Kprobe settings..4x read and 8ECC..why?

I scanned 2 dvd+r burned at 8x with my Liteon 811s(no overclock)
Media is ricoh 4x dvd+r

Drive Type = DVD DUAL
Disc Type = DVD+R (Single Layer)
Disc MID = 52 49 43 4F 48 4A 50 4E (RICOHJPN)
Disc TID = 52 30 31 (R01)
Nominal Capacity = 4.38GB
Manufacturer Maybe = Ricoh Company Limited
SMART-BURN Speed Limit = 8.0X (Write)

I first read with max read speed and 1 ECC…scans looked very good

Went back when I realized the scans here are done on 4x read and 8ECC

well the repeat scan of one of discs (have not gotten around to second) was horrible…Pi of >280…max was like 575 avg was 225, po was fine,avg .2335, max was 6
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85142

I saw a thread in Liteon forum regarding this issue and the ricoh media…not sure what this means

The dvd video I burned off Nero seems to work OK in one of my stand alone DVD players…I need to check with the other one

1x 8ECC is the (someone remeber the url i do not… OC-Freak had it posted before) standard… (someone remeber the url i do not… OC-Freak had it posted before)… but slow… so on the 401s and the 411s we used 4x speed so it would be faster… but on the 811s people seem to get higher than normal results… so they have been using 2x 8ECC and it seems to give better more consistant results on the 811s and 411s and 401s but obviously slower to test …

we originaly make up the 4x 8ECC so that all our test could be compared and get an idea of the quality of media and the quality of burns the drives are producing.

you can scan at your own speed and ecc but you will not be able to compare against others

I understand I can scan at different speed but then as you say I am unable to compre results…however at least with my burner a 4x 8ECC read give very high Pi to point they are not acceptable

so I wonder if the settings for reading need to be adjusted for a Liteon dvd burner series…ie 811s should have x read speed but the 411s need why speed and the results still are comparable because the drives are different in theory

It’s alwasy been true that with media/burnes that are “mediocre”, scanning at higher speeds can often give high and/or inconsistant results. Repeated scans will give widely varying results. Lowering the scan speed elimiinates much of this trouble, but also lower error rates.
It’s important to remember that the purpose of scanning is not to compare your results with those of others, but to find the combination of drive-media-burn speed that works best in your system. To that end, it’s only important that you always use the same settings, at least untill you get to know your drive and it’s quirks. If scanning at max speed gives you results that are acceptable, then do so. Just keep in mind that with the best media and burn quality, you should see progressively higher error rates as you increase scan speed. Any deviation from that pattern usually signals a disc that is less than “ideal”. but that does not mean it’s a “bad” disc, only that it does not behave as well as it could.
There’s a lot of distance between the the very best discs and the crappy ones, and most of that is “acceptable”.

Thanks for the info but in my cases while 2x 8ECC is slightly better than 8x/max 8ECC…4x is off the wall in Pi errors…much higher

4x to max read i actually get lower error rates in Pi…Po changes slightly up…

It has been suggested by others that maybe the 811s just does not like 4x read…

If I throw out my 4x reads…The burner gives overall good results…and the discs play fine…

I guess the only issue now is whether a NEC 2500A(Pioneer A07 if turns out as good of burn quality as some suggest it will) dvd+r will last longer than Liteon 811S…otherwise I see little difference except speed of the burn

If the NEC 2500A give a more reliable burn over time yrs this maybe important for data storage etc…

yeah rdgriems has a good point! if the disc works and kprobe scans at a certain speed work better then go with it! i guess what i was trying to say is that if we all use the same settings and get the same results then we can figure out what media is consistantly better quicker than if we do it individually… but everything rdgrimes said applies too!

Look HERE . Every scan is at 4x on a 401@811 HS0P.
You see any high error rates? I too have seen what you describe, but I do not blame the drive or Kprobe for it, I blame the media.
It is very possible that the 811 has some “issue” with scanning at 4x on some types of media, but I see no evidence of that in the linked thread. It may also be the burn strategy itself, and based on the scans on the NEC, I’d say that is the strongest possibility. BUT, that would mean that the scan is indeed accurate and there is something wrong with the disc that makes it act like that at 4x.
Weird stuff, to be sure, but I always go for the simplest and most obvious explanation, which is that it’s the media, the disc itself, that’s the problem.

Edit: by that I mean that the disc is either somehow flawed, or it was burned poorly, or some combination of those 2 things.

DAMN THE DISC! :stuck_out_tongue:

:bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile:

its mainly the ricoh/ritek media taht does it too and that is mainly what is out there for dvd+r for right now!
you can get others but you have to really look for them!

Originally posted by siliconsoul
[B]DAMN THE DISC! :stuck_out_tongue:

:bigsmile: :bigsmile: :bigsmile:

its mainly the ricoh/ritek media taht does it too and that is mainly what is out there for dvd+r for right now!
you can get others but you have to really look for them! [/B]

I’ve seen a post or 2 like that on TY and a couple other types too. But since most folks are currently burning at 8x, that means Ricoh JPNR-01 gets blamed the most. It may well be the 8x burn strategy or the drive itself that’s doing it. The NEC sure doesn’t have trouble with burning it at 6x.

yeah i noticed! wish i could have a liteon dvdr cdrw dvd-rom and a nec 8x dvdr in my case! :stuck_out_tongue: have the space and the ide on a raid controller but not the $$ at the moment!

I agree not everyone is seeing the issue so it appears more of media issue then…I can accept that…so media doesnt like 4x but does better with faster speeds…very odd

siliconsoul: I agree using a std read is excellent idea and I wish I could contribute to thefindings but clearly my media/drive will not…maybe new media and I will see new findings

I was going to open a new thread about this, and then I found this one :slight_smile:
If understood well, then it is the media that is guilty of this variable scans?
Look here, these are scans OF THE SAME DISK, the only difference was the time when I made them and that I rebooted after every scan to be sure. There is quite a difference here. They are made in the LDW-811s at 4X 8ECC as I have been doing all my scans.

This is Rocoh 4X media sold as That’s write here in Norway. The disks play very well in my stand alone (KISS DP-500) and in my Pioneer 106 DVD-ROM. They pass perfect the SPEED test in CD-SPEED and DVDInfopro, also report 0 errors in these 2 tests.

So how do you explain these differences in the same disk?


2nd. scan:


3rd. scan, same disc:


Originally posted by Thorz
[B]I was going to open a new thread about this, and then I found this one :slight_smile:
If understood well, then it is the media that is guilty of this variable scans?
Look here, these are scans OF THE SAME DISK, the only difference was the time when I made them and that I rebooted after every scan to be sure. There is quite a difference here. They are made in the LDW-811s at 4X 8ECC as I have been doing all my scans.

This is Rocoh 4X media sold as That’s write here in Norway. The disks play very well in my stand alone (KISS DP-500) and in my Pioneer 106 DVD-ROM. They pass perfect the SPEED test in CD-SPEED and DVDInfopro, also report 0 errors in these 2 tests.

So how do you explain these differences in the same disk? [/B]

Actually, the scans have more in common than not Thorz. Differences of 2x are typical variation, and the differences increase as the disc quality decreases. My theory is that these discs are suffering from tracking issues, and every time it gets scanned it is tracking differently. I’m leaning towards blaming the burner for the tracking problem, but you can never ignore that the interaction between burner and media is partly the problem. Given top quality media, you will likely not see this.

Originally posted by rdgrimes
Actually, the scans have more in common than not Thorz. Differences of 2x are typical variation, and the differences increase as the disc quality decreases. My theory is that these discs are suffering from tracking issues, and every time it gets scanned it is tracking differently. I’m leaning towards blaming the burner for the tracking problem, but you can never ignore that the interaction between burner and media is partly the problem. Given top quality media, you will likely not see this.

Thanks for the explanation. The bad thing is that it is almost impossible to find the TY disks here. Memorex media is too expensive. I was thinking that Ricoh was not so bad. Anyway they play ok.
What do you include in “top quality media”?

What do you include in “top quality media”?

  1. TY
  2. Hitachi-Maxell
  3. MCC (not really “top quality” but better than Ricoh)

Originally posted by rdgrimes
1) TY
2) Hitachi-Maxell
3) MCC (not really “top quality” but better than Ricoh)

And let me guess: None of them are found in “sipndles” or “cake boxes” with 25 or more disks without cases ah? :slight_smile:

Originally posted by Thorz
And let me guess: None of them are found in “sipndles” or “cake boxes” with 25 or more disks without cases ah? :slight_smile:

MCC can be found in spindles.

TY can be found in spindles

verbatim DLP made in japan are sometimes TY
but ive mostly found those as dvd-r