Quality scan BS(56k warning + long post)

So I burn a MCC004 printable disc, Prodisc made, on my LG4167B @12x. All pictures are of the same one singular disc.

1st scan is an 8x one. It looks bad.

Another scan, @ 8x just incase the initial result was random. No 8x shows errors again?

Next scan is @ 4x without jitter. For some reason this liteon drive won’t do jitter tests at the moment. It was doing them fine the other day. Seems pretty much in spec and I don’t see any massive PIF errors anywhere. PIF never exceeds 2.

Scanned at 6x now to see what happens. Wow the pink really comes out in this scan.

Re-scanned @ 16x. This time PIF is fine (ignore the spike at the start, it does that because the stupid drive doesn’t spin up properly at the beginning). PI is over the top, and in a totally different spot from the 8x scans PIF spot.

So I can see that the errors always drop off after 1.5 GB. This is most likely where the 4167B has reached 12x and the RPM is dropping. But otherwise the 6x & 8x scan compared to 4x is completely retarded. Not even close to being the same.

TRT pics for ppl as well. As you can see, no probs!

I have some princos and ritek G04 and let’s just say that they reach about 20 PIF. They cause massive slowdowns in all my drives. Now this MCC004 supposedly has up to 31 PIF! This should truly be very hard to read. Yet my pioneer which is considered a fussy reader has no problems doing a TRT.

I’m going to do the final test and most important one, watch the disc! I’ll post back here when I do. It will be on my PS2, which is a far crappier reader than my standalone. I’ll tell you guys if there are any glitches at all.

Thanks for reading. Feel free to post any theories and or opinions because I have never had this happen before :confused:

Ok, and now you know why you should probably scan at 4x with that drive :p, edit: I thought that 4x was also the forum standard for this drive, but I’m not sure now. I do agree that those are some wildly varying changes from one speed to the next.

Do you happen to have a Benq drive to compare with, or any other Liteons? BTW, I do not have this drive, but my 165P6S occasionally varies greatly at 8x vs. 4x, and those situations the 4x scans tend to ‘translate’ much more closely to my Benq scans, so I generally scan at 4x in my Liteon for this reason. I scanned a DL disc in it yesterday and the 8x result was completely ridiculous, while the 4x scan was more in line with the disc’s readability and my Benq scans.

EDIT: no sorry I have no BenQ or other liteon :o

Well scoobie, some interesting things have just happened. I was watching the disc, a backup of a pride DVD I have and during the first fight it glitched a couple times! Then as the fight progressed it glitched like all hell every 10 seconds a big load of glitches would happen and it would skip ahead to different parts of the fight. Damn.

So I guess 8x was infact showing the truth here.

So anyways, I re burned, @ 12x again, same drive, same everything. This is the scan. It’s an 8x scan. Looks perfectly fine scan wise, I’ll watch the first fight over again, just to make sure it was not an encoding issue or anything like that :slight_smile:

Btw, the discs all look the same on the underside. No dye splatters or anything out of the norm.

I also looked in the Liteon thread for this drive and looks like there’s plenty of 8x scans so perhaps 8x is the forum ‘standard’ for this drive as well. I thought I saw one of the newer Liteons was using 4x as the ‘standard’ a month or so ago, maybe I’m imagining it though.

One question, have you ever noticed any sharp increases in jitter from that combination of MCC004 and LG? If you can’t get jitter testing to work with CD-DVD Speed, you can always test it with Liteon’s ‘DVD Scan’ utility. Sometimes high jitter is a cause of these sharp rises in errors.

P.S. - one handy test that you can do with CD-DVD Speed for these types of problematic discs is to do the PIE/PIF test as a scandisc test instead of the normal graph layout. The benefit of this is that it lists each of the files at the bottom and once the test has finished, you can then trace back the worst parts of the scan back to those specific file(s) and play back those specific portions of the disc to see if the player has any trouble. For example, if it lists ‘title 6’ as having the highest errors, you can then go right to that spot on the disc and test that out first.

Edit: here’s an example of what I mean, you can run the PIE/PIF test in the form of a scandisc, then scroll through to the corresponding problem titles/chapters of a disc and specifically check those on your intended playback device.

Ahhh that’s a handy tool to have.

I think you are right as well scoobie, on my verbs when writing @ 12x with the 4167B there’s a strange jitter increase. It happens on all burns and the jitter rises quite a lot for the first section of the disc. Here’s a link to one of my burns in the 4167B. http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1637010&postcount=172

The second disc I posted, which showed low errors also skipped in my PS2. It must be a jitter problem. I burned a third disc with my pioneer 111L @ 8x. Jitter is usually 8% or lower with this combination. The disc played perfectly, I watched the whole thing without a hiccup :slight_smile:

It seems that I can take one thing from this experience and that’s jitter is important, just as much as PI/PIF. As everyone can see, the second disc was burnt quite well. If you don’t include jitter scanning with a test, a skipping disc could be seen as perfect when it’s far from that. I have trust in home jitter scanning :slight_smile:

Generally don’t look too much into quality scans. On the other hand i have a few recent failing video discs with perfect TRT and bad QS where the disc fails. I know it’s an upstream discussion here but as most here know scanning is an individual thing and some have a nice working system where others have to look a little more to make things match :slight_smile:

The beginning and ending of the error increases coincide with the jitter increases, so there seems to be a clear connection between the two. Definitely sounds like a jitter issue, and as you point out the 111D burns with excellent jitter levels, I like how the 111D and my Benqs perform when it comes to jitter. I’ve been taking jitter levels seriously for a couple of years, ever since I got my first Benq that could test for it, but it tends to get overlooked by most (often for the obvious reason that some drives cannot test for it). I tend to choose my burners and burn speeds by jitter as much as anything, as it’s possible to get playback problems by jitter levels alone. Glad you found the likely problem in any event, and welcome to the dark side, you’ve now admitted one of the benefits of scanning. :eek:

[B]cd pirate:[/B]

Your scans/TRT just demonstrate the limits of standard testing on most consumer drives. Do you have a DVD-ROM drive to run the TRT on? as other recent posts show the divergence between writers & DVD-ROM drives on TRT.

I do have one, its slow with DVD writable media but this media passed fine with the TRT.

Btw, to all people telling me that home based drives + quality scanning doesn’t mean the disc will work in real world situations, I already know this and this thread was partly made to further prove this.

In this situation it seems that jitter has played a big part in how the disc works. So people who post scans that show low error rates but no jitter could have a non working disc because of higher jitter.

I have seen many H22N burns with 8.5 - 9.5% average jitter, but great quality scan results. Whereas my Pioneer 111L may have higher error rates here and there but lower jitter. The 111L seems to burn with lower jitter on a number of my discs.

I am going to look more at jitter now instead of any PI/PIF values. Not saying that PI/PIF values are completely irrelevant though.