Lite-On SHM 165P6S Scans

Here the first burns with my new Lite-On.
The First: Fujifilm DVD-R 8x burned @ 8x

The second: Ridata DVD+R 8x burned @ 8x

The 3rd: Ricoh DVD+R 16x burned @ 16x

The 4th: PrimeOn CD-R 52x burned @ 48x

Could you try scanning one or more of the DVDs above at 16x scanning speed? I’ve seen one 16x scan (MCC 004) made on a 165P6S and it was nearly identical to the 8x scan… this may be the first drive that provides reasonably reliable 16x scans [in which case it will be my first Lite-On purchase since I gave up on them two years ago].

Here is the scan.
Much different I think :confused:
I only have 12x or Max.

naw 16x scans are very unreliable.

I’ve also posted scans with this drive here:

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=161497

These are scans of the same disc at 4x and 8x



These are scans of the very same disc at 12x and 16x:



Please have a look at my DVD-RAM threat and maybe some of you could post results for DVD-RAM. I seem to have some serious problems with these.

I’m not sure that scans really apply to DVD-RAM discs.

Thank you! Yes, it is different, similarly to what other drives from BenQ and NEC exhibit. [I will stick with 8x and 12x scanning using BenQ for now.]

You really dumped Liteon because they wouldn’t scan at 16X???

Wow, and I thought I was demanding. :rolleyes:

Well the 12x scan looks quite promising, but there is are perceiveable differences between all scanning speeds. The differences between 4x and 8x are considerably smaller than between 8x and 12x though.

Um… no. What I said above was, I haven’t touched Lite-On drives for a long time… since the early 3S days (1213S, 1633S), when they were disasters at any speed above 8x (for burning). Sometime around 1673S/1693S they became palatable again, but it took an awfully long time to get there, and by then I moved on to better toys.

The 5S and 6S drives built with the new 1888 chipset seem to have potential… I am looking for a reason to try one.

I don’t know about the 165P6S in particular, but in general the difference between scanning results at different scanning speeds depends a lot on the disc being scanned, particularly on the beta and jitter values on that disc. Jitter scanning can be done with e.g. Plextor and BenQ drives and Beta scanning can be done with Plextor drives.

Some discs will scan with almost identical results at low and high speed, and others will look completely different at low and high speeds. A high jitter and/or beta at the end of a disc, which is very common when burning at 16x, will usually lead to the PIE/PIF values skyrocketting at the end of the disc when scanning at high speed.

This doesn’t mean that low speed scanning is better than high speed scanning or vice versa, it simply means that you’ll be seeing different behaviour at different speeds. This can be very helpful when you really want to determine the quality of a burn - scanning at multiple speeds instead of just a single speed!

Verbatim printable 52x CD burned at 48x:




When scanning the very same CD using KProbe there are some C2 errors reported at 48x, these vanish with lower reading speeds, BUT reading CDs below 16x makes C1 results worse, so maybe better stick to faster reading speeds.



The thick green line in the 8x CD scan is just a glitch, I repeated the scan several times. What I was meant to show with this scan is the very high number of C1 errors (total: 16733) compared to the 48x scan with a total of only 784.

Here is a new 8x scan of the same disc.