KHypermedia, 50 for $9.99. Scans Inside. (CMC MAGE01)

[chas0039]

It's crap because my burners say so.

smurf- are you still burning with a Pioneer 105?? or is you profile out of date.

[chas0039]

Next, going to burn a movie @8x w/ Decrypter. Will post scans soon.

Seth

Thanks for all your work. Two questions. Is the Kprobe a scan that was burned on your 3500 at 8X? Also, have you any experience with the Khypermedia -R on sale now?

[Fandim]

KProbe

[aanaravs]

That is a pretty good kprobe scan for CMC media!

[Pudah]

Fandim,

Heh - you cant really judge media by the scans...remember this, Steve.. I havnt watched any of this burned material. I will later tonight, and post back on that tomorrow.

Why do you bother doing the scans and posting them if you believe that they can't be used to judge the media? And I'm not being a smartass. It just seems odd to me that you have posted several threads recently with scans of various media. But now you say they can't be used to judge the media. Makes it seem like an exercise in futility. Perhaps you meant to say that the scans shouldn't be used alone to gauge the quality of a given media, that they should be used in combination with actually viewing the recorded media on stand alone players. Can you please clarify your position?

lordsmurf,

It's crap because my burners say so.

I think I've seen you say that your burner also sometimes gives you problems with Taiyo Yuden media, however, you acknowledge that despite this, TY is excellent media.

Perhaps I should start a new thread but as I newbie, I find all of this very confusing. What exactly makes media crap? General consensus? Bad scans? If one brand/model burner or a particular firmware version burns a given media with no errors and that burned media plays back without problems on stand alone players, does that mean the media is fine even though some other burner does not burn it well? Does the "crap" media burn fine on some players and read back fine just after burning, but begin to deteriorate after a few weeks or months?

Any comments on this would be greatly appreciated.

Pudah

[Fandim]

Pudah - Scans can be used, just scans cannot be SOLEY used, I should have said. My apologies, I stand corrected.

Scans are also very useful for people wishing to use the media for data discs, as opposed to video, as it shows that the data can be read back 100%.

Seth

[Fandim]

And Lord Smurf was just making a comical statement in general, by the way.. The reason CMC is considered "crap", is because while some people have had fantastic results with it, a lot more people have had horrible results. Depending on your burner, (NEC's seem to LOVE cheap media), a lot of the cheaper brand media might be phenominal...Also, a lot of DVD players are picky on what types of media they'll use, even after a perfect burn. (I cant explain this, but even my own personal experiences tell me that this is true.)

CMC also has a history of just poor quality discs...discs that are purchased that already have marks in the ink...discs that have ink spreading issues (towards the end of the disc they wont burn), as well as reports of the bottoms of the disc literally having scratches, or the sides of the discs being dinged up etc.

I havnt watched a movie on these yet, honestly. But I will admit, I'm impressed by the scans..not MXL/TY quality for sure...But better than a lot of the scans that I've done. Just dont take the scans for more than what they're worth - scans. It's also good to keep in mind, that in general, Liteons are better readers than most other DVD players/writers/ROM's...Great example being, when I do a DVDInfo on some discs with my NEC, they'll spike in certain places consistently, however, my liteon reads them perfectly.

Seth

[Pudah]

Fandim,

Thanks very much for your comments. Very helpful.

Let me ask you (and everybody else) another question. For the "crappy" media producers... do they even make crap when they are making media for well known "brand name" companies? For example, might a generic brand CMC disc be inferior to discs made by CMC for somebody like Philips or HP or Imation? What I mean to say is, has it been your experience that the big companies give the disc makers some certain minimum quality level that they need to adhere to, whereas the house brand would be subject to lesser quality controls? Or might those discs (the house brand) even be the rejects from the discs made for the big brand name company?

Pudah

[steve2713]

I don't think Lordsmurf's comment was an attempt at humor, he thinks CMC is 'pure garbage' according to his site. I'd also like to know if your profile is up to date, Lordsmurf.

[Shocker Milwaukee]

CMC DVD-R is sketchy, but CMC DVD+R seems to be pretty good (from personal experience & various posts I've seen).

[lordsmurf]

Burners within my immediate grasp include Pioneer 103, 104, 105, BTC 1004, 1008, BenQ 1620, LiteOn 411, NEC 1100, 1300, plus the drive units inside DVD recorders. Profile is not old, just not enough room for everything. I quit bothering. My next drive will be DVD-R DL, preferably Pioneer 109 or 110 or whatever it is. My personal drive on my main system is the 105 drive. This list does not even include all the burners non-local people I know have, ones that also submit info for the research I've gathered over the years.

In general, CMC is bad media. You may be lucky and find good ones, or have that one burner with certain firmware during certain phases of the moon, but at some point, you'll hit a bad spot like everybody else. Bad is more typical than good, when it comes to CMC.

[DVDDave]

smurf---WELL SAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[steve2713]

I have 3 burners. CMC media works flawlessly on all 3 - NEC 1300, 2500, and Benq 822. My discs haven't had to rely on phases of the moon to burn well, they are good discs on all 3 of my drives.

[Fandim]

By humor - I meant him saying it's bad media because his burner said so. Not that he hates CMC - that's well known. Simply his statement of why the media was garbage.

Seth