Must 001 4x at 12x, amazing quality

I paid next to nothing for this kind of media yet burns well at 12x, 99 percent of the times. Wow. :stuck_out_tongue:

I have found that quality scan is a waste of time as you would have to do speedtest anyway. It’s not very accurate and often mislead you to think it’s good media when it’s not or it’s bad media when it is not. You cannot tell if it will coaster or not. It is just for fun or for nostalgia reason, those with too much free time on their hands.

Most cheap media at 4x should burn 8x to 12x no problems. Why pay more for 8x or 16x when you can pay less, get the same quality and burn time? This media maybe 4x media that they tested fine at higher speed and then charge you premium price for it cause it’s been tested.

Now make a real disc quality test and you’ll see why buying cheap media will make you pay twice in the end.

Now the last 100 mb’s look to be problematic which might explain the lower price.

Have it your way, but don’t say this is “amazing quality” though you don’t produce scans to show it. :disagree:

I also believe a TRT is enough to sort in “keeper” and “coaster”, but not enough to judge of the burn quality of a new/unknown MID.

The fact that it burns @12X is not a proof of quality.

Furthermore, the reading curve shows a problem at the end of the disc, so this is not a good burn in my book. In the 3540A, any good disc will show a perfect reading curve up to the very end (unless you perform lots of multitasking, but if it’s the case then don’t post the resulting TRT as an example of media quality…)

i will not waste anymore time doing quality scan to impress others. beside, I have enough experience to tell from looking at transfer test unlike ya guys who spend time judging quality scan exclusively. 5x scanning taking about 14min is time consuming and does not make any economy sense. please excuse me while I go to sleep and maybe come back later when I have nothing better to do. See ya later. :slight_smile:

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Seems like you haven’t really read my last post, nor Dakhaas’ one:

A repeat my point: don’t tell this media is of good quality if you can’t produce some evidence of this, which you didn’t.

This TRT on the Nec 3540A is not perfect, far from it, so the quality of the burn is NOT good. If you really had experience with TRTs you would know this. Sorry to be a bit harsh, but I have the feeling you simply don’t know what you’re talking about.

I’m among the most eager promoters of TRTs here, I personally use TRTs, not scans, to sort out keepers/coasters. I have a background of about 600+ burns, scans and TRTs, on different drives, with about 12-13 different MIDs, and I am very confident when telling you that you are fooling yourself if you assume by looking at this TRT that the disc will play flawlessly in most drives, or have a life expectancy of more than a year or so. This is as rational as fortune telling.

I’m still waiting, as others probably are, some evidence to backup the claim you made in the title of this thread: “amazing quality”. :confused:

Wow. You guys tried to tell him. I guess ignorance is bliss----until sugarmommyst tries to play these disks sometime next year.

Yo-

Don’t you just love it when they come in here and try to make a good case for low quality media - to a whole lotta seasoned vets of the media wars - and then to say that reliable Quality Scans are not meaningful…

Oh well-

Mike

Exactly, how would we defeat such ignorance…? :wink:

I recall a post over in the Newbie forum about a guy who’s MUST 001’s were developing cloudy white spots on the data side… It’ll sure be fun to see the transfer tests after that!

Hehe, so glad you found a nice solution for your needs. Anyway you’ll have to work harder to convince anybody here! Have fun with MUHAHA 001 or whatever you’re burning when you have nothing better to do… :wink: