PX-716UF disc quality test anomalies?

I recently purchased a PX-716UF (TLA #0202) that was flashed to 1.06 and is connected via USB2.

I’ve burnt 3 discs today and found that only 1 of the 3 discs produces a smooth read transfer rate graph.

All of the 3 discs seem to produce adequate SUM8, SUM1 and Beta/Jitter graphs.

Can anyone suggest why the read transfer rate graphs for 2 of the discs aren’t as smooth as the other? Could it be a problem with the drive’s reading ability?

The first block of 4 graphs is a TYG02 (DVD-R) burnt at 8x.

The second block of 4 graphs is another TYG02 burnt at 8x.

The third block of 4 graphs is a TDK TTH02 (DVD-R) burnt at 12x.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

I would agree that all three burns are within the norm and can be considered as good. I notice each total of PIF to be a little high and the the first disk shows a beta-graph that is a bit broad.

IMHO there remain two things to be checked: Is there any dirt/fingerprints/ etc. on the surface? Since the drive is connected via USB, is it sharing with other devices on the bus or was any opplication running in the backgroud that accesses the USB in any way?

All 3 discs are spotless.

My laptop has a single USB host controller and the burner does (normally) share this with two external hard drives. However, to achieve the 12x write speed on the TDK disc, I had disconnected both hard drives. The read transfer rate graphs with and without the drives connected are much the same.

Unfortunately, the laptop doesn’t have a Firewire connection so I can’t try that as a comparison. I do have a new laptop on order which does have Firewire so I may wait and see what happens when I isolate the burner on its own.

Thanks for the reply.

it’s the -R media with very dense PIE/Fs…it would help if you posted the quantitative stats (i.e. max, avg, total) for the sum8/1 scans. try a +R disc and you shouldn’t have that problem. i realize that your scans are well within spec, but if you look at the PIF scan, the blocks are very dense and i’m guessing your totals are above 2000. my totals for PIF on +R media average between 150 and 250…10X less.

i’ve noticed that with my 2 716As, when i use MCC 02RG20, MCC 03RG20 and TTG02 the PIE/F levels are much denser than when i use the equivalent +R media (i.e. MCC003, MCC004, etc.) and thus i’ve concluded that my 716s much prefer +media (and this seems to be the general consensus amongst 716 owners).

Please don’t set people’s expectations this high.

If I had to go by your standards (150 - 250 PIF) then EVERY SINGLE BURN EVER on my two burners should be considered a coaster!

A really good burn for me has <500 PIF (max 2) and an average burn has 1000-2500 PIF (max 3-4).

i don’t think i’m setting anyone’s expectations too high…i never said i considered a burn with total PIFs above 200 a coaster…not even close IMHO. i said that his drop in the Read Transfer rate graph is most likely due to the density of the PIFs as shown above. please refrain from putting words in my mouth.

Unfortunately, I didn’t keep the summary stats from the SUM1/SUM8 tests. I guess I should start saving as HTML just in case.

However, another TYG02 I have burnt since had a PIF total of about 1,750.

I’ve only ever used -R discs in the 2 years I’ve been burning. I’ll try to find some decent +R discs to try.

Thanks for your comments.

It was not my intention to imply that you INTENTIONALLY stated that a burn with more than 250 PIF should be considered a coaster. But in my opinion it is very easy for people to get the idea that there is something wrong with their burner and/or media when reading statements like “my totals for PIF on +R media average between 150 and 250” or other statements in this forum (and the BenQ forum for that matter) about sub-10 PIE max burns, 99% quality burns and so on.

I am trying to balance your experience of “average burns” with my own experiences, so that people don’t despair over not being able to achieve the levels of excellence seen in the best burns posted here.

Also in my experience, it is not always possible to find the explanation for a drop in Read Transfer rate by looking at PIE and PIF scans - no matter how dense they are, not even Beta/Jitter will necessarily give any explanation.

The Read Transfer test can be seen as a measurement in it’s own right!

agreed :slight_smile:

I don’t know if it’s at all related with the read transfer rate strangeness I was seeing last week but a couple of nights ago my drive developed problems writing to CD-R including Verbatim DataLifePlus Super AZO discs. It wouldn’t even start the write process at speeds as low as 8x.

It then would report 8x and 16x DVD-R discs as being only 4x capable.

I then performed the self test with a 8x DVD-R and it failed after a few minutes with a single blinking green light indicating a read or write error.

Just waiting for a return authority but, unfortunately, the distributor here in Australia doesn’t have any stock at the moment.