Qscan - can I trust it?

vbimport

#1

Hi all,

yesterday I bought some media, and I wanted to check their compatibility with my drive (DW 1650). So I tried Qscan.

Media: TDK DVD-R, 1-8x, MID TYG02, should be real TY
Qscan reports, that this disk should not be used with 8x speed.
How that? I thought, TY is quality media, and several users here have managed good burns even with higher speed that specified.
On the other hand, Qscan did not complain if I would write Sony DVD+R 8x MID: Sony (rest forgotten) @12x

What do you think about the predictions made by Qscan? Shall I take them for serious in order to avoid coaster production?

Thanks in advance,
Michael


#2

If you want to know for sure then I suggest you use Nero CD/DVD Speed Version 4.11 and do a create data disc. You can then scan it and get a good idea how the rest of the spindle is going to go.


#3

I personally have had a lot of variation with the Qscan scans. I believe what it says, but I’d bet if you scanned another disc you would not get the same results. Try scanning several of the blanks.


#4

Hi,

well, I do have only few of these media and don’t want to waste them. Quality media isn’t very cheap here in Germany.

According to MrBoomy, Qscan seems to be quite reliable, so I’ll test each media with that before burning data on them.

But Thanks to both of you,
Michael


#5

I think Qscan can be reliable if you record with WOPC off. I know the Qscan does not take this into account when scanning.

If you burn with WOPC on then the limits are a bit higher so you can get away with higher speeds on media that just fails.

One thing to look at though, The graph on Qscan will give you some idea of an error rate to expect. If there is a peak in the graph at some point, when you look at the quality scan you can expect to see a peak in errors as well. If the graph is quite high then expect high (but not excessive) error rates.

I always take the final result from Qsuite with a pinch of salt, I have discs here that were failed at 2.4x but burned correctly at 8x (allbeit with a highish error rate).