Poor Burns using Verbatim 8x DVD+R (MCC 003)

Okay bought some Verbatim 8x DVD+R media, with Media ID: MCC 003 -000

As I’ve been reading in these forums, this media is the second best media behind TY, so bought a 10-pack of these.

Now Burnt 2 of these thus far, and have not been getting good scan results at all…

I’ve done the ‘Quality Scans’ with a Pioneer 111D, now I know this drive isn’t accurate, but from what I’ve read it’s inaccurate (reports too high) with PIE errors but its PIF reports are actually somewhat accurate compared ot a LIteOn ? No idea the truth behind this but anyway…

CDFreaks reviewed this drive with this same media and got good results, if I remember clearly it got…PIE Max: 32, PIF Max: 2 Total: 370…something like that anyway…

This is 2 of my results, scanning with the Pioneer 111D burnt @ 8x (latest firmware)

Got 2 HDD’s set on Primary IDE, Pioneer is on Secondary IDE Alone and set as Secondary Master…and in Dma Mode 4

You kind of answered your own ‘question’, didn’t you? :stuck_out_tongue: Your drive reports PIE inaccurately, but is fairly accurate when it comes to PIFs. Your two scans show low PIFs, from that aspect they look like good burns. Don’t rely on the reported PIE as any way of judging quality with that drive.

yeah though I had antoher burn were I burnt @ 12x and had a lot higher PIF’s they were like a huge cluster around the 6 mark…thing is the beginning was fine, hardly any PIF’s then near the 2.5 GB mark it just rose to a huge cluster of PIFS…unfornutely I didnt save a screenshot of that one though.

Just wondering with the screenshots above…why is their a large collection of PIF’s at the end starting at just before the 3GB Mark?

I’ve also notice when burning @ 12x or 16x, the drive stops/slows down, the light goes off, then starts up again. (Buffer is usually around 88% or above, sometimes goes down to 75%)

I’ve just scanned a disk in my Pio 111 that I’d previously scanned in my Benq 1650. The result I’ve just achieved is remarkably similar to your scans with a steady build up in PIEs and then the dramatic jump at just before 3.0gb.

The Benq scan resulted in a PIE max of 10 against the Pio scan of 740.

Overall I’d say that you’ve got some good burns there.

Hmm yeah its just…having a huge cluster build up near the end is annoying, especially since the rest was nice lol

I guess the reason I’m concerned is I’m comparing this to the review of the Pioneer 111D

http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/270/5

a little down on the page it has it tested with the same media I’m using and if you look at the link and scroll down, you’ll see the huge difference in PIF’s.

Like I said I’ve read this drive is inaccurate when it comes too reporting PIE’s, but it’s fairly accurate in reporting PIFs

BUt yeah, on that site it shows PIF Max at 2 and TOTAL PIF = 191 with no cluster build up near the end…

There isn’t a “large collection” of PIF anywhere in those two scans. :disagree:

The graph is deceptive because each horizontal pixel equals approximately 350 ECC blocks and only the highest PIF value is shown, so what may look like a shallow but solid block of PIFs could just as easily be only 1 PIF per 350 ECC blocks, and if you look at the total PIF score it’s only a few hundred PIFs over the whole disc.

OTOH a single PIF spike with a height of 1 in the graph could be as many as 43 PIF when scanning per 8 ECC blocks as the Pioneer does, or as many as 350 PIF when scanning per 1 ECC block as LiteOn drives do.

Both PIF scans are very good in my opinion.

The elevated PIE could be a result of burning at 12x (I don’t know if the Pioneer overspeeds MCC 003 media), a result of the scanning peculiarities of the Pioneer drive, or it can be “real”.

It’s only [B]fairly[/B] accurate in reporting PIFs.

Anything with a PIF total of less than 1000 and a max of 2 or 4 (your scans) is not bad at all and nothing to worry about.

All the burns I’ve done with my 111D , now 111L, on various media have all been very acceptable when scanned on my Benq 1650, but would result in scans like yours if I used the 111 to scan.

Fair enough then…time to buy a Lite-On then me thinks and see if I can get similiar results to the Pioneer 11D in the review, which gets amazing results. It’s using the Lite-On though so yeah, maybe thats why… :stuck_out_tongue:

Another thing with your Pioneer 111D…does your drive while burning @ 12x or 16x stop (light goes off) then start up again (light comes on)?

I’ve burnt @ 16x and 12x with SONY16D1 and also @ 12x with this Verbatim media, which is only rated at 8x but gives me the option to burn @ 12x.

Well I never overspeed these days anyway.

Also I’ve converted mine to a 111L & never used the 111D 1.23 firmware.

I’ve never noticed any slowdown or stopping issues & both the read & device buffers stay well topped up. It could be that your source drive can’t keep up if the read buffer fluctuates or the burner hates the media if the device buffer fluctuates badly.

What do you use to burn and has the source HDD been defragged recently?

Presumably you have little else running whilst burning.

And what sort of spec is your PC?

I’m using Sony DVD-R (SONY16D1) burnt these at 16x and yah it stops and starts up again, Buffer lowest it goes is 75% but usually around 88% - 93%.

Using my old system for this

Specs

AMD Athlon 2200+
1GB DDR RAM
200GB WD 7200rpm HDD (Primary Master)
160GB WD 7200rpm HDD (Primary Slave)
Pioneer 11D (duh) :stuck_out_tongue: (Secondary Master)
Windows XP
Nero 6.6.0.17

As said using SONY16D1

As far as HDD not being able to keep up hmm I mean 16x is only 22MB/sec, so you would think the HDD would be able to keep up. HDD is set to ULTRA DMA Mode 5, Pioneeer, ULTRA DMA Mode 4.

As far as defragmeneting, no I havent…you think that would help ? I sohuld defrag more often but meh :stuck_out_tongue:

Well I’ve hardly got anything else running, mIRC, Opera, uTorrent, NOD32. I’ve tried it with all these applications closed anyway and still did the same thing.

I also tried with the Verbatim (8x) at 12x and it did the same thing, BUT I tried again with the Varbatim @ 12x just 30mins ago and this time it didn’t, but yeh with the SONY’s its consistenly doing it everytime @ 16x.

Could the burner be faulty? RMA? heh

Anyways yeah anything else you need to know just ask :stuck_out_tongue:

I’d defrag first off as this can have a serious impact on burning.

Okay I’ll defrag tonight, sorry for the delay in the reply :smiley:

Just purchased a LiteOn SHM-165P6S and was wondering on a few things.

If I decide to upgrade the current firmware to an updated offical firmware from LiteOn, can I downgrade to an earlier firmware version?

[Off-topic]

Yes you can! :iagree:

Well thats very comfortaing to know. :stuck_out_tongue:

Okay I did a scan with kprobe2 with my new Liteon SHM-165P6S

Date : 22/07/2006 7:29:41 PM
Model : 1-0-1-0 F:LITE-ON DVDRW SHM-165P6S MS0N
Disc : DVD+R , MCC003 [Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation]
Speed : 8x
ECC blocks sum (PI/PIF) : 8/1
Scanned range : 0 - 1969118
Sampling count : 100458
Errors : 0
PI Max : 4
PI Average : 0.06
PI Total : 930
PIF Max : 2
PIF Average : 0.00
PIF Total : 35

THat burn looks to good to be true? I mean PI TOTAL only 930?!!?


Yes, even though you only burned 3846 MB to that disc, I can’t remember seeing such a low PIE count in a LiteOn scan before - I’ve had PIE totals as low as approximately 3000 before.

You could scan the same disc with Nero CD-DVD Speed and see if you get similar results.

Yeah I thought it was a bit low but yeah PIF seem accurate enough? huge diff compared to the Pioneer showing PIFs…

Ive done other scans with kprobe just before I did that 1 with verbatim. It was with a SONY16D1 and it did show pretty ‘normal’ results with PIE total with that one…

But anyways, gonna do a scan with Nero and see if get similiar results, will post when done.

Okay here is that same scan in Nero…

Very Similiar results

I only get a 95% for this scan? I was expecting 99% lol. I noticed that it was at 99% until the first few PIF spikes and it dropped to 95%. Ive seen other scans on here with a little higher MAX and TOTAL PIFs that get 99% =/

Anyways theres the scan with Nero…

I noticed when the LiteOn was doing the scan, theres no light on the LiteOn drive


Comparing that LiteOn scan just above, I get a 95% for only
MAX PIF:2
TOTAL PIF:39
Quality Score: 95%

Compared to the top of this post with the Pioneer scan

MAX PIF:4
TOTAL PIF: 519
Quality Score: 98%

LOL, that makes no sense getting a higher quality score for a scan that has higher ‘MAX PIF’ & TOTAL PIF.

And with the LiteOn scan, you can see the jitter is greyed out, how can I display jitter ?

Thx Guys :slight_smile:

LiteOns scan more accurately (1ECC) while Pioneers and BenQs scan less accurately (8ECC) so Pio/BenQ’s PIF levels are less meaningful. However, I think that in fact this CD-DVD Speed issue makes the Liteys look like lower accuracy.
Jitter scanning with Liteys is not supported by CD-DVD Speed, so you might want to try LiteOn DVDScan.

Now this scan is really good. It looks almost like a TYG02 scan!