Taiyo Yuden has gone from best media to slowly becoming crap media!

I don’t know if I am alone here but I’m sure I’m not - Has anybody noticed the degrading quality in Taiyo Yuden discs lately ? I am a volume user and I have tested and used them in everything from LITEONS, to NECs, to PIONEERS, and anything you can think - the biggest change I see is the growing error rate ! About 2 years ago when I used TY I would rarely get anything over 100 PIF total (and that was the worst), now on my DVD+R 8x or DVD+R 16x, no matter what speed burnt, there are PIFs throughout the entire disc and the total exceeding 1000 with an occasional spike above 4 ! and PIE 10 times as high - Also noticed they’ve placed a metal ring in the middle, and appears that there is no more of that overflowing of the glue on the edge, BUT the discs are absolute crap now - I have done some tests to measure error rates months later, stored in controled conditions and see error rates climbing at an alarming rate - It is embarassing but my old memorex, CMC, even RITEK have produced and still do better scans. What about professional lab testing ? Passed along a few spindles to a friend to have tested in lab and was shocked to hear that those discs FAIL the standards in terms of reflectivity and jitter ! I tried contacting Taiyo Yuden they are extremely arrogant and evasive so are the distributors suggesting I should buy elsewhere if I’m not happy.

I guess I can add Taiyo Yuden to my list of crappy media - now there is nothing left that is decent, everything is crap and unreliable even the verbatims - what’s going on ?

TY will always will be the king. Ritek better?

Also noticed they’ve placed a metal ring in the middle

Um, huh? Where are you buying these?

I just got some Yuden and they had no metal ring on the disc anywhere but if its really small I probably wont see it anyway ( too old):doh:

Hello [B]Greg[/B] :slight_smile:

You’re at provocation again, aren’t you? :bigsmile: - Made in India Verbs can be “crappy” sometimes (“crappy” as in your book based on these extremely picky PIE/PIF considerations), but MIT MCC 004 is still well alive and kicking.

As usual, I’ll say that putting too much trust in PIE/PIF scans to sort out media is kinda foolish, at least when using arbitrary “standards” like with PIF counts 500/100/150/2000/whatever. The legit purpose of scans is to compare different burning methods with the SAME media, and possibly check for degradation if the scanner is consistent enough and the tests are conducted with enough care to avoid flawed conclusions.
The rest is mostly sport, fun, black art, wishful thinking and lots of misconceptions and myths. The only thing that really matters is the actual, real-world performance of a burned disc. For example, I just love my CMC MAG E01s despite so-so scans they show sometimes, because in real-world they are absolutely trouble-free. Of course, like any CDFreak, I enjoy the look of a great PIE/PIF scan, but it’s been rather long now that I don’t consider it as the foolproof and necessary signature of great media.

Now what really interested me in your post is your re-scans of 16X Yuden media, showing an increase in errors. First, I would like to see some of the actual scans if you don’t mind. Second, I’ll ask if you observed this with -R (TYG03) as well, which would come as a suprise to me as they did rather well in C’t climatic stability tests (unlike YUDEN000T03), and because no one has reported this as yet. So any data is welcome. I’m personally not a blind TY fanboy and I keep an open mind. Bring on the scans and the data.

[B]greg42:[/B]

Any possibility of posting some of these professional results? CATS or other analyzer used?

greg42: Where did you buy? What are the batch codes (are all 3 codes present)? Sounds very much like fake media to me.

Greg42 - I know plenty of people have just asked you a ton of questions, may I also lol?

First of all - Are you saying that you burnt a number of TY discs - scanned them, after a period of time you scanned them again and found considerable rises in errors? Or have you just found that TY you are using now burns with more errors than your previous older batches, which may have burnt with much lower errors? Or are you saying both, that the old TY is better and the new TY is burning with more errors, and also degrading quicker? I’m just a little bit cloudy about that.

Now as for what you said about reflectivity and jitter. You’re most likely right, TY is not the king of high reflectivity - their 16+R is also not that good for low jitter or longevity in accelerated aging tests. In fact even searching the forums you’ll see plenty of T02/3 burns with over 9% jitter averages. Despite low errors, jitter is high, which IMO is not impressive.

I’m not a TY fanboy at all. I don’t try to bash them either. But I do think plenty of people on this forum and many other forums throughout the world have absolutely zero clue about how overrated TY actually is. TY are praised for these home based tests which they score well on. Far too many people think that’s all there is to it and that’s the end of the story.

Just like Francksoy I’ve found other media, like CMC MAG E01 to be superior to ALL TY discs. Even T02 IMO. Looking at professional tests, the E01 sometimes doesn’t do that great for low errors but one thing it does do very well at is reflectivity. I’ve seen quite a number of tests and almost every disc scores with OVER .5 for the reflectivity rating. compare that to TYG02 which is sometimes between .38-.43. In fact, I don’t even think I’ve seen a TYG02 that has reached an acceptable level of reflectivity, which is .45 or above.

RW media won’t work in playstations. They can scan well, but why don’t they work? Reflectivity of RW media is pathetically low. So that’s a good example of how important it is to have a higher reflectivity or at least one that is not far below acceptable standards.

Anyways, I’m just another opinion here which is against TY. It’s not the best media available and it shouldn’t be treated like the holy grail of blank media. I wouldn’t mind seeing some of your scans btw - before and after scans would be great :iagree:

Only discs (besides Bulqpak) i had that failed in several players were HP branded CMC discs with awesome PIF results. I have yet to see one of my TY discs fail at all (despite not so good scanning results as the HP discs) Go figure :confused:

Were they 8x CMC MAG E01? Or something older or newer?

My results are quite opposite with zero failures to play so far with all my CMC MAG E01.

Were they 8x CMC MAG E01? Or something older or newer?

A little (lot) OT :o

It’s these HP discs http://svp.co.uk/products-solo.php?pid=931. Not sure where i have the old scans so here’s a few i just did. TRT’s are fine and max qs is somewhat worse than 4x but nothing alarming. My older scans were app 100-200 PIF max but with 100 PIE avg (or such) and fair jitter. I had 3 from a 25 disc tub that froze on a few standalones - perhaps one of them played through on my own. The PIF cluster on the 112 scan is a disc imperfection - not dust. Well, i got 4 tubs back then and until today i had 3 unopened. … Perhaps i just had a little bad luck but even cheapo Ridisc treat me better :slight_smile:



EMTEC MPO GOLD - If your disc is screwed use there supperior replacement data retrieval waranty. Offcourse it has it’s price !
Maxell B.Q./PROTEK - Again expensive.

So you still got options if verbatim is not good enough. However let me say this at the price of the above media you can most times use a verbatim, TDK 8x scratchguard, 1 HP( CMC MAG E01) 8x and 1 TY disc and still be cheaper ! So if 2 out of 4 suck it’s still no problem.

But the choice is yours. There are enough options still!

Ooh that’s a tricky question.
On some drives, on some settings and with some batches. Ritek can perform better as TY!
From what I’ve seen I suggest that R05 and P16 are not bad media but that support is quite bad in some cases. Same counts for TY’s 16x stuff which isn’t also top notch supported.

AE1 treated me ok. You ever try those @ 6x in the Pioneer? Jitter is very low @ 6x. The jitter in one of your scans is a little worrying. If any other scans look like that - jitter wise, it would explain playback issues.

Sorry for the OT

Trust me - they are not fake or I would not have ordered them.

The codes are TH000021 (TH for +R and GH for -R16x)

The recent batches I noticed they placed a metal ring in the center hub on the recording surface - I will scan and post an image - it is better with that metal ring - perhaps they used that to better hold disc together - As to Franksoy - provocation ? What provocation is that ? A lot of media is crap nowadays - consistency is not as good - I have used those media codes you mention - as to PIE/PIF not relying on those - I will post some scans of earlier TY and you will see for yourself the extremely low error rate, same media, same burner, same firmware…Running some more tests and will be posting some results soon - unfortunately I don’t have access to pro scanning so I rely on a friend to get that done for me - and no it’s not CATS, it’s Datarius scanning. Old TYs batches I used had jitters as low as 7.5% and highest at 8.5%~9%. New batches have levels 10.50~11.5% There was some datarius scans posted a while ago, and the TYs were barely on the borderline and in some tests above specs. My whole point in this thread is not provaction as per your blatant and uncalled for accusation (you haven’t changed one bit Franksoy) but to wonder if anybody else has had the same problem or noticed any drop in quality control ?

I must point out that in all tests, the TRT is perfect - Rely now mostly on that - howwever the high error rates worry me and the degradation of these error rates over time worry me - and I know for a FACT this is not my own made-up stories, but TY DID have some problems with defects and bonding issues - Like I said Franksoy most people here use small quantities, I order by volume and burn thousands and of the thousands I have burnt lately ALL of them exhibited high error rates - maybe that’s just fine for PC storage, but I also hear a lot of complaints of pausing/skipping on some DVD players (I would assume that is due to the subpar reflectivity values). I still have old batches of RICOHJPN and early RITEKS and they deliver scans that are day and night in comparaison, EXCELLENT, no skips no freezes, reflectivity well within range, and so far of all my burnt RITEKS prior to 2001 and burnt RICOHJPN not one has shown degradation, PIF totals are still in the 2 digits, and the variation is tiny - when comparing Taiyo Yudens the variation was as much as DOUBLE the max PIE and totals and tripling of the PIF totals particularly at the beginning 1st quarter of the disc (hmmm, this hints bonding issues… :D) anyways.
Sorry I ever brought this up - I will post some scans.

@[B]greg42 [/B] and [B]Francksoy[/B]: Please keep a respectful tone towards each other in this thread.

Gentlemen, please go to your separate corners. There’s no need for this fight! :wink:

I produce a high volume of DVDs and I always scan them - Most of the time it will be a TRT test now. On several I do run a scan just to give me an idea overall - The PIE/PIFs are well within specs, however by TY standards they should be 10 times lower. After a period of weeks or months I re-scan the same disc master backup that scanned with average results to start with, and that now scans at alarming rises in error rates with mountains of PIF at the beginning of the disc most often or scattered to the disc! That is unusual for TY - And while some people will say that PIE/PIF scans are unreliable, well it’s strange because the SAME spots that exhibited the degradation would FREEZE on most DVD players I tested it on.

Or have you just found that TY you are using now burns with more errors than your previous older batches, which may have burnt with much lower errors? Or are you saying both, that the old TY is better and the new TY is burning with more errors, and also degrading quicker? I’m just a little bit cloudy about that.

The older batches of TY are +R 8x, they burnt with excellent results, years ago now they scan perfect too no signs of degradation. Then for a while I started seeing all of a sudden a sharp rise in the error levels of newer batches of 8x +R discs so I siwtched to 16x DVD+R, it is obvious that TY was putting more resources into 16. At first the 16x batches were horrible, but that was due to the firmware perhaps not being optimized. Then after updating and fixes from TY, the 16x batches were better, much better, then all of a sudden a sharp rise in error and I would notice by the disc itself, imperfections, etc… so now whether 8x or 16x they exhibit high errors. Note that I have 5 new 20A1P LITEONS and I am certain it is not the drive or firmware because if I take some left overs from old batches and burn them with the same drive and firmware they burn excellent !

Now as for what you said about reflectivity and jitter. You’re most likely right, TY is not the king of high reflectivity - their 16+R is also not that good for low jitter or longevity in accelerated aging tests. In fact even searching the forums you’ll see plenty of T02/3 burns with over 9% jitter averages. Despite low errors, jitter is high, which IMO is not impressive.

How come TY can get away with this ? Don’t they run quality checks on their discs ? How can they deliver to the market discs that are outside strict specs in terms of stability and reflectivity ?

What makes me mad is that they were not always like that, this happened over time, and it is obvious that they no longer have quality control or don’t maintain their equipment very well.

I don’t know what else to use - I mean keep reading crap reviews about verbs, MBI, etc, it’s hard to rely on one brand now…I did post on this forum some scans of my VALUE LINE TYs - I had ordered a few spindles of those -R 8x value line thermal printable, and they had excellent and still do burn quite well with very low jitter and error values, no signs of degadation from those…funny, they are labeled VALUE LINE and burn well at 8x and 12x !!! My preium DVD+R 16x or 8x printable to hub give crap results in comparaison. I really don’t understand.

I’m not a TY fanboy at all. I don’t try to bash them either. But I do think plenty of people on this forum and many other forums throughout the world have absolutely zero clue about how overrated TY actually is. TY are praised for these home based tests which they score well on. Far too many people think that’s all there is to it and that’s the end of the story.

TY was the best - they were consistent and had extremely low error rates and reliable media across batches, not anymore.

So what should i use then ? Most of the stuff sold locally in stores are CRAP anyways - as to stuff sold online, I dunno anymore what to go for…I’ve also read about horror stories with verbatims going bad now too.

Just like Francksoy I’ve found other media, like CMC MAG E01 to be superior to ALL TY discs. Even T02 IMO. Looking at professional tests, the E01 sometimes doesn’t do that great for low errors but one thing it does do very well at is reflectivity. I’ve seen quite a number of tests and almost every disc scores with OVER .5 for the reflectivity rating. compare that to TYG02 which is sometimes between .38-.43. In fact, I don’t even think I’ve seen a TYG02 that has reached an acceptable level of reflectivity, which is .45 or above.

You’re refering to datarius test results right ?

RW media won’t work in playstations. They can scan well, but why don’t they work? Reflectivity of RW media is pathetically low. So that’s a good example of how important it is to have a higher reflectivity or at least one that is not far below acceptable standards.

Also depends greatly on your DVD player :slight_smile: Luckily a lot of new players are relaxed and not as strict to the standards as some older DVD players. I can play ALL my Taiyo Yudens fine on my Sony DVP DVD Player, the same disc would freeze on occasion with my APEX AD1200 (a very fussy player) and it would freeze/skip at exactly the same area where I would see spikes in my scanning… My old TYs never did that. I tried different burning speeds, 16x, 8x, 12x, etc, you name it, tried different firmwares, even tried tweaking SMARTBURN settings (hypertuning, online hypertuning, etc.) same results.

Anyways, I’m just another opinion here which is against TY. It’s not the best media available and it shouldn’t be treated like the holy grail of blank media. I wouldn’t mind seeing some of your scans btw - before and after scans would be great :iagree:

I haven’t kept them all/saved them all but I would be glad to make some new as I still have plenty of old batches left - so I could compare old and new.

I am not as much concerned over the initial burn and HIGH PIF max, which is usually in the 1100-1600 PIF totals, but more concerned over the rise of individual values in short amounts of time which is steady.

I should point out that the discs are stored in controled environment where the humidity is never above 55% and room temperature is maintained in the 20~22C.

For home testing I use both KPROBE and the latest cdspeed, results are similar.

TRTs are perfect all the way I don’t recall seeing any TRT going bad, but there again a DVD reader on the PC is more tolerant than a standalone DVD player. Also the errors are those reported by the drive - so to confirm I’ve had them tested in lab and was confirmed high PIE/PIFs, even so higher than those reported by home testing software much higher…as not ALL sectors are scanned… another thing to keep in consideration, only a SAMPLING.

I wish the folks at TY could pull their foot out their ******** and address these issues instead of being a bunch of arrogant ****** and telling me that they stand by their media and how they are the best in the industry…LOL

There are no “metal rings” in TY discs. What there is is a ring inside the dye area that has no dye, so you see the reflective foil layer. This is not new, it’s always been there. It is, however, more apparent on G03 discs as the foil extends to the center hub. It enhances the quality of hub-printable discs, and makes the silver hub-printable possible. I believe you will see it on all G03 discs.

Uh? :confused: Don’t we already? :slight_smile: - if that’s because of my sentence about “provocation”, I’m sure [B]Greg[/B] knows this was friendly teasing. :wink: I think neither of us has any intention to fight with each other, we’ve worked that out long ago. :cool:

and that now scans at alarming rises in error rates with mountains of PIF at the beginning of the disc most often or scattered to the disc!
Care to post some scans? I’ve seen similar things with some (isolated) TYG20s of mine, this was already 2 years ago BTW.
How can they deliver to the market discs that are outside strict specs in terms of stability and reflectivity ?
What makes me mad is that they were not always like that
To my knowledge, they were. TYG02 has always had out-of-specs reflectivity, which is why I soon stopped using and recommending them, when I realised that their compatibility with picky players was not all that great despite amazing PIE/PIF scans. About T02 i’m not that sure about the reflectivity, though. Kinda lazy to find the data. :o

“What to use?” I’m suprised about the “crap reviews” about the Verbs… :confused: What reviews are you referring to? MCC004 Verbies, at least the MIT, are considered by many as peace-of-mind discs. I haven’t had a single disc with real-world issues among about 600 MCC004 Verbatim discs that I’ve burned during the last 18 months. Oh I’ve had minor issues with one batch of Made in India ones. My last buy of CMC-manufactured MCC004 Verbs (16 25-discs spindles, all randomly tested showing great consistency) is so good that it’s not even funny, I’m going to use these exclusively now, I even think I will live without even testing my burns anymore, until I’ve burnt all of these. :bigsmile: - I’ll certainly welcome the break. :stuck_out_tongue:

I think we have more good choices now than we had a couple of years ago. Assuming you’re right about TY, granted we have three Japanese manufacturers which used to be great but went downhill (TDK, RICOH, TY), but on the other hand CMC, Optodisc, Prodisc and Ritek have greatly improved, to the point where people like [B]cd pirate[/B] or myself consider premium CMC MAG E01 or OPTODISC00R08 as top-notch media. Maxell still makes excellent discs (Broadcast quality, Pro line) if you’re willing to pay more. And of course, Made in Taiwan Verbatim is still excellent media. (no, I don’t work for MCC lol - I’m just a very happy customer who wishes they would force MBI to get their act together.).

I wish the folks at TY could pull their foot out their ******** and address these issues instead of being a bunch of arrogant ****** and telling me that they stand by their media and how they are the best in the industry…LOL
Well, you’re certainly not the only one to have this feeling about the arrogance of TY… :bigsmile: :iagree:

I agree.
It would be great if we could see what your home kit can do and then the pro stuff (fail or not) with the same batches. That would give us some even ground to work from.

I do get some (I am working with Verb T03 right now) ~1000 mark PIF TY media, but I have no problems with that disk in any of my stuff and so far not with any others they get used in.

But as I have said many times, I do like Verb MC004 and IMO they are a very good disk for the money.