Scan differences between 411s@811s & 1633s

I notice a huge difference in PIE between these two drives. PIF is similar, though. I am attaching 3 scans. One is a Nero CD/DVD speed disc quality test on the 411s@811s. Another is the same test with the 1633s. I am also attaching a KProbe 2 scan done with the 1633s for comparison. I don’t know which one to believe. I like to believe the 1633s scan because it looks better. All of these scans are the same disc. The disc is a Fuji -R 8X Prodisc F01 that I’ve had fairly good luck with. It was burned on a Pioneer DVR-109 with F/W 8.40. I don’t need any help, but comments would be appreciated. :cool:

All 3 scans are “correct”. The moral of this story is: don’t compare scans from different drives. Obviously, your 1633 is a better reader on this particular disc, but you could just as easily find another disc that produces opposite results on the 2 drives. Most people feel that the 1633 is a more consistant reader with the full range of media types.

I appreciate the comments. That was the reason I got the 1633. All of my KProbe scans were looking so bad that I was wondering if I had a bad reader or if I was buying nothing but bad discs. PIE of 400-800 on discs that seemed to play OK was nothing unusual. Discs that are truely bad, such as most of my older BeAll discs, have similar PIE readings on both drives (1000+). I have never found a disc, however, that reads better on the 411S@811S than the 1633S. I thought it could have been the mod, so I tried to undo it without success. Oh well, burners are pretty cheap nowadays.

I disagree. The 1633 is VERY misleading. I have done very extensive tests and I also ran into much the same problems. Discs that scan GREAT with 1633 and very poor with 811S… Result, those discs would skip and freeze on 6 different types of DVD players I try it on. So I always rely on my 811S now. Now I use RITEK R02 with YUDEN02 strat and I get identical readings on both the 1633 and 811S, and they work excellent on all dvd players. The 811S might not be as tolerant to errors grant it BUT, most dvd players out there aren’t either, so to me, the 811S is a good indication.

I had the same bad readings with my 411 till i switched to a 812 and the readings dropped down to the teens from the hundreds.

Nonsense. There is a certian logic to using a reader that displays more errors over one that displays fewer, but stating that one drive is “misleading” just shows that one doesn’t know what one is testing for. ALL scans are equally “accurate”, regardless of the drive used. (unless there is some system issue causing low sample rates)

Interesting. I have found the reverse to be true. I can play DVDs on a liteon 5005, and on a Pioneer DV- 2750 and on a LG DVDC8700 BUT if I try to use DVD Decreypter, DVD shrink or copy and paste on the same DVDs with a BenQ1620 or a Plextor 716A they find faults and will not copy.

To me this says that recorders are designed to ignore faults and to play almost anything ( perhaps explaining why recorders make poorer recordings than PC burners ?) which PC burners are far more sensitive.

I agree. Anytime I have a disc that skips or pixelates on my set top player I can scan it and find a very high PIE and/or PIF at that point on the disc. This is with the 811S or the 1633S. Obviously rhe 1633S can read better because it never shows any large jumps in PIE at speed changes where as the 811S did. My DVD players are much more tolerant of errors than any of my computer drives. I’ve also found this true with most of my friends DVD players also. I don’t want to argue with anyone but these have been my experiences. This is only the reading capabilities that I am speaking of. I primarily use my Pioneers to burn with and my Lite-Ons for scanning. I used to burn +R with my Lite-On for the bit settimg capability, but since I put the 8.40 firmware in my DVR-109 it does it automatically.

Incidentaly, the reason you don’t see the 411S@811S below is rhat I have moved it to my wife’s computer. It’s still available for use, of course.

Ignore Rimmer he’s somewhat of a forum troll, well not really he’s just a bloke who talks alot of sh*e, the 811S is a poor PI/PIF tester, stick with the 1633S.

@forkndave

If the disc can play well, don’t pay too much attention on the KProbe scan.

My 1213s burns/gives very high PIE and PIF on MCC003 but it plays well on my friend’s LG.

i am convinced that the pif,s [yellow lines in cdspeed-scan] are the most importent
the 811 that i use has always high pi but low pif,s

in my case only when the pif,r are to high, multiple spikes more than 4, than the dvd dont play well

and seeing the scans on the forum ,the pifs from dvd,s scanned with more recorders , are not so different at all :eek:

I think you’re probably right. The PIF numbers are very similar with the 811 and 1633. Although if I get a high PIF spike there is usually a corresponding PIE spike. I have had discs scanned on the 811 rhat had very high PIE (~600-700) that would play fine as long as the PIF remained low.