Is Pioneer to blame for fake media codes?

Being new to this forum I will abide by jsl’s wishes and start a new thread on this topic. Even though he brought it up on this thread: CDFreaks’ “first look” at the Pioneer DVR-110D with 8x DL writing. He has also raised this issue on another forum, blaming Pioneer’s poor media support for the raft of counterfeit media codes.
I think this is pure bs and Pioneer bashing. Companies have a right to support media they feel is of sufficient quality for certain burn speeds. In my opinion. If consumers don’t like this approach, there are many other manufacturers out there to chose from.
Anyone care to comment?

I really don’t think drive manufacturers should bend over backward to support low quality media. Those cheap media manufacturers need to step up their QC and R&D.

I think it is the manufacturer’s responsibility to add support for different media types in their drive. Just because a drive recognizes a media code doesn’t mean that it’s something that Pioneer sanctions or recommends. And they don’t have to do a spectacular job of testing fine-tuning the support for that media type. But to leave support out entirely is negligent, especially considering how easy it ridiculously would be for them to just add an entry for a new media code to the firmware’s table and copy-n-paste in a TY write strategy (which would have the exact same result as disc makers using fake codes, except they won’t need the fake codes).

It has been stated by a number of people from the Asian region who are somewhat familiar with some of the politics there that the Japanese companies are not very keen on supporting the various lower-tier non-Japanese companies while the Taiwanese companies are much quicker to do so, hinting at corporate politics. Don’t know how accurate this is, but I’ve seen it be stated at CDF and other places. Probably the highest profile case is Optodisc using a fake TY code because, while they were able to get all the Taiwanese companies to add support, the Japanese companies wouldn’t, so for some time, they resorted to using fake codes until support was finally added and they reverted back to their own code.

So yea, I think it is the manufacturer’s responsibility, especially if doing a sloppy job requires so very little effort and is still better than doing nothing (if anything, to reduce incentives for making fake media codes).

[QUOTE=code65536]I think it is the manufacturer’s responsibility to add support for different media types in their drive. Just because a drive recognizes a media code doesn’t mean that it’s something that Pioneer sanctions or recommends. QUOTE]

Most if not all of these “second tier” media are supported. At a writing speed Pioneer feels is appropriate.

It is obvious that Pioneer chose to support 16x burning only on media from Japanese companies with the current 110D firmware. Here is jsl’s original quote for those who are wondering…

Thanks again, Wesociety for your coments. This is another jsl post from
“Only 5 DVD-R MIDs and 5 DVD+Rs MIDs supported at 16x. Also only one 8x DVD+RW MID supported at 8x.
No wonder media manufacturers start using fake media codes when there are drive manufacturers such as Pioneer around…”

Again the question is- “Is Pioneer to blame for fake media codes”?

Well I guess customers will move in time for more attractive burners like BenQ 1640 who is offering support for a wide range of media, not to mention the autostrategy feature that obviously seems to be the definitive solution for unsupported mediacodes.

This may be true. I doubt, however, there will be any “difinitive solution for unsupported mediacodes” from BenQ or anyone else where cheap/counterfeit media is concerned.
Now, back to the issue at hand and the topic of my post. Is Pioneer to blame for fake media codes?

This whole thread is about a non-issue. Who cares what media code is on a disc? If you buy from honest & knowledgable people, you’ll have no problems. Why delve the depths of local flea markets for media?
I don’t think anybody is trying to cheat people, every “fake” media I’ve ever seen has been clearly branded as something else, no matter what MID it bears.
It’s pretty easy to do the math on this one.

Actually I think it’s not that OK to compare the current media support from the BENQ 1640 with the current one of the Pio 110D. That’s not logical and not really fair actually. No doubt that support has to improve a lot of things for the 110D, but everything requires time. :wink:

A lot of us care what media code is on a disc. If this is a “no-issue” for you, move on.

A lot of us care what media code is on a disc.
For me, it is more important who actually made the disc…

And how do you determine that? Could you share your expertise with the rest of us? How do you know who made a Sony, a TDK or a Maxell disc?
And what about the actual point of this thread?
Is Pioneer to blame for fake media codes?

Why do you keep asking the same question? Obviously you want to hear “yes” otherwise you’d take the comments in this thread into consideration.
The best way to identify a manufacturer is never the MID. The best way is to check the serial number stamped into the disc. I’ve gotten to the point where I can look through a cake box in a store and tell who made the disc by the font of the serial. There are countless threads on this forum and others detailing how to tell a disc manufacturer by the serial, search for it.
I think that manufacturers fake the MID for better media compatibility. Drive manufacturers can’t be expected to test every new crappy media out of Taiwan. If a manufacturer decides their disc works great with a TY MID, I’m all for them. Why deal with returns from dissatisfied customers when their drive decides to write at a default strat?
The problem comes when a retailer (mostly online) decides to associate the disc with it’s MID. If retailers stuck with actual manufacturers and serials this wouldn’t be a problem. Hell, the common customer doesn’t even notice when brands switch manufacturers.

For me that would be.
The nice and easy way look at box + output dvd identifier.
The dirty way checking it up the hard way.

And what about the actual point of this thread?
Is Pioneer to blame for fake media codes?

I wouldn’t blame Pioneer for fakeing codes because the end decision was with the compannies who faked the codes. They also could have opted for the 3A MEDIA way of supporting firmware hackers.
Still pioneer support isn’t very nice when it comes to smaller manufacturers when compared to some taiwanese companies or good old Dutch Philips.

I think Pioneer should take some responsibility for the recent flood of “faked” discs that have entered the market. Smaller media manufacturers (Taiwan, Hong Kong, China, etc.) realise that Pioneer drives are big sellers but they also realise that Pioneer will almost certainly never add support for their media. Even some larger Taiwanese manufacturers (e.g. Optodisc, Princo) have had to use well-recognised media codes as a last resort in the past due to poor support by the Japanese drive manufacturers. Even the largest Taiwanese manufacturers (RITEK, CMC Magnetics, Prodisc) find that their newly-released media codes are unsupported by Pioneer (or not supported at their rated speeds) for long periods of time after their release.

If the Korean and Taiwanese drive manufacturers can go out of their way to support Japanese media as soon as it is released, why can’t Japanese manufacturers do the same with Taiwanese media?

Good media support is just one of the reasons why I currently recommend BenQ DVD Writers.

Just my $0.02 worth.


How can you blame Pioneer? Most of that second tier bullsh*t isn’t worth the plastic it’s wrapped in anyway! Out of the box (without all the mods and hacked firmware), Pioneer drives are arguably the BEST writers. You don’t put regular unleaded in a Porsche, do you? Use the best media, get the best results. I still fail to see why someone would tweak their drive’s write strat for crap media (besides the fact that some of the grade A media may not be available to them). If it’s just trying to be cheap, then you reap what you sow…

Comparing media from different manufacturers is different from comparing 91RON and 98RON petrol. For starters, any manufacturer is capable of producing first-class media whereas 91RON and 98RON petrol standards are quite well defined. I also think that Pioneer is being anti-competitive by not supporting media that’s manufacturered by any company less than a first-tier Japanese company. Let’s face it - whether you like it or not, Pioneer’s current DVD writers have poorer media support than most other drives on the market. Even LiteON who are well known for their media-picky DVD writers are improving their DVD media compatibility and write quality on their latest drive (the SOHW-1693S) - and they’re willing to support new media as it is released - not two years after!


Media codes are not fake. There’s no central authority of MIDs, they aren’t trademarked, nor does it fall under copyright law. MIDs are simply a convenient way of telling the manufacturer which writing strategy to use, which is generally dependent on the dye type & manufacturing tolerances.
The fact is, all the big manufacturers just created their own MIDs in the absence of a standards body. Obviously, it’s easier for you if MIDs are consistently correlated to manufacturers, but it’s by no means “faking” when somebody uses another’s media code.
Here’s an idea: try looking at the packaging! You’ll find pretty quickly that YUDEN000T02 is only Taiyo Yuden if the package says “Made In Japan.” Others are equally easy to figure out, you don’t even need to see the serial 95% of the time.
If you’re not clever enough to figure it out, then maybe you deserve the crap media you buy.

I’m kinda with riggits on this one. For us, we are knowledgable enough to know how to recognize discs actually made by the Japanese manufacturers (and lets be honest, those are pretty much the only media codes being borrowed). For the common user who doesn’t know anything about media codes, how does it hurt them?