Verbatim MCC03 (Made in Taiwan)

Since discovering the Indian made disks left much to be desired, I have been searching for the ‘Made in Taiwan’ Verbatim disks for over six months.

Finally, my search came to an end yesterday evening, whilst visiting a Staples branch. I must have sifted through about 200 spindles before finding one that was not made in India.

Feeling confident a good result was only a formality, I burnt and scanned the first disk.

Perhaps, it was a fluke… First and last disks in a spindle have been known to misbehave before now. :frowning:

OK, wipe that last theory. Six disks later, various burn speeds, exact same results. Let’s try something else.

Which looks good, but doesn’t explain the previous scans. :confused:

Let’s try that ISO again with a TYG03.

Not brilliant, but not too bad. Perhaps a TYG02 might do better…

Ouch. :eek: Only just got these (batch GG000234) :frowning:

Excluding that spike, the result’s not too bad. It shouldn’t make a difference, but let’s try scanning that disk at 4X.

Similar result, but minus the massive spike. :smiley:

Just two questions.

a) Are the scans actually as bad as they look?

b) Should I scan at 4X for disks with an 8X write speed and 8X for 16X disks, etc?

Sorry, I know I said two questions, but just one last one.

c) If a disk produces a bad scan at 8X and a good one at 4X, is it safe to assume that the 4X one is more accurate?

Maybe, maybe not. It’s impossible to say really without knowing how your particular drive (not just the model) behaves when scanning.

b) Should I scan at 4X for disks with an 8X write speed and 8X for 16X disks, etc?
I would personally suggest scanning at 4x on these LH-20A1* drives, since many of them have peculiar behaviour when scanning at higher speeds. High speed scanning behaviour (12x and 16x) is also very dependant on firmware version and the same is true for reading behaviour. Scanning at 4x will mimimize the difference between scanning drives (but will also potentially mask some problems that can only be seen when using high-speed scanning or other scanning drives).

Scanning speed should not be chosen based on certified media speed or burning speed. It should be chosen in a way that gives repeatable results and results that can be compared between different media and burning speeds.

c) If a disk produces a bad scan at 8X and a good one at 4X, is it safe to assume that the 4X one is more accurate?
In general, no it’s not. With these particular drives, I’d trust the 4x scans more than 8x scans.

This is just personal opinion, but I tend to scan at 4x on my Litey LH-20A1H. 8x often gives me wacky results (not to mention the jitter reading at 8x…).

Other Liteys I have seem to behave differently at 8x, much like the 20x Litey does at 4x.

Also, the TRT is a good one :iagree:…no scan IMO is complete without a TRT to go with it :wink:

The Liteys tend to “learn” media too, so you may well find scans look prettier after 3-4 burns of one MID.

Edit: LOL, beaten by the Dragon :smiley:

Good point about TRT. :iagree:

EDIT: Although there is no TRT in the original post above - it’s a Create Disc graph.

Edit: LOL, beaten by the Dragon :smiley:
Are you into that sorta thing? :stuck_out_tongue:

Kinky! Must be the time of night :stuck_out_tongue:

LOL @ Arachne and Drage. Didn’t you know that Drage likes to whip out his furry red dragon late at night?

Ok back on topic :stuck_out_tongue: I hear the results are whacky with newer liteons @ 8x. Scan @ 4x and don’t bother for now with 8x.

Based on the scans I’ve made with my LiteOn LH-20A1H manufactured in April 2007 I definitely prefer 8x scans. They come repeatably closest to the scans of my Plextor 716. The other speeds both faster and slower are far too optimistic :slight_smile: in their error reports. Just my experience, YMMV.

Moomin

Bwahahaha :bigsmile:

Uhhhh. Blonde Moment :o :doh:

Seems that there is a noticeable regression with LiteOn drives. :frowning:

Maybe in some areas but improvements in others.

Agreed. :wink:

Can you folks be more specific? For someone who doesn’t currently own a Lite-On, like myself, would you suggest I try to hunt down a 160P6S/165P6S, or should I forget about that and just get a newfangled 20A1H/P/S?

Note, I’m a Macintosh fiend, and because of that I know Pioneer drives inside and out, plus I already own four classic BenQs, so I don’t need a burner, but I’m still fascinated and unfamiliar with the Lite-On world.

[Off-topic]

If your main objective is to get the LiteOn drive for scanning DVDs, then I suggest you get a 160P6*/165P6* if you can find it.

If you don’t care so much about scanning or it’s only a secondary objective, and you just want the best LiteOn burner for DVD burning, then the 20A1* is a better choice IMO.

Ditto what Drage said. I regret giving my 165P6S away before I had a feel for what the 20A1P is and isn’t. :frowning:

I agree too. I’m kinda glad I still have my two 1635Ss (wouldn’t get rid of those for love nor money).

I have a 165P6S, but IMO it’s not as good a burner as the 1635s’s. It shines as a scanner though.