Which is better burn?

Hello,

I want to know the “better” media in terms of PIE and PIF.

For example, there are 2 medium here, and one has higher pie and the other has higher pif.

Which media do you choose ?

Lower PIFs is more important than lower PI (in fact, you could have PI levels ten times as high and you’d still be fine as long as the PIF levels are good). So the second scan would be the better burn, although they are both good burns.

The 2nd one, a very good burn.

Another vote for the second burn :iagree:

The bottom one, definitely!

As PIF is a far better indication of how good or bad the media was burned on your burner, the 2nd one is best (yuden000t02-00). PIE has been explained by one poster as “raw error counts” before any error correction is applied. As PIF results from errors that remain after a stage of error correction has been applied, this is why it is more important as an indication of quality.

The second is a better burn, but both should play fine.

Not trying to hijack here, but as far as PIF goes what are the values that indicate a bad burn?? What should set off red flags as far as average, maximum and totals??

Thanks…

If you are scanning on a Liteon drive, the PIF max should not exceed 4; on a BenQ the PIF max should not exceed 16. Single spike should not be a problem.

As far as totals go it is subjective. I prefer PIE totals lower than 10,000 and PIF totals close to 200. PIE totals in excess of 100,000 are a pretty clear sign of bad quality as are max levels above 100 but that too is subjective. PIF is less clear as I rarely see anything high but I walk away from any media with levels above 1000.

Other than the 4 and 16 max for PIF, all the standards listed above are arbitrary and may be different for different users.

Thanks…

I have had PIF totals ranging from 300-800 on some occassions (max was 2-3…single spike or a spike here and there) and was curious.

I wouldn’t worry about those numbers. They are just fine for many media.

:iagree: True! - (my following comments are not adressed to you, Chas :wink: ) Many users here (including me) are trying to achieve “top-notch” burns, with PIF counts under 100. Of course it’s great, but PIF total counts have in theory no relevance whatsoever in real-world, only levels are important. The theory behing scanning doesn’t support the idea that these counts have to be taken into account when judging of the potential readability of the discs.

Of course the PIF total count is quite interesting when comparing the quality of different media/firmwares/burners, to choose the best combination (lowest PIF counts, assuming all levels are in-specs), but that’s about it.

I have lots of (about 100) MCC02RG20 Verbs here, burnt in a standalone DVD recorder @1X, with PIF counts over 3000-4000 :eek: , but levels are excellent… they’re reading fine in all my drives and show no sign of degradation. :cool:

Thanks. I know I am one of those obsessed with low numbers and you are absolutely correct that the real world really is much more tolerant of high errors.

That’s partly because I know you’re among the “lucid” obsessed users, that I mentioned my post wasn’t meant for you :wink:

I’m just as obsessed as you are with ultra-low error counts, BTW. As a sport, though. It’s gratifiying and funny to see scans with 1 or 2 PIFs. :bigsmile: (didn’t achieve a 0 PIF like yours :()

I’m just worried with the fact that many “obsessed” members have come to the point where they call “crap” perfectly fine burns, just because the total PIF count is over 500 or the PI levels are over 40. Then newcomers tend to think their own burns are crappy, and start complaining that their burners aren’t good and that their media is poor… I’m worried with the loss of perspective about this whole scanning thing. An example among many: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?p=1278395#post1278395