Who makes the absolute best quality CD-R media for data archival?

vbimport

#1

As I said in the subject, I’d like to know what the absolute best quality CD-R is:

[ul]
[li]Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs Gold CD-R; 74 minutes (http://www.mofi.com/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=11&idproduct=29) [/li][li]MAM-A Gold CD-R; 80 minutes (http://www.mediasupply.com/mtc80lsgos-100.html) [/li][li]Taiyo Yuden CD-R; 80 minutes (http://www.rima.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=R&Product_Code=1160&Category_Code=TY) [/li][/ul] I’m burning on a Plextor Premium with firmware 1.06. Thanks for answers…


#2

Where I work we stock the Mitsui Gold Archive disks. Part # 00040201 (Mitsui part#) but ours are 74 minute. I’ve been told and read that the 74 minutes ones would be more compatible with older burners. I’m sure you can’t go wrong with either Mitsui or Taiyo. We get weird audiophile types that come in and ask for the Mitsui. They say they can hear the difference! I try not to get involved and yet keep an open mind even with strange declarations like that. I reserve the right to snicker a little when they leave.


#3

I would say that TY is the best overall. I’ve heard that there were a line of TDK discs that were better but to my knowledge they have ceased production of that line.


#4

For the plextor it’s easy. Just Taiyo Yuden. THe plextor drive is optimised much better for this media as for the current MAM media.
But for the Tascam it becomes complicated.
If you have access and don’t care about money I would recommend Plextor’s TY over the generic TY media. Much better top cover. However if you really got weird connections then I should recommend Ceramic coated TY disc’s. The old Emtec’s made by TY are really the best disc’s I still have here. (Beating out MAM-E and KODAK GOLD MEDIA ) Shame is that EMTEC doesn’t sell these any more new ceramatic is made by MPO. (I still have some for special occasions)


#5

Yo-

Without question - the Taiyo Yuden - they and Plextor spent five years on the laser write strategy for the 716-

Mike


#6

We used the gold Mitsui discs for archival at the BBC, but there was a fair share of duff ones - around %2-3 or more!

As per a post of mine easrlier today, my Plextor premium seems worse than the 2410, and where cd’s/dvd’s are concerned, I almost always buy TY. I believe TY CD production quality has dropped, as too many of the TY cdr’s seem to have problems compared to older ones. I bought a fair amount of Plextor branded cd’s in the past - they were the best quality TY cdr’s I have used - hardly any trouble at all.


#7

Plextor gets first crack at TY media so it’s no surprise that they’re branded discs are top quality.


#8

Plextor TY cd’rs are nice still doesn’t beat the old basf/emtec’s.
Still plextor TY’s cd’rs are better as most other TY disc’s currently on the market. (verbatim pastel, printables, silever ones, Taibotech)
I also have to say that my plextor 2410 outperforms the premium specially with cheap crappy media. I would have expected better from plextor when you call a drive premium. So your not the only one who has spotted the difference.


#9

Unfortunately my trusty 2410 died a year ago - mind you, it did have a very busy life, must have burned 4000+ discs (that is NOT an exageration), and they are all gathering dust in my house.

So, I got the Premium with it’s many good reviews and special features - and I have never found it to be truly amazing. Compared to some posts, the error count using Plextools was always quite high on TY media - maybe it’s a duffer.


#10

So much misunderstanding here, without any shred of proof.

Arhival stability means that the discs lasts long, even when NOT stored optimally. Ideal would be close to 20C, relative humidity controlled, no UV or noxious gas exposure and in stable pH climate. How many of us can store our discs in an enviroment like that? Didn’t see many hands being raised…

Archival stability is not the same as “most favoured disc of forum XXX” or “disc that gives the absolute lowest read error rates on most burners after burning”.

Of the discs still available and in the production, the best archival CD-R disc is without a doubt:

MAM-A Gold on Gold Archival (rated for 300 years), tested to be the best resistant to accelerated aging (Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards, Vol 109, number 5, Sept-Oct 2004, pp. 517-524)

Be aware that it must be gold on gold Archival (300 years rated). Not gold Studio, Gold Medical or other Gold variants.

It is very resistant to UV, humidity and temp changes. Much more so than Azo or various cyanine dyes.

Of course the bonding and lacquer quality is also important, as is the reflective layer corrosion resistance.

As a combination of hese factors the MAM-A disc in questio is the best there is. It’s also very expensive. more than 1,2 dollars / piece in quantities of 100 or more (at least in Europe). Don’t know how expensive it is in Northern America.

Go ask what the people at national archives use (if/when they use cd-r).

Hint, it’s not TY.

regards,
halcyon

PS Yes TY is a good media, but cyanine is not that stable compared to properly done phthalocyanine (like MAM-A discs). Of the discs original poster mentioned, Mob-Fi and MAM-A Gold discs are probably best bets, but I’m not sure they are the same stuff that MAM-A sells as gold-on-gold Archival discs (which are, according to MAM-A, separately picked, more stringently QA checked discs out of their gold production runs).


#11

It does not matter which is the one single best brand. For archival purposes, you should be burning two copies at the very least on different types of media.


#12

I have asked this question on a digital photography forum and I got back that MAM-A were the best CD-R archival. I purchased a cake box of 100 from American-Digital for about a buck a piece (US). As everyone here will tell you, hard drive first, then optical media and back it up a couple of times. I have photos on one copy of MAM-A (too expensive to back up twice) and two copies on TY DVD+R. Of course, I need to store them in different places…


#13

Jucius_Maximus and Curious_D are so right it hurts. For anything really important: double copies, separate storage. Storage pros agree on this (if they can afford to do it).


#14

You forget 3 things here. Why MAM-A/E has had perfect results in accelerated ageing tests.
There are 3 things that are against them.
1 The fact that MAM-A/E disc’s performed much worse in real life situations.
(MAM-E silver did show ageing signs after 2 years.) Thanks to the fact that MAM-E (At least the euro stuff) seems to be inferior made. Also why are all my friend Philips TY disc’s still perfect why the old so called superior gold media from Kodak and MAM-E(Yes MAM-E so the media hasn’t lasted that long) has delivered quite some bad disc’s.

2 Accelerated ageing tests are not real life. Sorry to say but there are to much flaws in the humidity only test. I could mannipulate such tests easy in a way that will tell you cheap media will life for 300+ years. Really the test is to flawed

3 The disc that performed so well in NIST was a old KODAK disc. SO it was made by KODAK not MAM-E. But it uses there dye. This comes from MAM-A own people that it was KODAK but that it used there dye and that the results for that reason were just the same. That’s crappy marketing because it has proven by know thanks to plasmon codes and other licensing technology that the end manufacturer (which was different) production quality is much more important as the dye.

So while MAM has a excellent propoganda. The real life results in my area doesn’t seem to back up the story.

Also a lot of companies (NOB(production companny for Dutch television) for instance) do use TY for archiveing.

So just back up on MAM-gold and TY if you can last. And just recheck ones a year but this one allready has been said.


#15

Thanks Dakhaas, you bring up good points. Let’s go through them one by one:

“The fact that MAM-A/E disc’s performed much worse in real life situations.”

Can you show me some references on this, I’d like to read it (honestly).

I’m especially interested on the performance of the so-called “gold on gold archival”, but other media is also of interest.

(MAM-E silver did show ageing signs after 2 years.) Thanks to the fact that MAM-E (At least the euro stuff) seems to be inferior made. Also why are all my friend Philips
TY disc’s still perfect why the old so called superior gold media from Kodak and

Yes, I’ve also had bad experience with the original (authentic) Kodak Ultima Gold discs, which started to peel of on their lable side (taking away the reflective layer as well). Probably a bonding issue, when Kodak was already outsourcing prodution to Mexico (at that time, several years ago).

2 Accelerated ageing tests are not real life. Sorry to say but there are to much flaws in the humidity only test. I could mannipulate such tests easy in a way that will tell you cheap media will life for 300+ years. Really the test is to flawed

Again, please provide reference, if you can.

I know of some of the limitations in doing Arrhenius formula (parameter estimation difficulty) and the limited scope of humidity/temp/UV tests. There are other factors that affect archival longevity (not talking about day-to-day real world use now, but archival use), namely noxiuos gases, solvents (both alcohol and grease) and pH levels. The effects of these are rarely touched, because they are hard to test for.

However, this fact doesn’t refute that if a disc does not age well in UV/humidity/temp testing, it probably isn’t the best choice for long term archival anyway (even if it has superior gas/pH/solvent resistance).

Also, it doesn’t remove the fact that all manufacturers have produced discs that have failed. I have used for example the otherwise very good (not for sale anymore) Basf Cemtec Ceram Guard (mfg: TY) which have failed almost right after a burn.

Anecdotes do not make good statistics though.

3 The disc that performed so well in NIST was a old KODAK disc. SO it was made by KODAK not MAM-E. But it uses there dye. This comes from MAM-A own people that it was KODAK but that it used there dye and that the results for that reason were just the same.

That’s interesting. Can you provide more information on this. A reference perhaps?

AFAIK, some of the old Kodak Japan discs were Formazan dye based, not phthalocyanine based (like MAM-A discs are).

I have been getting information from two sources that the cd-r disc in the NIST study was in fact MAM-A production.

It would be interesting if we found out it was made by Kodak (or some cheaper/lesser quality company that did production for Kodak when Kodak still was in the cd-r business, but had already started diminishing their own production).

It would also be interesting, because AFAIR Kodak stopped production of it’s own CD-R discs years ago. This would mean that the disc in the test was at least several years old (counting from manufacture). Again, this slightly speaks against the usable self-life of non-burned cd-r discs, but in a good way. The disc, if truly a Kodak production run, did better than any other, even though it was “old stock” so to speak.

That’s crappy marketing because it has proven by know thanks to plasmon codes and other licensing technology that the end manufacturer (which was different) production quality is much more important as the dye.

This is again true: production (bonding/sputtering quality) do matter A LOT. However, even with superior bonding, some dyes just will not tolerate aging as well as others, at least under accelerated aging.

However, accelerated aging results are the best we have, at least until another 30-70 years has passed and we have actual real-world results.

So while MAM has a excellent propoganda. The real life results in my area doesn’t seem to back up the story.

Heh, the propaganda argument may be true. However, archival specialists (people who’s main job is archival, not production) tend to rely on MAM-A archival discs these days. At least on the anglo market that I’ve tried to become familiar with.

Also, let’s not mix NIST studies with propaganda. Manufacturer results are always suspect (at least to me) from the get-go. I’ve seen such silly claims from almost everyone (e.g. Kodak, Mitsui, Ricoh, MKM/Vebatim, etc.)

Also a lot of companies (NOB(production companny for Dutch television) for instance) do use TY for archiveing.

Never heard of anybody using TY for archival in the archival field, but it’s nice to know some production companies are doing that.

Do you know what kind of data/selection criteria they used to make their desicion and why they ended up with TY?

Again, please understand that I’m not here to argue, but to learn.

However, I want proof as argumentation support and will provide it myself as much as I can.

I really wish we all had at least one really good disc that was available, inexpensive enough to use and really guaranteed to last.

However that doesn’t seem to be the case. Still, independent and scientific tests seem to point out that certain manufacturer produced phthalocyanine/gold reflective discs are the best bet we have for longer/stable archival on cd-r discs at this moment.

Now, let’s just try to find out who actually produces these discs and under what name are they sold under.

cheers,
halcyon


#16

Emtec brand provide “Carbon” and “Gold” media

http://www.emtec-group.com/page.asp?idRub=2&idSousRub=15&idSSRub=18
http://www.emtec-group.com/page.asp?idRub=2&idSousRub=15&idSSRub=19


#17

Thanks Mister-T. I wonder if the new formulations are still TY? Emtec was sold to Imation (in 2003, AFAIR). Some of their old discs used to be manufactured by MBI, afair again.


#18

Emtec and Hispace media are made by MPO, I trust them they are really made in france ! (for cd-r and dvd+r)

http://www.emtec-international.com/page.asp?idRub=2&idSousRub=15&idSSRub=25

“MPO Media is not a mass manufacturer, we concentrate on producing high-end quality of recordable optical media products for professional and private uses.”


#19

i have to say for a quality and price ratio it has to be verbatim.


#20

Quick question: Under what brands, if any, are Ty CD-r’s sold under? Or is the only way to get them by internet order?

Thanks,
-Behr