What might explain a big prolonged spike

… at the beginning of a CD quality check with KPROBE, with the predominant elevated error area gradually tapering off to more acceptable levels?

i just bought a whole spindleless spindle of RiTek CD-R’s and they all exhibit the phenomenon.

none of these discs (burned on my QSOE Lite-On 52327S) are acceptable when using KPROBE as a checking application.

the discs usually start off in the low 10s for c1 averages, then eventually drop down to the mid 2’s and 3’s for an avg. by disc’s end.

the discs usually start off in the low 10s for c1 averages, then eventually drop down to the mid 2’s and 3’s for an avg. by disc’s end.

What’s wrong with that? Nobody can really coment without seeing a scan.


here you go:

Manufacturer : Ritek
Code : 97m15s17f
Disc Type : CD-R
Usage : General
Recording Layer : Dye Type 7: Short Strategy (Phthalocyanine)
Recording Speed : n/a
Capacity : 79:59.70
703 MB
Additional Capacity : n/a
Overburn Capacity : not tested


Disc Type = CDR (A-)
Manufacturer = RiTEK Corporation

<< Disc Information >>
Erasable = False
Status of Last Session/Border = Complete Session/Border
Disc Status = Complete Disc
Number of First Track/RZone on Disc = 1
Number of Sessions/Borders(LSB) = 1
First Track/RZone Number in Last Session/Border(LSB) = 1
Last Track/RZone Number in Last Session/Border(LSB) = 5
Disc Identification Valid(DID_V) = False
Disc Bar Code Valid(DBC_V) = False
Unrestricted Use Disc(DRU) = False
Disc Type = CD-DA or CD-ROM Disc
Disc Identification = 00000000h
Lead-in Start Time of Last Session = 255:255:255(FF:FF:FFh)
Last Possible Start Time for Startof Lead-out = 255:255:255(FF:FF:FFh)
Disc Bar Code = 0000000000000000h
Number of OPC Table Entries = 0

<< Track Information >>
Number of Complete Sessions on Disc = 1
Session 1 :
A0 = 0:0:0
A1 = 0:0:0
A2 = 0:0:0
Track Number 1
Track Start 0:2:0
Track Number 2
Track Start 9:27:62
Track Number 3
Track Start 26:24:62
Track Number 4
Track Start 35:39:62
Track Number 5
Track Start 42:7:12

ahhh… i burned this disc (see above scan) at 32x. 40x and higher and lower than 32x give worse results. curiously, another reitek spindle i bought 1 week before gives me even better results than the fujifilm (ty) CDR’s i bought to “upgrade.” those discs give me avg. c1’s of less than 0.5.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the scanned disc, the C1 rates are way below anything that would cause trouble, and well below what a pressed CD would show.

The reason for the slope at the start is possibly due to OPC adjusting the laser during the burn.


rdgrimes, so why does the faq list stuff about no max c1 values above 20 and no avg. c1 values more than 2 to equal a “good” copy.

would you archive to this media for long-term?

i’m new… obviously. maybe paranoid. those faq specs for CDR’s scared the sh$t out of me.

Obviously it’s not as good as some other discs, but it’s not that bad. There’s no documented cases of ANY level of C1 causing read failure or lost data. The C1/C2 figures are for “preferred” levels.

Would I archive that disc? Not if I had a choice of something better, but it’s good enough to trust for a while, check it again in a year. But regardless of the quality of your discs, you should be checking them annually anyhow.

Maybe the disks are counterfeit. I have heard that happens sometimes when you buy cheap media from disreputable sources.

That is a standard result from Ritek media, and is excellent. Any quality scan without C2 errors is an excellent result. Do a transfer rate scan just to be sure, but that disc should perform about the best a CD-R can. Nothing really more to say about it.