Look what a little patience will buy! Prodisc S03 at 2X.

[chas0039]

I just received a new batch of Prodisc S03s and was disappointed in the drop in scan quality. I have always gotten scans in the 30-50 range before and now I was getting 70-100. These were still OK for a 35 cent disc but you all know how that goes. We search for the TY quality with the Kmart price. My Liteon did even worse and I was all set to start looking for different burn schemes when I thought I would try a 2X burn. The first scan is 4x and the next is 2X. Both burns are Pioneer 107D with 1.18.

I think the extra few minutes is worth it.

[aanaravs]

Now THAT is a good scan. Thanks

[chas0039]

aanaravs:

Thanks, it is one of the things that make this a great hobby; a little tweaking and a little knowledge gained from other members and a scan to be proud of.

[888888]

aanaravs:

Thanks, it is one of the things that make this a great hobby; a little tweaking and a little knowledge gained from other members and a scan to be proud of.

...and a Lite-On drive.

[chas0039]

The burn was on a Pioneer 107 but you are right in one way. The main reason I got the Liteon was to do scans... and burn the occasional +R on sale.

[888888]

The burn was on a Pioneer 107 but you are right in one way. The main reason I got the Liteon was to do scans... and burn the occasional +R on sale.

That's what I meant. My Optorite burner is no good for scanning so I will never know how good my DVDRs are.

[vandakeg]

so, am I doing something wrong? Or is there a reason I can't use KBProbe w/ my Pioneer 104? I try to scan it, and it does nothing.

[888888]

so, am I doing something wrong? Or is there a reason I can't use KBProbe w/ my Pioneer 104? I try to scan it, and it does nothing.

KProbe only works with Lite-On drives as far as I know.

[maldb]

Am I missing something? Isn't the purpose of buying 4X (or higher) media is to burn it at 4X (or higher)? Why pay extra for 4X media when it won't burn well at that speed and you have to burn it at 2X? You might as well buy 2X media at a lower price if that's the only way you're going to get good burns.

[888888]

Am I missing something? Isn't the purpose of buying 4X (or higher) media is to burn it at 4X (or higher)? Why pay extra for 4X media when it won't burn well at that speed and you have to burn it at 2X? You might as well buy 2X media at a lower price if that's the only way you're going to get good burns.

A lot of 4x media (especially really cheap stuff) is more suited to 2x than 4x. Optodisc for example. Although you are buying 4x, when you buy very cheap, you should expect that it might work better at a slower speed. No, it's not right, but that is why people buy TY and Maxell.

[lordsmurf]

Am I missing something? Isn't the purpose of buying 4X (or higher) media is to burn it at 4X (or higher)? Why pay extra for 4X media when it won't burn well at that speed and you have to burn it at 2X? You might as well buy 2X media at a lower price if that's the only way you're going to get good burns.

Wobble groove is better at higher speed. Therefore slower burns (in theory, and most time in practice) should be better. Optodisc is a perfect example, as it is one disc known to suffer some sort of "dye melting" at 4x burns (it discolors, becomes useless coasters ... it's not seen at 2x burns!).

[indolikaa]

Am I missing something? Isn't the purpose of buying 4X (or higher) media is to burn it at 4X (or higher)? Why pay extra for 4X media when it won't burn well at that speed and you have to burn it at 2X? You might as well buy 2X media at a lower price if that's the only way you're going to get good burns.

Try using that logic with CD-Rs and see what happens to your 3T errors.

[hedstrosity]

does anyone actually know what the pi and pif really mean? ive found these tests to be extrememly stupid cause the numbers dont meant anything. either the sector can be read or it cant. i feel the nero scandisk is much better showing bad sectors and good sectors. its worked 100% of the time as fas as home dvd players vs scandisk. if the home player has a problem then i know it has bad sectors. not once has this not held true in 100's, 1,000's of burns. every single one of my discs is checked, and this holds true. what good are these pi and pif rates if it never really says a sector cant be read?
im curious to see the feedback this may generate

[chas0039]

does anyone actually know what the pi and pif really mean?

Here is a link that explains it more completely:

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=80545

Very simply PI errors are errors in the data and PIF errors are errors in the data that are uncorrectable. This is totally different from what you get with Nero Scandisk as I believe this show physical errors in the media itself. Many, if not all, DVDs will have PI and PIF errors and show no scandisk errors. I almost never see scandisk errors unless I have crap media or some sort of laser problem that is causing physical damage.

However the quality of the burn is measured with Kprobe. This can be see easily when you burn an RW disc on one drive and get a different scan when it burns on a different drive; same media but different quality of burn.

I would say that discscan is a gross measurement of physical errors whereas Kprobe is a fine measure of data errors.

[hedstrosity]

but what good is a fine measurement if the disc can be read 100%?
like ive said not once has a home dvd player, and scandisc been wrong.
i understand kprobe is more precise, but it does seem useless. this is all a matter of IMHO 8)

[888888]

but what good is a fine measurement if the disc can be read 100%?
like ive said not once has a home dvd player, and scandisc been wrong.
i understand kprobe is more precise, but it does seem useless. this is all a matter of IMHO 8)

Scandisc has been completely useless for me. It has many times reported a perfect scan for jumpy, pixelated, dye-issues DVDRs. It could be a useful tool but not for DVDR quality control. Which drive you have may be an issue too.

[chas0039]

but what good is a fine measurement if the disc can be read 100%?

Errors increase over time as the disc ages. The fewer errors there are to begin with the more likely the disc will remain readable as the errors increase and eventually exceed the hardware's ability to correct. Readable today does not mean readable in the future. Many posters have attested to discs gone bad over time.

[GizmoTheGremlin]

Here is my scan of new prodisc 4x discs that I got. This is burned with a Liteon 411s at 2x.



This is the first time that I've used Kprobe, but I'm guessing that this sucks. oh well, plays fine.

[aanaravs]

Yes, that is pretty bad. Try reading it at 4x instead at the maximim rate.

[GizmoTheGremlin]

I will if my wife ever gets off the other computer. In the meantime, is there any way to improve it? besides waiting for liteon to release new firmware that is?

I can't burn the discs at 1x, otherwise I would. i dont run any other programs when burning.

[chas0039]

Sorry about that scan. If it plays I would assume you are getting errors because of the high speed. I guess you are talking about S03 Prodisc? Also what is your current firmware.

[GizmoTheGremlin]

I guess you are talking about S03 Prodisc? Also what is your current firmware.

I was expecting the S03, but unfortunately I got the MCC. I'm not sure if they're better or worse cuz I've never had any S03. My firmware is FSOH. I didn't upgrade to FSOJ because it said it was only booktype setting. perhaps I'll upgrade now just to see what happens.

I did a different disc, just so that I could get more of an average. Here is the scan:



better, but not close to being level throughout. uggh!!!

[TerminalVeloCD]

The LiteON LDW-401S/411S/811S drives are known to return much higher errors in KProbe compared to other LiteON drives. I wouldn't worry about the higher number of PI/PIF - you can't compare a scan done on these first generation drives with scans done by anything else. I guarantee that if you scan a disc using an LDW-401S/411S/811S and then re-scanned the disc again using, say, an SOHW-812S, the results will be completely different - with much lower error rates returned by the SOHW-812S.

Regards,
TerminalVeloCD

[GizmoTheGremlin]

The LiteON LDW-401S/411S/811S drives are known to return much higher errors in KProbe compared to other LiteON drives.

that's odd, but a bit comforting. Thanks.

by the way, did you use the Zebra mod for that LiteOn 451@851? I thought about trying it, but I'm chicken.

[chas0039]

You might move to the FS51. That was my thought as well, but I wasn't familiar with the 411 Kprobe problems. You might want to find someone with an 812 and see what they get on a scan.

http://codeguys.rpc1.org/firmwares.html

[GizmoTheGremlin]

Ok, now up to FS51. I'm still in mid scan, but I can tell it's definately not any better. It actually looks a little worse. With that link you gave me, I was able to patch the firmware to let me burn the discs at 1x. I presume that would give a better quality burn.

I'm not too worried about it. all the discs play fine, so i'll keep on trucking. Thanks for the help, and sorry if I sort of hijacked the thread.

[GizmoTheGremlin]

Oops, I was wrong. It ended up being a little better.



Thanks Chas

I'm curious though. When I scan at lower speeds, is it more accurate? I'm scanning at 1x right now and the average PI is less than 5. I would think that's good, but I don't know what changes when you scan at slower speeds.

[chas0039]

In general, discs are harder to read at higher speeds. More errors on the disc mean more errors at higer speeds that might have been correctable at lower speeds. Kprobe is run at 4X as this is a compromise to to take less time and still get a meaningful report. Since your DVD player reads at 1X they are able to play because the error correction is working. This is what your very good PIF number is telling you.

As the earlier poster said, the 411 is not the unit to read your Kprobe scans. Although it might not be so, you might want to get the latest version of Nero CDSpeed and see how it works. Their strategy for your drive might be better. It also just might be that your drive is not adequate for use with Kprobe and the like.

[GizmoTheGremlin]

I agree. If I knew someone with a better drive I would check it out. But this is what I got.

I wonder if the 411 just can't handle well at the higher speeds, such as 4x. But at 1x it is much better.

Here is the same disc scanned at 1x:



Pretty huge difference, eh? Since this looks about like your scan, I would bet this is more likely to be accurate.

[chas0039]

I would guess you are right, especially since the PIF stays the same. This last scan is what your DVD player sees anyway. Be happy. If you are looking for something that will probably give you a reliable read as to your disk readability you might look at CDSpeed's transfer rate test. Just be sure to keep it at a low read speed.

http://www.cdspeed2000.com/go.php3?link=download.html#nerocdspeed