Do I want DL or SL, -R or +R?
Here is the choice at the bottom of page (today only):
http://www.scan.co.uk/todayonly/
if its not today (:)) then:
http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Products.ASP?CatID=21&Category=Media&Thumbnails=yes
Ive never tried to use a DVD quality recording on a standalone player, I usually deal in AVIs ect.
Ive not even bought the Sh-203 yet, I saw it was recommended here but am I missing something better?
Cbf searching that site, it loads slow but you should also check out www.SVP.co.uk if you want a good online site in the UK. The UK users here report very good things from them.
Btw, yes I’ve also heard the Samsung 203 is good but I haven’t looked too far into it personally. I think there is a samsung forum here, you should take a look there, people post all their results quite frequently.
Im using that site cause thats where Im buying the burner and a new hard drive, and it loads fine for me being from the UK. 
Is there an advantage of DL over SL though cause for the same price I can get 235Gb storage (50 x 4.7) vs 85Gb (10 x 8.5)?
No advantage IMO. When I backups movies to SL they need to be compressed but I rarely see a difference in quality when using SL.
I only use DL for PS2 game backups, that’s when shrinking is not possible.
But as far as compatibility goes, SL is far better. Try get Verbatim for either DL or SL, they are very compatible media and widely available.
You mean in case of Ps2 stuff??
In the “today” link:
I wouldn’t recommend any of the +R non-LightScribe, which is the category I’d go for. Mind you I just checked the DVD-R list and wouldn’t choose any of those, either.
Onto the second link, then:
I’d either go for the 100 pack of Verbatim 16x +Rs or the 50 pack of the same.
My own older Sammy (SH-S182D) likes the Verb 16x +Rs whether they’re made in India or Taiwan, so if your 203B is anything like it, you’ll be good to go with that media.
Just my opinions, of course. Others may disagree. 
I agree 100%, it burns it at 20X with quality, what more can you ask for?
MCC004 is great for the Samsung SH203B.
No for everything. SL is more playable. Aging players can’t read DL burns, either can really fussy players. The reflectivity of DL burnt media is very low.
[OT]
Now that this is raised in the media forum and not in the Samsung forum, where I would risk lynchage for writing what I’m about to write 
, let me ask you a question: why all these raving opinions about these 203B burns reported there… I’ve parsed the scans of these high-speed burns and all the ones showing the jitter graph show [I] frankly out-of-specs jitter[/I]. 
I’m under the impression that once again, our dear CDFreaks have tunnel vision fixed on PIE/PIF figures exclusively, forgetting that ECMA standards also include a max for jitter…
[/OT]
@[B]megatron[/B]: even in the 203B, I suggest you avoid overspeeding media, even the best media, unless you’re in a rush and you neither need to keep the data on the disc for long nor need to be sure the disc will play in a wide array of drives. The reason why is in my OT point above.
Like others, I recommend 16X +R Verbatims for your burner. 
May I also recommend you to check the 203B scans thread in the Samsung forum? You can’t find more reports of 203B burns with varied media than there are in that thread…
Posted by Francksoy
where I would risk lynchage for writing what I’m about to write
They have no trees in that forum, you’ll be fine.
Take a look at the jitter on lower speed burns. Nothing to write home about there, either. But I’ll admit it’s a lifesaver when you have 20 discs worth of network backup to burn.
Agreed. For regular periodic backups, for convenience I also use higher burning speeds (@18X in LG H22N) and I don’t care that much about the higher jitter, as these discs :
No, I’m personally concerned with jitter figures only for maximum compatibility with picky standalone players, and for “archival” quality, as some studies have shown a consistent correlation between jitter figures and media stability.
The thing is, I’m simply kinda amused that almost no one seems to be worried at all by the out-of-specs jitter figures shown in these scans of >@16X burns, but merely praise the low PIE/PIF figures. A mix of habit and wishful thinking, I guess.
Also quite a few used Benq as scanner 
…
Na - i’m a little interested in taking my Plextor 810 out and replace it with a Samsung drive. I’m just not [B]that[/B] convinced yet that it’s an improvement?? The 810 is definately a medium quality burner. That goes for my Optiarc too but the Optiarc is the nicest (hi speed) reader i ever had so i’d prefer to keep that one. I have so many Pioneers and they are good for most purposes but i’d like to try something new and preferably something with outstanding write quality like my old LG 4163 (but SATA)… hmmmmm - tsk tsk - hmmmm
I agree Franck. I’ve also seen a number of people in the LG forums also, saying wow great burn etc @ a burn on a T02. Sure the PIE/PIF figures were low but the jitter averaged almost 10% throughout the entire disc. I wouldn’t consider that good at all
This viewpoint may also partially be because CDfreaks reviews do not consider Jitter or mention it, but there maybe a thread already about that somewhere 
I saw a really nice jitter reading of an LG burn earlier
It was clear from the first scans posted there that this was a problem, but the hype still goes on. 
This was back in July: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1838927&postcount=8 . I didn’t dare post it there either .
Well, sorry for having initiated the OT discussion… but I’m glad that I’m not the only one with second thoughts about the 203B and the hype surrounding it… 
From the limited reports I’ve seen, I think the 182D is the better Sammy, but for some reason there hasn’t been much hype around it. Go figure. That’s gonna be my next buy nevertheless… (the 182D, not the 203B)
…and [B]Arachne[/B] goes: [I]“you don’t say”[/I]?
there maybe a thread already about that somewhere
What? Where? Who? Why? How?