TDK Inkjet Printable Scans Inside. ($8/25 @ CC - CMC E01)

[steve2713]

dmagic1, nice burn. Funny, I don't see any Lemmings chiming in with random claims of 'CMC is worthless shit' yet. I wonder why? Most of my TY media doesn't burn this well...

[winifreid]

Anybody want to buy mine? Look at this scan:

[steve2713]

What'd you burn it with? burner/firmware?

[winifreid]

Can you see the scan? I usually can see my scan posts, but this one I can't. Anyway, I have a Lite-On 451@832. I have tried several strat swaps based upon the media results forum at cdfreaks, but none have helped.

[steve2713]

Yeah, I copy-pasted it though :P

I'd honestly buy it, except I've already got alot of discs... (unless the price is right :P)

It's too bad you haven't found a good working firmware, they appear to burn great for most people.

[Fandim]

you cant have a space in the filename if you want it to show up, FYI..

[Fandim]

Oh, and by the way...Steve...I'm not attacking your views on CMC at all...it's worked great for me thus far. I'm just skeptical etc... got burned once before.

I will admit I'm actually impressed with how well this CMC stuff works.

However..

dmagic1, nice burn. Funny, I don't see any Lemmings chiming in with random claims of 'CMC is worthless shit' yet. I wonder why? Most of my TY media doesn't burn this well...

Woah...My burner does TY WAY better than CMC any day... Let me show you how my burner handles Taiyo Yuden...and you can compare for yourself vs these CMC scans.





Here is how my Liteon burns TY media.

[steve2713]

I said most of my TY doesn't burn as well, I never said anything about yours. I'm not crazy, it is a FACT. I can post some scans if you'd like.

Yeah, your TY scan is good. The second one is nothing special, MUCH higher than the PI I get on most of my CMC. Better than your CMC scans, but the CMCs are clearly burning VERY good as well, better than most media.

Edit: a note to make when comparing liteon tests vs. benq tests, the PIF is tested differently on the Benq drives, a peak of 1 is basically 4 on Benq, 4 on Liteon=16 on Benq, etc. So a scan with total PIF of 100 is going to be about 400 on my Benq. I'm not bashing TY, it's good stuff no doubt. My lowest PIF was 7(!) total on a TY disc, that'd be like a total of about 1 or 2! on a Liteon. It was only about a 3 1/2 gb disc, but still... :P About the only gripe I have for TY, they have odd spikes, especially PI, scattered on different spots on the disc, they're just not as consistent edge to edge, although their total PIF is usually very low, which is important.

[Fandim]

Steve, saw you said "my scans", thought you said scans in general. edited my post to reflect as such. My apologies.

[winifreid]

Here are scans from my liteon that were burned at 2.4x and then the same disk after I printed it with my Canon. I always thought printing had no effect on scan quality. This may not be a huge change, but with maginal disks, printing could be enough to puch the disk into coasterdom.

[steve2713]

That's interesting, winifreid. Neither scan would probably be quite enough to cause skipping, but the PI is getting pretty high in the second one, and the PIF increased 500% (!) after printing to the disc. The discs look 'OK' at 2.4x, not great but certainly decent, the PIF is more important and 836 is pretty good. I'm suprised you haven't found a better firmware/strategy yet.

[winifreid]

I have tried several recommended ones and even one suggest by codeking (which is what I used for the above). I wish they worked because it would be nice to have cheap printable disks. Have you rescanned any of your disks after printing?

[Fandim]

What I find interesting, is this 'same disc' has a sampling count of over 2,000 difference? And the scanned range is also different. Heh. Someones deleting highest values!