QScan Overreading Errors?

Recently I tried my hand at using MSCE to increase read speed using FW BSLB. I didn’t notice any benefit in burning discs (duh!), maybe even a slight decrease in Nero Quality Scans after the MSCE flash. I then used MSCE to change the write strategy for Taiyo Yuden 8X DVD+R T02 to T03 to see if I could either improve burn quality, increase burn speed without sacrificing quality, or both. My testing is too eatly to comment much, but so far the burn quality at 8X is same or decreased with the new strategy.

The images posted below represent the same TY 8X DVD+R disc scanned at 16X, 12X, and 8X, respectfully. All three scans resulted in BenQ recommending NOT to burn at that speed. Interesting that these T02’s were judged bad at 8X, the very speed I have been burning at with very good results from the same spindle. I then wondered if I were to turn off WOPC (everything else being set to default) in QSuite if that would make a difference. The difference was marginal and still resulted in a “bad” speed for the disc scanned at 12X (the fourth image). I choose 12X because there have been numerous posts of good quality burns of T02 media burned at 12X after changing the write strategy to T03 using MSCE.

My questions for this post are about QSuite’s QScan:

  1. How valid is QScan?

  2. Is it possible to change the outcome of it’s scans by manipulating other burn factors besides burn speed for a given disc such as WOPC, SolidBurn, Overspeed, Booktype.

  3. Would MSCE have any bearing on how QScan performs if you change write strategy for that disc being scanned?

Hi :slight_smile:
QScan appears to be buggy & too fierce when assessing media speed. Anything but pure BenQ f/w probably aids this.
I believe that QScan is trying to assess quality of disc without using any tweaks. Even of it’s own like SB/OS etc.
Look out for any revisions for QScan, as I’m sure they will come. But when? Who knows?

Q scan is really only good when looking at extreams.

One thing to remember is it is trying to guess the problems you will have by looking at how well the drive and disc are able to match each other for writing, WOPC goes along way to help this along.

I use Qscan to test B grade or no-name discs before I write to them BUT only so far as to see if there will be any major problems with the burning. I have a stack of Datawrite discs here that all have a MASSIVE tracking error spike at about the 3 GB that I cannot burn past 3.4GB, they excelent burns upto that point (PIF less than 4) but after that point I see a major ski slope and finally POF and then sense errors… basically trash.

In your case I would say that those discs are not totally A++++ discs BUT you should not have any problems when recording as the only errors are the tracking errors at the very end of the disc, I have seen this before and it did not cause me any errors. If the errors were all the way down the media or they peaked alot earlier than those you have shown then I would say burn it at a slow speed, if at all.

BTW, changing the media codes around in the firmware will not affect Qscan as all Qscan does is follow the pre-grove on the disc reporting the foucs and tracking corrections needed to stay on target, the lower the better.

If you read the QSuites’s help screen, it appears the software is trying to establish the quality of the manufactured disc. Since the disc is data free a quality scan can’t be done. But I think in part it measures how the predefined groove is laid out.

From what I’ve seen Qsuites’ quality assessment is on the money.

Hi :slight_smile:
More or less what I was trying to say, but to say it’s on the money is a bit OTT. That implies my 16X media MCC 004 & MCC 03 is only capable of 8X,still with risk. 8X media again MCC + & - is definately screwed even @ 4X.

The media I used was Taiyo Yuden 8X DVD+R T02. As far as I know it is Grade A. Unless someone packaged the 50 discs in an authentic appearing cakebox/spindle with authentic appearing paper insert on top of the discs, then it is not “value line” media.

This media has been burning at 8X reliably and with low PIE and PIF for the whole spindle. I have numerous Quality Scans that consistently are 97-98% scoring with Nero CD DVD Speed. I’ve not had a bad burn in the whole lot, except for my initial experiment at overspeed burning at 16X with an earlier firmware version. This is why I am perplexed at the behavior of this disc with QScan: Even at 8X, QScan reports the disc as bad.

I haven’t tried burning this disc yet. I will try it at 12X with the MSCE modified BLSB write strategy T02 -> T03 and see what the Nero Quality Scan looks like. I’ll also try a different disc/manufacturer with QScan and see if it was just the disc I selected for the test that caused the trailing errors.

Disc burned fine with low error rates.

Tried QScan with another T02 disc and had similar results.

Is it the media? I doubt that Taiyo Yuden’s quality was that poor to cause QScan to rate the disc bad for 8X writing, which is the media’s rated speed to begin with. What may be more likely is that the age of the disc (I’v had it for 9 months and who knows how long it had been sitting around before shipped to me), the quality of my BenQ 1640 (I’ve been getting 97-98% Quality Scans with these TY’s burned at 8X) and the over zealous nature of QScan.

Below is posted some new QScans of just purchased Sony 16X DVD+R Accucore, 5 pack in jewel cases, Made in Japan, and MID of Sony D21 (000) scanned at 16X, 12X and 8X respectfully. Only the 8X scan was judged as acceptable write speed.

I’m having a tough time believing that the Sony’s are better than the Taiyo Yudens at 8X, since a burn of the Sony D21 at 8X showed more PIE/PIF’s than numerous Taiyo Yuden T02’s burned at 8X.