NEC AD-7170A + Verbatim MKM 003 DVD+R DL = terrible results?

Hi, I’m sorry if this wasn’t supposed to be posted here, but i figured that I’m a newbie and odds are this is a dumb question :stuck_out_tongue:

I just bought some DVD+R DL’s from the CDfreaks webshop, they are Verbatim’s with MID ( ? ) MKM 003.

I just burned 3 DVD’s (thought the first one was just crappy) and they all end up in lousy quality…
The discs were burnt at 8x and one at 6x, but this didn’t really matter.

Reading them at 5x instead of max made a small improvement, but 50% is waay to low as far as i know…

I added some screens from driveSpeed so you know what i mean.

I also updated the firmware to the latest version, i havent burned a new disc with this new firmware yet, i’m a bit hesitant to use up another disc if someone says it’s not gonna matter…

I’m new to the whole Dual Layer stuff, and my 7170 always did a perfect job on my single layer discs… with quality numbers always being mid-90’s (Plextor Taiyo Yuden T03’s and Verbatim MCC …)

Does anyone here know if i’m doing something wrong or whatever else can cause this?

Try burning with ImgBurn at 4x.

I burn them at x4 in my 20A4P or my 116D and the results are very good, only thing I can take a guess at it either your 7170A doesn’t burn those DL that well or the drives not that great for scanning in which case the results won’t looks so good. I can only take a guess on this as I don’t have a 7170A, maybe someone who has can give a better answer.

Agree with Kerry, slow down your burn for DL and use ImgBurn

Just downloaded IMGBurn. I’m now burning another one at 5x. (misread the 4x you said for a 5x, whoops)

I’ll see what this ends up like! What is/are the best way(s) to check a disc for quality? The DriveSpeed test i already did? Or are there other options?

edit: btw, these discs are designed to be burned at 8x, so i’m not overspeeding anything :slight_smile:

Somehow i cannot edit my previous post… well here goes then!

Burned at 5x with IMGBurn. Then scanned with DriveSpeed at maximum, though it never went above 4x for some weird reason… (i dont know)

still lots of errors :confused: is this the quality i can expect from dual layer discs?

scanned with 8ECC option (standard)

this is the 4th disc already :frowning: costing me money… how hard can it be to burn a dual layer disc? :s


In my experience, using the Optiarc AD-5170/7170/7173 series drives for DVD scanning is a waste of time, because these drives are generally very untrustworthy DVD scanners. I’ve had several and none of them was usable for this task.

They are good for performing Transfer Rate Test (benchmark tab in CDSpeed/DiscSpeed).

[QUOTE=DrageMester;2212345]In my experience, using the Optiarc AD-5170/7170/7173 series drives for DVD scanning is a waste of time, because these drives are generally very untrustworthy DVD scanners. I’ve had several and none of them was usable for this task.

They are good for performing Transfer Rate Test (benchmark tab in CDSpeed/DiscSpeed).[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the reply, I tested the IMGBurn disc and one of the Nerco burned discs in the TRT, results included.

Since I need the discs for (pretty long-term) data storage, would you use these for the long-term storage purpose when seeing above scan results and below TRT results?

The strange looking TRT graph is (as the name implies) the disc that was burned by IMGBurn, somehow the speed is all wacky.

I also included an image from a scan from a single layer DVD to make it clear that it’s only a problem with dual layers.

Thanks for the input so far!




When running the TRT was you using your pc? I find the TRT best done while not using the pc.

On the subject of long term storage I believe most will say to use SL discs for long term storage as no one quite knows how good the longevity of the DL disc is.

[QUOTE=Jedi Master Yoda;2212510]When running the TRT was you using your pc? I find the TRT best done while not using the pc.

On the subject of long term storage I believe most will say to use SL discs for long term storage as no one quite knows how good the longevity of the DL disc is.[/QUOTE]

nope, not using it. told it to test, then went to the shop for some things, was done when i came back.

Only had two torrents slowly seeding in the background, but that has never interfered with any writing activity and the torrents are on a different drive… (so no buffering problems or anything)

I think the IMGBurn TRT is like this because of booktype… it set it to dvd-rom, so i figure that’s also why it’s so slow.

I just burned yet another (6th so far…) disc with IMGBurn and i believe i set the booktype to DVD+R DL, and so far the TRT looks nice (about 25% done)

Will try a quality check afterwards.

Well, here are the results:

  • Burned with IMGBurn
  • Burned at 4x speed
  • Media: Verbatim 8x DVD+R DL
  • MID ( ? ): MKM 003
  • Booktype set as DVD+R DL

looks a bit better…until it hits the second layer… faulty media?

both 1ecc and 8ecc scans included

edit: thought i had set booktype as DVD+R DL in IMGBurn but drivespeed still reports it as DVD-Rom, I have no idea how this works :stuck_out_tongue:




[QUOTE=Jedi Master Yoda;2212510]When running the TRT was you using your pc? I find the TRT best done while not using the pc.

[B]On the subject of long term storage I believe most will say to use SL discs for long term storage [/B]as no one quite knows how good the longevity of the DL disc is.[/QUOTE]
For storage SL is the way to go.

Here’s some high quality favorites, dirt cheap compared to DL.

http://www.supermediastore.com/taiyo-yuden-silver-thermal-8x-dvd-r-media-200.html

[QUOTE=MysticEyes;2212573]For storage SL is the way to go.

Here’s some high quality favorites, dirt cheap compared to DL.

http://www.supermediastore.com/taiyo-yuden-silver-thermal-8x-dvd-r-media-200.html[/QUOTE]

thanks for the advice, any reason why those DVD-R’s are better than DVD+r’s?

I bought the dual layer’s for the storage purpose, guess i’ll use those for temporary storage or image burning now though…

I’ve been looking for other dual layer scans, and they all seriously look different from my scans, so even if i’ll probably be using SL’s for storage, I still want to know why these discs come out the way they do…

Dragemester already told you that your particular drive is not to be trusted as a quality scanner.

Get a Lite-on drive for $25 shipped and scan in it.

okay, i can find a Lite-On iHap122 and iHap322 near here, if one of those is far better i’ll save some money until i can afford it.

It’s going to take a month until i have enough money for a new drive, and i’m not exactly rich, that’s why I’d rather be sure before i spend money on a new drive…