Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
thollian

Disc Burn Quality

Recommended Posts

Not sure how to read this, nor if this is the write place to post this, sorry if it isn't, but is this a good or bad burn? thanks

post-4093-1185148833_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the spike at around 1.5gb doesn't look too good.

its a shame you couldn't measure jitter, it would give a more accurate result

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the spike at around 1.5gb doesn't look too good.

its a shame you couldn't measure jitter, it would give a more accurate result

 

 

so does that indicate a bad burn? or possibilty the disc will not work at a future date?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is another screenshot using my burner to test, just wondering how well the burner is burning since it is a year old....

post-4093-1185150125_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The disk is certainly out of ECMA spec. I'd re-burn.

 

Anything happen to the data flow while you were burning? Is there a log?

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The disk is certainly out of ECMA spec. I'd re-burn.

 

Anything happen to the data flow while you were burning? Is there a log?

 

Regards

 

 

there were no errors durig the burn, and the disc plays fine though? so how can the disc be out of ECMA specs, when it plays fine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing OK and being outa spec are 2 different things. A few poor sectors you won't notice.

 

The ECMA standard are specifications as to what determines a good burn as definied in ECMA 349 (section 6, chapter 32.2).

 

1. No consecutive set of 8 blocks (sectors) should have a total of more than 280 PIEs. Clearly, your disk does not comply and should not have got a "96" quality (in fact, it looks like it does not comply at about 40-50% of the points on the disk's surface)

 

2. No block should have more than 4 PIFs. Many sectors on your disk do not comply with the standard.

 

3. Of course any single POF (better known as a CRC error) makes the disk fucked anyway.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so with the disc being out of spec, does this imply that 1) the disc may/may not play correctly in a future date? 2) does this mean my burner is bad and doesn't burn good anymore?

 

 

or really if the disc, does not meet the spec, how does this affect me? short/long term?

 

 

thanks for your help.

Edited by thollian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. No. No-one has such a crystal ball. Some players are more forgiving than others anyway.

2. Not sure just on a single burn. Check out some other ones that you do.

 

Your blanks should be OK. Usually, you see poor stats on the outside (end) of the disk. Do some more tests, perhaps also in a different burner. Maybe burn at slower speed as a test (8x). Is there a log????

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. No. No-one has such a crystal ball. Some players are more forgiving than others anyway.

2. Not sure just on a single burn. Check out some other ones that you do.

 

Your blanks should be OK. Usually, you see poor stats on the outside (end) of the disk. Do some more tests, perhaps also in a different burner. Maybe burn at slower speed as a test (8x). Is there a log????

 

Regards

 

 

log of the burn?

 

; //****************************************\\

; ImgBurn Version 2.3.2.0 - Log

; Sunday, 22 July 2007, 00:32:49

; \\****************************************//

;

;

I 00:04:13 ImgBurn Version 2.3.2.0 started!

I 00:04:13 Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate Edition (6.0, Build 6000)

I 00:04:13 Total Physical Memory: 1,046,064 KB - Available: 412,588 KB

I 00:04:13 Initialising SPTI...

I 00:04:13 Searching for SCSI / ATAPI devices...

I 00:04:13 Found 1 DVD-ROM and 1 DVD±RW!

I 00:05:03 Operation Started!

I 00:05:03 Source File: C:\ISO\TITLE.ISO

I 00:05:03 Source File Sectors: 1,914,888 (MODE1/2048)

I 00:05:03 Source File Size: 3,921,690,624 bytes

I 00:05:03 Source File Volume Identifier: TITLE

I 00:05:03 Source File Implementation Identifier: DVD Shrink

I 00:05:03 Source File File System(s): ISO9660, UDF (1.02)

I 00:05:03 Destination Device: [1:0:0] _NEC DVD_RW ND-3550A 1.07 (E:) (ATA)

I 00:05:03 Destination Media Type: DVD+R (Disc ID: MCC-004-00) (Speeds: 2.4x, 4x, 6x, 8x, 12x, 16x)

I 00:05:03 Destination Media Sectors: 2,295,104

I 00:05:03 Write Mode: DVD

I 00:05:03 Write Type: DAO

I 00:05:03 Write Speed: 4x

I 00:05:03 Link Size: Auto

I 00:05:03 Test Mode: No

I 00:05:03 BURN-Proof: Enabled

I 00:05:04 Filling Buffer... (40 MB)

I 00:05:05 Writing LeadIn...

I 00:05:31 Writing Image... (LBA: 0 - 1914887)

I 00:17:05 Synchronising Cache...

I 00:17:06 Closing Track...

I 00:17:19 Finalising Disc...

I 00:17:36 Image MD5: 3809f13cbbcbf051aebbe3869f52aece

I 00:17:37 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:12:33

I 00:17:37 Average Write Rate: 5,526 KB/s (4.0x) - Maximum Write Rate: 5,763 KB/s (4.2x)

I 00:17:37 Cycling Tray before Verify...

I 00:17:56 Device Ready!

I 00:17:56 Operation Started!

I 00:17:56 Source Device: [1:0:0] _NEC DVD_RW ND-3550A 1.07 (E:) (ATA)

I 00:17:56 Source Media Type: DVD+R (Book Type: DVD+R) (Disc ID: MCC-004-00) (Speeds: 2.4x, 4x, 6x, 8x, 12x, 16x)

I 00:17:56 Image File: C:\ISO\TITLE.ISO

I 00:17:56 Image File Sectors: 1,914,888 (MODE1/2048)

I 00:17:56 Image File Size: 3,921,690,624 bytes

I 00:17:56 Image File Volume Identifier: TITLE

I 00:17:56 Image File Implementation Identifier: DVD Shrink

I 00:17:56 Image File File System(s): ISO9660, UDF (1.02)

I 00:17:56 Verifying Sectors... (LBA: 0 - 1914887)

I 00:22:24 Device MD5: 3809f13cbbcbf051aebbe3869f52aece

I 00:22:24 Device (Padded) MD5: 04ea4021de554bbe38a0162ea829879e

I 00:22:24 Image MD5: 3809f13cbbcbf051aebbe3869f52aece

I 00:22:24 File Successfully Deleted: C:\ISO\TITLE.ISO

I 00:22:24 Operation Successfully Completed! - Duration: 00:04:27

I 00:22:24 Average Verify Rate: 14,343 KB/s (10.4x) - Maximum Verify Rate: 20,540 KB/s (14.8x)

I 00:32:49 Close Request Acknowledged

I 00:32:49 Closing Down...

I 00:32:49 Shutting down SPTI...

I 00:32:49 ImgBurn closed!

Edited by thollian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried cleaning your drive?

 

And, it's worse with PIFs (which have degraded your "score"), but not PIEs (which look fine). Admittedly, the PIFs are more important, IMHO, anyway.

 

Try burning at 8x.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, I haven't cleaned the drive, I will do that.

 

so the log looks ok?

 

I just burned a dvd at 8x, and these were the results: looks like it has done better burning at 8x rather than 4x....I always thought slower the burn, beter results....

 

first image @ 8x

 

second @ 16x

post-4093-1185158743_thumb.jpg

post-4093-1185160710_thumb.jpg

Edited by thollian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ther only graph that looks "normal" is your last one and even that is outa spec (but at least its bad at the end).

 

Do clean the drive and see what happens.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ther only graph that looks "normal" is your last one and even that is outa spec (but at least its bad at the end).

 

Do clean the drive and see what happens.

 

Regards

 

 

the last image was taken after the drive was cleaned....

 

would you say its time for a new drive?

 

latest one:

post-4093-1185164394_thumb.jpg

Edited by thollian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It pretty easy to see the blue coloured 'PI Error' graph is much lower in the first burn you did. You got a max of 20 in that one, rather than 300 in the other scans!

 

You should stick to doing the scanning in the LiteOn drive though. You can't really compare 2 different drives - even if they're the same make/model!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what exactly do these graphs/numbers mean? I mean if I can read the data fine, how does this really effect the disc and the data on the disc? especially since I can read the same disc on the same drive and get different numbers each time, even though they are around the same....

 

also, is C1 one good, and C2 bad?

Edited by thollian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, I bought a new dvd cleaner, and burned something new, and here are the results, looks like a huge improvement, if I am reading this correctly?

post-4093-1185212773_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
looks a lot better than posts 1,4 and 12

 

 

would you say its acceptable burn? or the burner is showing signs of wear and tear/age?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the last scan is certainly acceptable. jitter can affect the quality result dramatically but the scan looks good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the last scan is certainly acceptable. jitter can affect the quality result dramatically but the scan looks good

 

 

thanks for all your help, one last question, what numbers are consider acceptable, and what is not consider acceptable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.