Ritek DVD+R

Does anyone know what would cause a Lite-ON drive to read a burn with these results at more than double the error rate?

BENQ

Lite-ON

Perhaps this is typical of the iHAS “c” drives… Someone mentioned something about “c” drives and poor reading on this forum.

I’ll test the media for degradation (as the original scan is from July), but I doubt that’s it. Oh well, on goes the hunt for an A,B or E drive.

I don’t use Ritek media, but what I reported above and elsewhere in the forum appears to be the same issue.

I am stuck with two new C drives that behave badly for both reading and burning.

1 Like

The question now is, is something like an SOHW-1693S good enough for the type of scan an A, B or F would do (Or a DH20A4P)? They give low PIE results like the iHAS models. But the results everyone posts here with these drives are just for bragging rights, as I imagine (and as has been indicated to me by a member here in a private chat) Lite-ON greatly underreports error rates.

From what I gather, the only meaningful scans are with BenQ drives, and only then when the jitter is below 12%.

I don’t have an SOHW-1693S, but I do have B, E and F drives and all they seem to agree more or less about the results.

Writer:Sony RDR-HX 750 (DVD-HDD-Recorder)
Firmware: ?
Media: Quvido DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 8x
Burned 2019
Scanned 2019

3 months later, and the media has definitely degraded:

PIE has almost doubled.

Hm, my oldest F16-burn is from 2007 and was 2017 still readable

I don’t know how I missed this, but this disc is a coaster when tested (read) at 16x… Is that supposed to happen?

DW1655:

The DW1620 soldiers on a little farther through the scan but also fails to complete it.

I should also state that my DW1655 is a great disappointment… At 8x P-CAV it dips repeatedly throughout a scan, and this is a known firmware bug and it is discussed extensively here. I don’t know why I went through all the trouble to refurbish it. It’s supposed to be more accurate than the DW1640 and DW1620, but who cares about accuracy if you can’t scan with it…

I need to burn a fresh disc of F16 and re-test… The problem is, the discs are decreasing in quality lower down in the spindle…

Is it readable in other drives? Readable at lower speeds?

More/less accurate ist not easy to say, I have some Benq 1640 and massive differences (>Q90 on one, POF on other 1640) on some media

Many ppl here would recommend the 1640 as the ultimate scanner, but use it atm rarely for DVD because strange behaviour. If the scan shows POFs but can be read without errors I doubt the scan results

I thought I’d check something before trying to test it on a 1640 (which I need to refurbish), like you advise.

I scanned my MCC 01RG20 which I use as a reference at 16x and it also got spikes at the end when scanned at 16X so that’s perfectly normal. Mind you, the spikes were much less severe than the F16, but that’s because the media is a lot better to begin with.

Drives probably don’t read discs at 16x throughout the whole disc as part of a subroutine in their firmware for this reason. If they did, they’d spit the disc out if they tried to towards the end of it.

Ok, I refurbished the DW1640 and ran a scan. The results were good:

So I burned another one and scanned it. The result was more than double PIE and triple PIF. So I can’t do any more objective testing since they’re obviously decreasing in quality lower down in the spindle, as mentioned previously.

However, I proceeded to re-scan the July disc again, and this time I got a different result:

Baffled, I put my reference or ‘baseline’ disc (MCC 01RG20), and scanned it with the DW1640. The scan was nearly identical to the one performed on the DW1620 in July, with the PIF and PIE spikes in virtually the same places:

My DW1640 is working fine. It does in fact read lower PIE and PIF than the DW1620. What I don’t understand is the more significant fluctuation between the same F16 disc on two different scans on the same drive. That’s a point in favour of the suggestion posted elsewhere here on this forum that F16 degrades over time. So I’ll need to do some further testing before I reach any conclusions about F16.

And if you’re wondering, a subsequent scan on the DW1640 yields the same results as the second scan:

This might sound ridiculous, but I wonder if the laser beam from the DVDRW can possibly have a healing effect on an unstable dye layer. What I propose to do is leave this media for another three months and then re-test on the DW1640 and check if the PIE. If the PIE is significantly higher than 40,000 then I can say with a great degree of certainty that F16 is at least unpredictable, if not unreliable.

I have also sometimes different results if I scan media more than one time in a row. But mostly the differences are small.

I have F16 from different brands and my experience is the media is much better than many other +R-media you can buy, at least if it´s burned recently.

Writer: LG GH24NSD6
Firmware: : LU00
Media: Edeka DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 16x
Software: Nero 7
Burned 2020
Scanned 2020

Writer: Emprex DRW 1016IM (BTC)
Firmware: A187
Media: Maxell DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 16x, but some speeddrops
Software: Nero CDSpeed 4.7.7.16
Burned 2020
Scanned 2020

Writer: Emprex DRW 1016IM (BTC)
Firmware: A187
Media: Maxell DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 4x
Software: Nero CDSpeed 4.7.7.16
Burned 2020
Scanned 2020

Not good but makes no problems

Writer: Benq 1650
Firmware: BCIC
Media: Maxell DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 4x, 16x selected
Software: Nero CDSpeed 4.7.7.16
Burned 2020
Scanned 2020

The Benq slowdown at the beginning. The end of this media seems to be problematic, here is it more worse than the Emprex-burn

Writer: LiteOn iHAS 324 F
Firmware: CL8F
Media: Maxell DVD+R 16x
MID: (RITEK F16)
Burn Speed: 4x, 16x selected
Software: Nero CDSpeed 4.7.7.16
Burned 2020
Scanned 2020

This looks awful for this media

Sold as: Maxell DVD+R 16GB
MID: Ritek F16
Burned with: LG GSA-H62N CL01
Hub Code: SEI912300700A07 (Manufactured December 30th, 2009)
Stamper Code: VR5F16-00704 PD

F16 on H62N 12x 4

If we ignore that odd PIF spike in the middle of the graph, then the results are better than average. 12x is the sweet spot for this media with this drive. I tried all other speeds, and this is the best result. Now I have no use for my Pioneer drives anymore. This was the only media it outperformed all other drives on until now.

I like some of the older drives because it using P-CAV at lower speeds instead of CAV