Poor Scan

vbimport

#1

What do you make of these scans,
disk was burnt at 8* on a benq 1620


#2

The scan looks pretty bad. The 1620 scan shows 51,496 PIF’s (that’s a LOT - I like this number to be below 2000), peaking to a maximum of 29 (on a 1620, PIF maximum below 16 is considered to be in the safe zone) .

Even worse, the AOpen scan shows a “PO Failures” count of 786. Any count other than zero in here is a fair indicator of a coaster.

I notice that you’re running an older firmware B7P9. The latest is B7T9, and I’ve heard that there’s been work done in B7T9 specific to improving the quality of CMC Mag disks. So if you haven’t yet tried out B7T9, it might be worth your while.


#3

If flashing to B7T9 doesn’t fix it you could try flashing back to B7L9 using the official BenQ firmware, make a burn, then flash back to B7T9 and make a burn and try again. This is a bit of a cleaning process that seems to work sometimes. But as Spartane said I’d certainly try B7T9 first and see if that corrects the issue with the CMC Mag AE1’s you have… these should burn better than that unless it is just a really bad batch of media.


#4

They’re atrocious. I’m not sure what’s causing such horrid looking scans by your drive. But, there’s definitely something not right.


#5

To my experience this media is really crap. No matter what burner or what firmware I use, I still get scans up in the blue.

See my burn on this media here.


#6

agree…

go for ricohjpn02 or mcc003 media code…


#7

Two things are wrong. First don’t use ROM drives (even the AOpen) for scanning. Second, try scanning at 4X. As to CMC media, I agree. Go for something better.


#8

chas0039,

I see in your sig that you have an AOpen 1648/AAP 1.07 DVD-ROM drive. Why are the DVD-ROM drives bad for scanning? Is there some function(s) that they can’t do correctly/accurately or something along those lines? I remember reading your posts in another thread regarding the AOpen 1648/AAP. If I remember correctly, it’s a good reader/ripper and one of the fastest ones out there? How do you like yours? Thanks for any info.
:slight_smile:


#9

I don’t look at the technical details concerning what a drive should or should not be able to do. Clearly the 1648 “can” use CDSpeed to scan a disc. What I have done is compare a number of different discs by scanning them both in a 1648 and then in a Liteon to see if there was a correlation between the results. The CDSpeed author agrees that the results on the AOpen are too high but that you should still be able to use the results to see a pattern. Others feel that you should be able to take the results and divide them by 4 or 8 and see meaningful scans.

What I found was that there was no reliable correlation between the scans in the two drives. Some discs looked too good on the AOpen and some were too bad and some were sort of OK. By the way, there was a clear relationship between Kprobe and CDSpeed for the Liteon.

I am making no statements as to the meaningfulness of scans in general; I find them very useful and a very good measure of burn quality. It is also possible that there is only a problem with my drive, but I see no reason to believe this. I am just saying that scanning with ROM drives in general is unreliable and not meaningful. This makes it useless unless you check it against a burner. At that point ROM scanning is a waste of time.

As to its reading ability, I am a strong advocate. German testing has spoken of superior error correction and I, as well as others, have seen that it has very fast reading ability. I have only found one very bad quality disc I couldn’t read. In all other cases, the drive speed just slowed down to get through the errors and then returned to speed after it had passed. If it was unavailable, I would use Liteon, then Toshiba, then Benq.


#10

why does anyone need to make a burn first before flashing to another fw?
why not flashing from one fw to another without the burn process?


#11

CMC media is crap ? No way (TDK branded DVD+R):




#12

while cmcmage01 may not be ty media, i get great results on all my cmc burns. specially since these are my give away media @ $.20 a disc…

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=113166&page=7&pp=100

see post #678. as stated the totals are a little high.


#13

Off Topic:

chas0039,

Thanks for posting back about the AOpen 1648/AAP. I really appreciate it. I’m tempted to get one of these as well. I see from your sig that yours is using firmware version 1.07. Is that the firmware version you recommend for it? Thanks again. :smiley:


#14

Its the first time I scanned a disk,the reason I did was because the burned surface didnt look right(it looked kinda patchy) and I wasnt sure how to interpret the results,all I knew was a quality score of zero couldnt be good.
The scan on the aopen was going pretty much the same as the benq scan until about 3\4 of the way thru then read speed dropped from 16* to 3.33* and quality jumped to zero,
The first thing I did was to update the firmware but havent had a chance to try it yet,
will post when I do,
also disk was burned OTF so think I’ll try a slower speed next time,
is there a link someone can post to both good and bad media for this drive


#15

Most CMC media is generally crap and not reliable, particulary CMC MAG AE1. There have been quite a few of people getting decent burns with the mid you are using, E01. I’m not convinced of it’s staying power though… :wink:


#16

CMC media has the greatest quality deviation of all media types … it ranges from excellent “A-Grade” to horrible “E-Grade”.

IMO, this is due to CMC literally selling every single piece of produced media (even the ones produced on worn-out stampers/machinery and the ones being produced during production cycle startup/shutdown) to different manufacturers. TDK (with its huge reputation as a quality media manufacturer) will surely buy A-Grade CMC … and the customer will surely pay for it.

As for your scan … it indeed is terrible and I seriously doubt that a lower writing speed will give you better results …


#17

Try this: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=113166

It probably has mostly good media, but read through it (29 pages long as of right now). You’ll definitely get an idea of what media types work best with which particular firmware version. Use only media that appears to get good scan results. Stay away from “crappy” media with your BenQ DW1620; or any other DVD burner out there for that matter. I never like to use junk media. You get what you pay for. :smiley:


#18

Heres the results with the new f/ware,looks way better
still had to burn at 8* tho could only select 2.4 ,4,8,or 12*

@ spartane what should the PIe and jitter read




#19

It looks like the new firmware helped out. But, the PIEs Total and PIFs Total values are still kind of high. Your PIE Maximum value shouldn’t exceed 280. Your Jitter Average value should be below 10% (both are). Those are good values to stay within. This may be the best possible for this “crappy” media with your drive.


#20

Recan @ 8X…