Ritek bd-r dl

Xlayer 50GB 4x / RITEKDR2

Burned with Pioneer BDR-209EBK @4x

Xlayer 50GB 4x / RITEKDR2

Burned with LiteOn iHBS112 @4x

The Pioneer-burn looks like the scanner “see” data in unburned area. Reminds me of a scan with a partial written RE.

So maybe it’s not the discs fault?
Normally i burn data with Nero.
This time it was an ISO image with Imgburn.

Did the burn stopped immediately after the Layer Break? Did you stop the scan manual? If the scan shows this long max. DC 9728 and BIS 768 I would say the part of the disc was not burned or is real trash

The Pioneer stopped at layer break, the LiteOn burned till the end.

The Pioneer scan i stopped manually, LiteOn had error.

Will test the image on a RE.

OK, thought this, the Lite don´t see the end of writing area and scanned unburned part

The image is 46.61GB, but when I extract the files, it’s only 41.3GB… weird.
The burned disc shows a size of 46.61GB, too but when I look at the files, it’s again 41.3GB und I can copy all to HDD without error.
So maybe the missing 5.3GB is some dummy data, which is seen as errors in scanning?

Image of the source file or from one of your burns?

An image a friend gave me on USB stick to burn for him.

But that was not the problem… the problem was 8x scanning and a really bad quality of the disc.

Here a scan with 4x

I won´t trust this media.

How a transfer-test with the Pio would look?

Looks better than I thought

MNDA Disk 50GB Printable 8x / RITEKDR3
Made In China

Burned with Pioneer BDR-209EBK @4x

Xlayer 50GB 4x / RITEKDR2

Burned with Pioneer BDR-209EBK @4x


Xlayer 50GB 4x / RITEKDR2

Burned with Pioneer BDR-209EBK @2x


Could it be that the Lite is an awful reader for this media?

I think it’s awful media. With 8x it’s not possible to write the 2nd layer.

I mean the difference between 4x and 8x scan.

The Liteon is much more sensitive with higher read speeds than my LG, but this difference is to big.

Maybe