HELP with choosing firmware for nec 3500 and benq1620

[mattyboy]

I Have purchased a whole whack of RICOHJPNR01 WHICH ARE fuji 4X, FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOOBS TO THIS, and I want to know what people who have the NEC3500 think is the best firmware for these discs and also those who have the BENQ 1620 and 1610 think it the best firmware for these drives also. I have tried many and Im not sure Im getting the best results, as these are highly rated blank dvds.

[budz]

BENQ 1620 FIRMWARE B7P9 is what I use for my BENQ 1620 drives. Use CD/DVD NERO SPEED to see what firmware will work best for you. I use RICOHJPNR01 with no problems.

[steve2713]

I've always gotten great results with RICOHJPNR01 discs on my NEC 1300, NEC 2500, and Benq 822. I burn most of them at 8x anymore with great burns, so I can speak for their quality. Although I don't have your burners so I can't suggest specific FWs, with the NEC drives I had great success with any FW I used, although I've stuck to using Herrie's FWs at this point and they burn GREAT at 8x.

[mattyboy]

how do these look?


[/url]

[Ma_Jie]

Your scan looks pretty good...see one of mine below for comparison.

You should use either B7P9 or B7T9 -- they're generally considered the best, but I see many people over @ CDFreaks are using the B7U9.

- Ma Jie

MXL RG03 @ 8x on BenQ1620 @ B7T9.

[steve2713]

Your scans don't look as good as the results I get with RICOHJPNR01, but your scans are still pretty good. BTW, do your scans at 4x if you want them to be used as comparison - that is the 'standard' and gives more accurate results than testing at higher speeds.

Here's a typical looking scan for me, this disc was burned at 8x on my Benq 822, results at 8x on my NEC 2500 are essentially identical:

[dmagic1]

Actually for the BenQ, scans of 8x is the standard. It has been found that scanning at 4x and 8x pretty much give the same results for the BenQ. This isn't true for other drives such as LiteOn.

[dmagic1]

Forgot about the topic....
You may want to checkout some modified firmware for your NEC3500 over at cdfreaks. Many, including myself, get scans this good burning these at 12x.
If your up to it you can also get a tool to modifiy your BenQ firmware to over speed media also. Thats available over at the same forum. The NEC firmware is already modded and tested for results. The BenQ firmware you will have to do yourself but many ppl have posted their results with various strats.

[mattyboy]

Ya I do have modded FW for my NEC , to remove riplock etc, and Im using B7T9 for my 1620 and B8T9 for my 1610. I just wanted to hear from owners of THOSE drives to see what FW they used with the stockpile of discs that I have so I can get the best results, but no one here has those drives I guess. The 822 and 1620 are totally different .
What speed are you all burning these fujis at? They are rated at 4x, but I can burn up to 12X with my drives.

[mattyboy]

Actually for the BenQ, scans of 8x is the standard. It has been found that scanning at 4x and 8x pretty much give the same results for the BenQ. This isn't true for other drives such as LiteOn.

thats true. At least thats what they say the standard test speed is over at cdfreaks.com (8x)

[steve2713]

You're right, I now recall that the Benq 1620 is the ONE and only exception to the 4x rule. I just thought I'd point it out as one scan is at 8x and the other is at 12x, so I figured you weren't aware of the 'standard' testing speed.

And of course I know 822 and 1620, 2500 and 3500 are different drives. I was just letting you know that I'd had no problems with this media in similar drives. The 2500 and 3500 burn most media very similar in quality, so I thought I'd point out that I'd had no issues on my 2500.

Here's an idea - ever thought of not burning 4x media at 12x if you aren't happy with the burns?........

[mattyboy]

Well whatever the reputation of the media, I have 150 of them, thats why I was asking for firmware that people had used already. This isnt a question of whether Im happy with the burns I know what speed to burn media at, I asked for people who had my drives to tell me what FW they like with the discs I bought. Not one of these points applies to your information or situation at all.

[Ma_Jie]

mattyboy: relax man.

Steve was nice enough to answer your posts, and frankly, you should be more grateful.

You're still new to this stuff, so you ought to respect what more senior members say.

- Ma Jie

P.S. Plus if you don't like what Steve said, why not DL all the FWs and do tests for yourself? Whenever one shares their own burning experience, it is never a bad thing.

[mattyboy]

Im not mad , no need to relax, if my post above seems to be harsh , then you must lead a pretty sheltered life, and Im not ungrateful , but Im not greatful either, he doesnt have the drives I have so why "answer" my question.
And Im not new to this,I have had four dvd burners at a time for the last 3 years in a row.
I asked for FWs from other who like them enough to recommend them.
"Frankly" you shouldnt jump in to save the day when there no reason too.
He doesnt have the drives I have, not even close so I dont know why he starts to get bent out of shape when I repeated my question to anyone else, so they could answer.
And to DL all the FWs and try them all would be stupid and I waste of time, thats why I wouldnt do that myself.
Thanks for the meaningful input though, it was a big help to my original question.
This is the last time I post a question like this in this forum, if this is the kind of replies Im going to get.

[steve2713]

I didn't realize I was getting 'bent out of shape', thanks for letting me know though. My apologies for sharing my experiences with this media with my NEC and Benq drives (each of which are the model before your burners, so I'd expect your results to be similar to what I've had). (matty)boy, I can see that my comments are making you upset, sorry about that.

[henry_nettles]

Steve, perhaps if we continue to politely answer his questions he'll become mad enough to go away and leave us alone.

[budz]

Steve, perhaps if we continue to politely answer his questions he'll become mad enough to go away and leave us alone.

bottom line is if the discs playback perfectly fine that's all that matters!

[mattyboy]

Steve, perhaps if we continue to politely answer his questions he'll become mad enough to go away and leave us alone.

I was never rude, and Id be amazed at this point if one of my questions was actually answered, since not one was as of yet.

[budz]

Id be amazed at this point if one of my questions was actually answered, since not one was as of yet.

First of all your scans look fine and as long as they playback ok that is all that matters. If you really want to do comparisons regarding your scans go to the NEC & BENQ FORUMS at CDFREAKS.COM. If I am not mistaken you've posted in the BENQ FORUM before and answers were given to you. If you don't like the replies from either forum then you're on your own at this point. Too much emphasis is on quality scans which in my opinion don't mean much unless the discs are not playing back correctly.

Using those RICOH 4x discs burned @8x is fine. I have no problems burning them @ 8x speed with my BENQ 1620 with firmware B7P9.

[mattyboy]

[quote="budz"]

Using those RICOH 4x discs burned @8x is fine. I have no problems burning them @ 8x speed with my BENQ 1620 with firmware B7P9.

Since you have the same drive as me ,thanks Ill stick with "P" FW. The newer ones like "U" dont seem to that popular, with the hardcore DVD crowd. "P" seems solid enough for most quality media.