Which is better?

vbimport

#1

I hope that I have correctly attached 2 CD Speed scans.

Which disk is giving the better result ? The verbatim shows much lower PI Errors but higher PI failures. Also I don’t like the way the PI errors increase dramatically towards the end with the Sony.

Both disks play fine.

So is it a case of if a disk has less than say 100 PI Errors, no more than 16 PI Failures, zero PO failures then it is good enough ?


#2

PI Failures have more infuence on playback issues as PI Errors.
So Disk 1 is a better burn. FI Failures are errors that could not be corrected by the reader. If you use the search option in this forum you can read an learn all about it.
Less PI Failures is better, the best thing is when the don’t go higher as 4, with exceptions of some spikes. Also clusterd PI Failures can have bad influences.
So disk 1 is a good decent burn.


#3

You could try going back to B7P9 fw, the MCC 003 should burn better than this. But it could just be a fluke; it is still well within limits for a good burn with this score.


#4

I agree with Xterminator about the MCC 003. I use that media type almost every day with B7P9 firmware and I usually get better scores/results than your post above. It’s up to you. Both of your scans are good and the first one (Sony) is better between the two. The reason why was very well stated by cor808.


#5

Thanks cor808, Xterminator, and socrates007 for your replies.

I have gone back to B7P9 - scan attached.

I have checked earlier scans for verbatim disks and as suggested they were better. It may be that the batch I’m using now are not so good ?


#6

I think the Sony D11 and the MCC 003 discs both look very similar in terms of quality.

CDSpeed reports a quality score of 97% for the Sony D11 and 95% for the MCC 003 - very similar scores, based totally upon the maximum value of the PIF’s. The Sony D11 PIF total is a very low 343, which I feel is EXCELLENT, but the MCC 003 is still VERY GOOD with a PIF total of only 1443 (I like this number to be below 2000). Both discs are VERY acceptable in terms of PIF’s (generally considered to be the most important indicator).

However, the Sony D11 PIE total is a bit higher than I like at 201,965 (I prefer this number to be under 100,000). In contrast, the MCC 003 PIE total is EXCELLENT with only 5986 errors. Although good PIF values are significantly more important than PIE values, PIE values should still be considered. Since the MCC 003 PIE total is more than thirty times less than the Sony D11, and since the PIE max for the MCC 003 is more than five times less (7 vs 38), I’d probably choose the MCC 003 discs if I had to pick one type over the other.

As far as choosing an older firmware (B7P9) over a newer firmware (B7T9), I’d advise a very slight bit of caution. To me, both of your MCC 003 scans look identical (I don’t feel that the 95% versus 97% quality score difference is significant). Note that firmware bugs are generally corrected by the firmware engineers in the more recent firmware releases, as they are discovered. By running an older firmware, even if it appears to scan slightly better, I feel that you are running an unnecessary (but perhaps very small) risk. There have been several reports that movies written with B7T9 will play better (despite the very slightly worse quality scans) than the B7P9 firmware. Personally, I’d only revert to an older firmware if the media scans for the discs that I burn look SIGNIFICANTLY worse than those with the more recent firmware.

So is it a case of if a disk has less than say 100 PI Errors, no more than 16 PI Failures, zero PO failures then it is good enough ?

In general, I’d say that’s a fair assessment.


#7

Spartane:“Note that firmware bugs are generally corrected by the firmware engineers in the more recent firmware releases, as they are discovered.”
Not allways, they can bring new feature(new disk XXXX), what can increase number of bugs and in process they can broke some existing write strategy.
This all: PC, software, OS - what help to decide P9 or
T9. Good luck.
:stuck_out_tongue:


#8

Slim chance… Write strats that work well are generally left alone and new mid’s are added. As a rule go with the update. :wink: :wink:


#9

As far as choosing an older firmware (B7P9) over a newer firmware (B7T9), I’d advise a very slight bit of caution. To me, both of your MCC 003 scans look identical (I don’t feel that the 95% versus 97% quality score difference is significant). Note that firmware bugs are generally corrected by the firmware engineers in the more recent firmware releases, as they are discovered. By running an older firmware, even if it appears to scan slightly better, I feel that you are running an unnecessary (but perhaps very small) risk. There have been several reports that movies written with B7T9 will play better (despite the very slightly worse quality scans) than the B7P9 firmware. Personally, I’d only revert to an older firmware if the media scans for the discs that I burn look SIGNIFICANTLY worse than those with the more recent firmware.

Thanks - very thorough. New question though - having changed from B7P9 to B7T9 and then back again am I doing any harm in changing again ? In other words is there any practical limit to the number of times firmware can be changed ?


#10

If you want to be safe, don’t flash unless you have to. I would be happy with a 97% score and not let others make me feel bad about it.


#11

No.


#12

This is very good advice in my opinion. There’s nothing wrong with a score of 97. That’s a very good score. I just like B7P9 because it gives good results for all of the media types I have been using. Also, it makes my BenQ DW1620 read really well. I don’t want to change my firmware again unless I see really positive benfits that I would be missing out on. If such becomes the case in the future, then I will change my firmware; but not until then.