Very inconsistents tests, serious problem

for days I have been having a new toy, a Benq pro. I updated to B7T9 and here I show to an example of his first works (nero, Verbatim Taiwan):

All good until repeating the test to the same burn, only days later:

Now watch you this, please. It is a burn of only a few hours ago, scanned just after being burned and soon the same burn only a pair of hours later:

My question is very simple: somebody knows what means this shit??? :a :Z

Mmmmm… I do not know why the images are all meetings in the end. Anyway I believe that the subject is understood well. If anybody does not understand it, that asks to me. Thanks

The simple rule of thumb is; PI errors under 280, PI failures under 15, and NO PO failures.

the problem is not good or bad burn, the problem is WHENEVER I MAKE the TEST, the RESULT IS VERY DIFFERENT

Every disc media is different…
So the test will be different…
Drive is cold - results different…
Drive is hot - results different…
etc., etc., etc…

I repeat: they are four tests for only two discs. Four different ones are not burned, only two. I take to months verifying recordings with other apparatuses, cold discs, hot discs, square discs and round, ugly and pretty discs. In addition, as the longevity of the recordings interests much to me, I repeat tests every month or two. I am not inexperienced in this subject that gets upset by anything. For that reason I request attention in this for all the community. It is the first time that I see something thus. I have never seen a Litty showing results so different from a hours to others with the same disc. I have never seen my Aopen doing something so inconsistente. If it is a failure in my Benq, if it is a aspi corrupt or a badly a flash, I will fix it. But if thus it is the normal thing that it happens, then is much people losing the time doing a test after another one, that in truth it is not worth anything, or less than nothing.

The best test is will it play on my set top player that is hooked to the TV. I have had discs with low PIFS and score of 97 /98 freeze frame and ones with scores of 0/45 play just fine.

I’ve had this happen to me and it turned out to be my fault.

The first pair of scans suggest a fingerprint near the edge of the disc.
The second pair of scans suggest a very slight bit of dust on the disc.

May or may not be the case - just my opinion. You could test this by cleaning the discs and then rescanning.

Neither appears to be serious as evidenced by the excellent quality scores in all four cases.

I see the problem here too.
I want more for my data backup to last (who doesn’t), and the set top won’t help much there :slight_smile:

My external EW162i doens’t support cd-speed media check very well, and no pif is shown.
I have run Qscan a few times, at the same speed on the same disk. The results were very similar, other than the whole graph being moved up a small amount. I use a viewer on the 2 pics and just flipped back and forth, and the the fact it was the same disk stood out better to me that way.

If with cd-speed they were the same, except for a spike near the end, then i would be worried about fingerprints or in a few years it could be rot or scratches I guess.

If I can’t use the tools this way, then I can delete the scans I’ve saved and free up some disk space.
Probably in 5 years I’ll be out of the red light area and into the blue so it won’t matter maybe :slight_smile:

interesting results vega22, I would suggest to keep the two disc and scan maybe every week just to see if they continue to deteriorate. Would be very interesting to find out how the scans turn out after a long time.


If it is important data buy another hard drive to back it up on, it will store for a long, long time.

Something peculiar is happening here. I did not want to put attention in the quality of the burned and either in the duration of the life of the burned ones. I wanted to put attention in the possible non consistency of the reports of errors of benq. By that reason the first example that I show says that the first reading is better than the later one and the second example shows the opposite. If we observed the examples that I have put, we can say that the burned ones are deteriorated in a moment or that the burned ones with time become from more quality =). Nevertheless, it is very interesting what it has happened, and I am glad of that we are speaking of important questions as the duration of ours backups. Already for several months we have been using this new generation of burners and is moment for studying what is happening with first burned that we did with them. I have read in some posts things that scare to anyone. All we know by experience that we needed something more consistent than only a test made just after the burn, a single time, to be sure that the film will never be freeze and that we will be able to continue seeing in the next year…