of what is considered readable. I wouldn’t count on this disk staying readable as long as one that scans beter though (and certainlly wouldn’t trust important data to it). Also some players, standalone or computer drive, are beter readers and or more forgiving than others. That looks like the kind of scan that might not be playable in all players because of the errors (might not work at a friends house in his player though it works in yours). Also keep in mind that some of us here (myself included) tend to go a little overboard on what is required for a good scan (though that one you posted defanatlly looks marginal). I have seen scans a little worse than the play just fine but again, they are still marginal (very high errors meaning the drive is already having to go all out to play it, even if it does play fine).