Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ThaCrip

  1. I just decided to see what would happen if I copied one of my previously burned MCC 003 discs recently, that is of suspect burn quality, back to the hard drive with my 7240s and iHAS324B burners and while both ultimately worked, as I confirmed with Linux's 'sha256sum' hash check as both matched my original file on hard drive, so there is no data corruption (which is most important), you can tell the 7240s has issues reading that disc where as the iHAS324B does not as the iHAS324B basically went full speed the whole time (I suspect it must have better error correction than the 7240s(?)). because on the 7240s drive when copying the file back to the hard drive the speed at which it reads fluctuates up and down and this is obvious given you can hear the drive speed up and down throughout the transfer along with the transfer rate shown in the Linux Mint file manager. because while I did not time the transfer, I know a full DVD+R (or -R) should take right around 5 minutes to copy the data from the disc back to hard drive if it's reading at max speed (at least that's the best my 7240s and iHAS324B drives can do at their best), and I am sure that was a fair amount longer than that (guessing... probably at least 7min+) given it never reached the speeds it normally would as you could hear it try to spin up here and there but it does not last long and slowed back down, but at least it does not read the disc TOO slowly either. but the transfer rate was nothing TOO slow even though you could see near the end area of the disc, it was at it's slowest transfer speed, which is when the PIF's, based on KProbe scan, were the worst. like ball park transfer speed when it dropped to it's slowest speed late into the disc (which is typically when it's at it's fastest under normal circumstances) is probably 4-5MB/s at best. but I would say most of the disc was floating around 9-10MB/s as you could see it was doing about 9-10MB/s and then occasionally it would try to speed up, it would gain a bit more MB/s briefly, and then drop back down etc.

    basically the single 'MCC 003' disc I tested in the above test was burned on a Liteon 1673s burner at 8x as it's the 1st picture posted on the 1st page of this topic (i.e.  https://forum.imgburn.com/topic/26594-best-medium-for-long-term-storage/?do=findComment&comment=169108 ) ; because as you can see there, while this disc could be worse, it's got plenty of total PIF's (41.5k) and late into the disc it really ramps up with higher peaks, and while read speed fluctuated on the 7240s when reading that disc, you could see it was at it's slowest near the end which is inline with the higher PIF's.

    so I think stuff like this gives credibility to these KProbe scans and the like. because on other discs that had pretty good burn quality, the 7240s reads the disc at basically max speed the whole way since you can hear the drive buzzed up and transfer rate slowly climbs up as it reads further into the disc, like expected. I just don't know the rough point in which the 7240s drive will begin to have at least slight issues reading these MCC 003 discs. but any of my KProbe scans that are anywhere near 'higher quality' it will likely read it at full speed as expected.

    but as long as this disc (and ones similar) does not noticeably degrade in say 5-10 years, it will probably still be working decades from now. plus, like I say these discs were probably made somewhere around the mid-2000's from my best guesstimate, or probably no newer than the late 2000's, which probably means they are at least 13+ years old but I would guess closer to around 17 years old.


    p.s. but I think on the bright side, short of me missing something, that disc I tested is probably my all-around worst disc of those working (like I mentioned before only about 4-6 discs might have been suspect burn quality on some level), especially in terms of total PIF's and probably even general peak PIF's. because even a moment ago briefly playing with a disc that reached 828 PI briefly at the very beginning, did not have any obvious read speed issues that I noticed. so short of that brief 828 PI spike, the rest of the disc is pretty good burn quality. so I suspect unless the PI's get really crazy, and as long as PIF's ain't too bad, the discs will probably remain of 'good enough' quality for the foreseeable future.

  2. 21 hours ago, dbminter said:

    For music CD's, I don't make image files.  I rip the tracks as FLAC.


    Yeah, basically same here. plus, it takes up less storage space that way to.

    ill either use EAC (Exact Audio Copy), which also works on Linux Mint through Wine, or just copy the track directly from file manager to the hard drive, which gives you a standard WAV file, and then use Foobar2000 to compress it to FLAC (I typically use max compression of 8 ) etc.

  3. 17 hours ago, dbminter said:

    I can remember when the 100 MB Zip Drive disks were mass storage in 1995.

    I still have one of those (I still have the unit (USB connection) and five 100MB Fujifilm 100MB disks and they still worked the last I knew). but honestly, looking back on it, I regret buying that. but I suspect at the time it was half way decent external storage where adding/deleting files was convenient unlike recordable CD tech.

    I don't remember when I got that Zip drive but just given it uses USB connection that probably means it was not before the year 2000 for me because I am pretty sure the first computer I owned with USB port was in the year 2000 (my 3rd computer in total). so I would guess either 2000-2001 (maybe a little after) when I got that Zip drive.


    17 hours ago, dbminter said:

    You'd spend an hour writing to a DVD-R only to have it fail at 99% due to a buffer underrun.

    I would have been steaming waiting that long for it to fail at pretty much the last second and on top of that it was not cheap either.


    17 hours ago, dbminter said:

    $15 was the high quality Mitsubishi stuff from Panasonic.  It was around the time I paid $999 for a first generation DVD video recorder.  I didn't pay $15 a pop for very long.


    Damn, nearly $1k for a burner.

    I don't recall what I paid for my 1st CD burner in 1998 but I would guess it was likely somewhere between $100-200.

    even my Liteon 24102b (Dec 2001 mfg date), which I still have as it's the oldest burner I still have that I consider good, I want to say I paid something around $70-80 for it which would have likely been sometime in 2002.

  4. 13 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    I remember paying $15 a pop for quality Mitsubishi DVD-R in 2002 when I first started burning those.

    Damn, I would have never paid it as I figure even around $1-2 a disc is really pushing it as beyond that, short of a very limited amount of data, is just too much. so it's like if a disc fails one would be cringing.

    $15 for a single DVD recordable, hell no! (at that price data backup would be very limited to super high importance stuff and not a bit more causal backup) ; but I guess it makes my 'expensive' recording days of about $1 for a CD-R look like a major bargain in comparison. thankfully I missed those earlier days of DVD burning since I never got into DVD recording until 2005 as at that time prices were a lot more reasonable for DVD recordable discs (because I just stuck with CD-R until prices of DVD got a bit more competitive with CD-R). but I do recall that in my very early DVD burning days I was mostly, if not entirely, using generic DVD recordables to save a bit of $. but at this point in time, off the top of my head, the only recordable DVD's I still have from quite a few years ago are likely all Verbatim, with some being Taiyo Yuden media as the only TY media I owned is TYG02 (DVD-R 8x) which is probably bought somewhere between the 2005-2007 time frame.

    do you still have those discs you paid $15 a pop for? ; they still work today? ; I sure hope so.

    but come to think of it... in terms of general DVD video discs I think I read a while ago that DVD video rentals peaked in the year 2003 (or maybe it was when they really hit their stride, or something to this effect). I can imagine in 2002 DVD recordable discs were not cheap since at that time CD-R was probably still far more commonly burned off the top of my head since that was probably around the time (call it about 2001-2002) quality CD burners were really starting to take off. like the technology was maturing etc where as I would assume DVD recordable had to be in the earlier stages, which I think your $15 a disc pretty much confirms. I don't know for sure but I would imagine your 2002 DVD recording would probably have been roughly equivalent to recording CD-R's in about 1995-1996(?) because I can't imagine recording CD-R's in that time frame was more in the affordable range. probably at least several dollars a disc each I imagine, maybe more(?). because I can't recall asking that person I knew how much it cost him to record a CD-R when he had his which was likely between 1995-1997, I was guessing about 1996 though.


    16 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    My first IBM x86 PC was in 1992.  30 years ago this past January, actually.  Back when PC's had a Turbo button on them.  It had a whopping 40 MB HDD.  And dual 5.25" and 3.5" floppies.

    Damn, 40MB HDD. funny thing is in that time frame it was probably pretty good. it's funny how fast things advanced back in the 1990's into the 2000's as while we still get decent advancements you can tell things are slowing down as they don't get outdated nearly as quickly as we can hang onto hardware much longer, thankfully, before it's truly outdated.

    it's funny how even dirt cheap flash storage now would have been an amazing amount of storage space for the common person maybe 15-20 years or so ago.

    as for floppies... I only used the 1.44MB 3.5" ones at home but I do recall seeing those bigger 5.25" in school back around early 1990's as I think you used to put it into the drive and turn something to lock it into place, if I recall correctly. but it's been ages since I last touched one of those bigger floppies so I am a big vague on the details.

  5. 40 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    And I thought I was an early adopter of CD-R getting my first burner in 2000.  :)


    While I don't have my original CD burner, as I don't remember the exact model of it, I know it was a Memorex burner and I want to say it was roughly 2x2x6 (and got buffer underruns here and there sadly). back then I think I bought it from Best Buy and I think I ended up swapping it with another similar burner. I don't even remember what happened to those. but even those Verbatim CD-R's I still have three of them with the 1997 date on the back, they don't even have a listed write speed on them. so I am guessing they are either 1x or 2x discs.

    but the oldest burner I still do have is a HP burner (8x4x32) which has a May 2000 mfg date on it as it still works as I was playing with it connected through a IDE/SATA to USB 3 adapter (I can connect it to my older computer if I wanted but I am using the 24102b in there instead) as ImgBurn see's it through that adapter. although I would say my oldest 'good' CD burner, which I still have and still works, is a Liteon 24102b (Dec 2001 mfg date). both IDE.

    but anyways, I knew someone many years ago now (who's pretty much same age as myself) who got into CD burning before myself as I don't know exactly when he did but it was probably about 1996 (likely within 1995-1997 time frame though) as I think it was SCSI based (I imagine CD-R's were not reasonably price at this time). but off the top of my head I think in 1998 when I was burning CD-R's they were roughly $1 each (so while not cheap, not horribly expensive either). thankfully they ain't anywhere near that price now (even the best CD-R's now are about 1/3rd of that price pretty much, with many decent enough discs being about 1/5th of that price) otherwise I would probably not be burning much.

    but I still do have some Mitsui CD-R's which seem to have some sort of coating on them as I am pretty sure I paid $50 for a 100-pack (I don't know exactly when I bought these, but probably somewhere in the 2002-2003 area) and still work well to this day as I burned one (as a audio CD) not all that long ago. I probably still got about 75 of these discs left. but I recently got those cheaper 100-pack of Verbatim CD-R's (CMC Magnetics media code) for more general use as the Mitsui I might only use on occasion since they are a bit pricier. but the Verbatim's at $0.18 each, I can afford to burn through those a bit more freely. but at this point ill probably be set for the foreseeable future in terms of CD/DVD recordable discs as I probably won't have to buy more for years.

    so in terms of CD-R's I can still burn right now I would imagine those three Verbatim ones with the 1997 date on the back and my Mitsui ones are the best quality CD-R's I currently own.

    p.s. my first burner, as I was saying was 1998, but my first PC was 1995 (came with Windows v3.11 and was a 486dx2 66mHz CPU with 4MB of RAM (I think we upgraded to 8MB (yes, MB not GB ;) )) and a 4xxMB HDD. I think I still got this hard drive to this day) as I was a teenager back then. I would say in general computers went more mainstream around that 1998-2000 time frame (which is probably very similar to cell phone tech taking off with the masses to). hell, in terms of 'high speed internet' that was not available in my area until the year 2000 as when I first got it installed the guy who installed it said I was one of the earlier people to get it in the area etc.

  6. 13 hours ago, dbminter said:

    Audio CD can be a real pain.  I had a disc just 2 or 3 weeks ago where reading to image was fine, but it didn't read it correctly.  When I used Free Audio Converter to extract the tracks, it failed a hash check because it was reading too fast.  So, I slowed down the read in ImgBurn to get an image that read correctly at the slowest possible speed.  Then, I mounted that image as a virtual drive for FreeAC to extract from.

    That's messed up.

    but I guess lesson learned. so if someone wants to be safe on Audio CD's, it's probably best to try something like 4x right off the start as this way it reads slow, but won't take TOO long to read it.

    but thanks for the info.

    p.s. but typically I always keep my FLAC files and make custom audio CD's from them with ImgBurn as this way, even if a burned audio CD ever gets a little so-so, I can always make a reliable duplicate using the FLAC files that I know are good. but since I am on Linux I use Foobar2000 (which is the best general audio playback/conversion software if you ask me) to temporarily convert my FLAC back to WAV as ImgBurn can directly use WAV (standard 44.1Hz/16bit) without issue on Linux. but I did notice if I tried to use modified WAV files, like losslessly editing a WAV file to remove silence from the beginning/end of a track and then save it and try to use it with ImgBurn through Wine, that ImgBurn would throw a 'DirectShow' error basically upon attempting to read the WAV file in the burning process. but it seems as long as I am using a Wine version newer than Wine v4 series (I was using v4.0.4 when it had issues), like Wine v5 and I am currently using Wine v6.0.1 (v7 series is newest available Wine currently), that issue disappears and ImgBurn no longer throws that 'DirectShow' error as you could see it had trouble with the WAV files with Wine v4.0.4, but on say Wine v5 series and especially Wine v6.0.1 I no longer have trouble. I used the following link to trim my WAV files... https://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?t=99503#p345303 ; I was editing it with Audacity and I even tried Ocenaudio with the same results. normally I don't modify lossless audio like that (I did not mess with my original FLAC files as I kept those unmodified, but I only modified the WAV that I was burning to a CD-R) but at the time I was trying to shave off a little time from a custom audio CD I was making so it was not too long since I was overburning beyond the normal 80min limit.

    but speaking of overburning... I noticed those CMC Magnetics Verbatim CD-R 80min/700MB (CMC Magnetics media code ; which I recently bought from Amazon for pretty much $18 for a 100 CD-R's) tend to overburn further than pretty much everything else I tried in the past as I can overburn to at least 82min15sec (shows as '82:14:66' on ImgBurn) without issue (no errors whatsoever in ImgBurn when I tried it) as it shows up as 82min12sec on my original audio CD player which has a April 1991 mfg date on it (which I probably has since 1992) as it plays fine without issue. I burned them at 16x with my Sony Optiarc 7240s drive. I heard 16x is a pretty good start point for audio CD's since on the myce forums I heard someone claim that's probably fairly safe in terms of 'jitter' which I suspect stuff like audio CD's might be a bit more susceptible to as I heard you generally don't want to burn audio CD's at full speed (48x and the like) from what I read on myce forums.

    so I got a little bonus with those Verbatim CD-R (CMC Magnetics media code), which I did not expect. because on most CD-R's off the top of my head, I would not feel comfortable attempting a overburn more than around 1min over the 80min limit otherwise I imagine ones chances of failure start to increase quite a bit. so I guess I could say this in terms of overburning audio CD's... 30seconds or so should be pretty safe as I would expect that to work on pretty much all CD-R media and I think there is a good chance of success around 1min over the 80min limit, but much beyond that there is probably a good chance of failure. so to see 82min15sec with no errors at all, I was a bit surprised. but I don't overburn all of the time as it's mostly good on the occasion your making a custom audio CD and you go a bit over the 80min limit so you don't have to remove a song for it to fit.

  7. @Terrycia


    I must have been a bit tired or something, as I just checked your ImgBurn 'log' again and it shows "Windows 8 etc etc", so my mistake, and you are obviously running Windows 10 given your picture, so all is good there. because if I recall correctly, since ImgBurn was last updated in June 2013, Windows 10 was released in July 2015, it does not correctly report the exact version of Windows.

    but I think what dbminter said pretty much summed up your situation. because I personally have some Verbatim DVD+R DL 2.4x Azo discs (I only have eight of them left) but I only used them in the XBox360 era (as I never had a issue burning those at 2.4x on my iHAS324B drive which was one of the few drives with special firmware so they could burn more than the normal 8.5GB limit of DVD DL media) as they collect dust now as I mostly keep em as a artifact like I still got a handful of Verbatim 650MB/74min CD-R (blue dye on them so they are likely of higher quality) that have a 1997 date on the back of the jewel case as I first got into CD burning in 1998, so they got to be among my earlier CD-R's I ever owned.

    but anyways, the bottom line in your situation... use regular DVD+R or DVD-R discs when burning (preferably some better quality discs) since they cost less $ and what your trying to burn...

    I 12:20:23 Size: 1,659,243,310 bytes
    I 12:20:23 Sectors: 810,178
    I 12:20:23 Image Size: 1,659,797,504 bytes

    ...is not even 1.7GB in size. NOTE: I took that particular thing from the part where you got those errors since you were attempting to burn that on DVD+R DL media. because like dbminter said, Mitsubishi are pretty much the only ones who make quality DVD DL media. because with regular DVD-R or +R media, which is all you need, these are not as picky as unless you got low quality media, just about anything decent should work well enough although Verbatim (with Mitsubishi dye) or Taiyo Yuden media is preferred.

  8. EAC (Exact Audio Copy) is probably what you want to try for general audio CD ripping.


    On 5/11/2021 at 8:31 PM, Muse said:

    Is there a way to ask Imgburn to rip at a slower speed than it otherwise would?

    Yeah, 'Mode > Read' and then on that same screen try setting it to 4x where it says 'Settings' and then where it says "Read Speed:" change the 2ND BOX to 4x which is for AUDIO (1st box is for data ripping).

    because just putting in a CD-R (AUDIO CD) a moment ago, 4x is the slowest I can rip with ImgBurn on my Verbatim CD-R (CMC Magnetics) media.

  9. Why are you burning a ISO on DVD+R DL media (Destination Media Type: DVD+R DL (Disc ID: CMC MAG-D03-64)) when it will fit on regular 4.7GB DVD+R(-R) media?

    but in regards to that error... while i can't say for sure, I suspect it's because your using probably low quality DVD+R DL media, although it's possible your DVD burner (HP DVD Writer 640c) is the problem to as I would see if your running the newest firmware for your burner.

    https://club.myce.com/t/hp-dvd-r-dl-hpdvd640-unable-to-burn-movies-to-a-dvd-r-dl-disc/214991 ; seems to suggest that burner is a so-so burner in general.

    p.s. your still using WindowsXP which has not had any official support or security updates from Microsoft as Microsoft dropped support of that in April 2014. your best off putting something like Linux Mint on that system. NOTE: ImgBurn works on Linux Mint through Wine etc.

  10. I figured I would make another post as here is a link (from September 2006) that talks about scans with KProbe (which is basically designed for Lite-On DVD burners from what that article also says which I only have used KProbe myself on my Liteon iHAS324B(2011) and Liteon 1673S(2005) burners) and how to interpret results... https://www.myce.com/article/home-pi_pif-scanning-who-to-believe-238/ ; but just to list some of the highlights from that article...



    Use this as a guideline for good discs:

    -PI (Parity Inner): No larger areas on the disc should exceed 280 PI-8 errors, do not worry too much about high single spikes that exceed 280.

    -PIF (Parity Inner Failures): No larger areas on the disc should exceed 4 PIF-1 errors, do not worry too much about high single spikes that exceed 4.


    but with that said the article also mentions another good point in regards to PI's (as up to 280 PI's apparently are still within official spec), which ill post...


    According to our tests the specified max PI-8 sum of 280 for good discs seems to be a good guideline, as some readers have problems reading discs when the PI-8 errors is over 300 and most players starts to have problems when the PI-8 error level reaches 600 or more.


    so based on that even though some of my discs are so-so in regards to "PI", at least so far, they seem to have stayed to about 500 or so tops on the worst ones even though I did get a really high single spike (or so) to 800 on that 7240s drive, but I have not seen over around 500 on my iHAS324B so far on these Verbatim DVD+R 8x (MCC 003) discs and even when I do see that 500 range PI's it seems to always be near the start for maybe the first 5-10% of the disc and then starts returning to normal/safe levels and even the PIF's have not been TOO bad in my burns so far even though occasionally I do get a burn that's exceeds the '4' recommended limit of that article (and sometimes my burns are more on the top notch side of things to). but keep in mind that's probably more of a 'safe' max limit for PIF's as I am sure you can go beyond that a fair amount and still have a working disc that will 'verify' on ImgBurn (i.e. so your data is not corrupt). I just don't know how far you can go before your on the edge of ImgBurn not being able to pass it's 'verify' in regards to PIF's. but given that disc I posted in a previous post in this topic that actually had corrupted data on it from a bad burn that failed to pass ImgBurn's 'verify', looking at the PIF's on that might give us a ball park figure as I figure if your PIF's are not close to that range and are closer to the known 'high quality' range, chances are your discs will remain 'good enough' for the foreseeable future especially if these Mitsubishi Chemicals discs (Azo/DataLife Plus and the like) are quite stable as time passes with little to no degradation.

    but anyways back on topic... it appears when they say 'players' they are referring to standard DVD video players, which I suspect are generally more picky(?) than a decent DVD burner is for the computer (hence, a computer DVD burner can probably read discs okay that might fail on a standard home DVD video player). because, at least so far, on all of the discs I have burned, putting aside the two heavily scratched discs being the fault for ImgBurn not being able to 'verify' the two discs, none had any problem reading the data written on the disc. even ones with PIF's that are not really in that 'optimal range' (i.e. 4 or less) as pretty much on all of the 'MCC 003' discs I have burned so far, the ones with the highest PIF's are still readable and those are generally in the 6-9 range tops (on either of my iHAS324B or 7240s burners) with the exception of my 1673s burner on the single disc I wrote with 6-16 PIF range at their general worst points of the disc.

    but I suspect, given the age of these 'MCC 003' discs I have (which my best guesstimate is they are around 17 years old now (probably from around the mid-2000's since it seems the 16x DVD+R Azo (MCC 004) discs (and the like) have been around/standard since probably at least late 2000's or so)), and they still burn pretty well, and even the occasional disc that does not burn top notch, I suspect if it's still decent enough to this day (as in passes ImgBurn's 'verify'), it will probably last for the foreseeable future.

    so I guess in terms of the general topic of 'best medium for long term storage'... assuming one does not get a bad batch or have really weak burns that are on the edge of failure etc, chances are Verbatim (Azo/DataLife Plus) or Taiyo Yuden should be one of the safest choices for long term storage even though you 'might' be okay with other media to.

  11. Well I just looked through the 50-pack at the surface of each the remaining DVD+R's in that 50-pack and had about 5 scratched discs in total (like scratches I would think are of obvious concern) in that initial 50-pack that was already opened when I bought it. hopefully the other three fair better.

    but on two of the discs, I tried burning a 3519MB file to it, which basically failed to verify as I kind of figured it was going to fail given the severity of the scratched area on the disc (as with a flashlight on it you can't really see the usual recordable area underneath) and the data reached that area of the disc. but on my 3rd attempt, on a disc that had scratch issues, but was a bit closer to the outer edge vs the other two, I tried again and this time it succeeded because the data written did not reach that point on the disc (as I looked at it with my eyes when done and it just barely avoided that scratched area) and the funny thing is that particular disc was pretty much the best KProbe scanned disc so far (granted it was only 3519MB (so about 1.2GB shy of a full disc burn), but had that scan standard held for a full-burn, it would have been the best so far (see attached picture)) as total PIF's were closer to that more elite range and even the PI's are pretty much in that elite range also given the 2.26 average etc.

    but on those two discs that I said failed to 'verify' due to obvious heavier scratches on outer area of the disc etc... you could see during the burn process that it proceeds like normal working it's way up to 8x on ImgBurn and once it got late into the disc you could see the iHAS324B burner shifted burn speed to around 6x, which is not normal, and I kind of figured it was going to fail once I seen that happen and after it finished the write process, then during verify, ImgBurn failed to verify the disc, so that disc was outright dead. the other disc was similar to but during write it took a rather long time to finish the 'synchronize cache' part etc and then during 'verify' it failed as I assumed it would during the part of the disc with the heavier scratches.

    although one disc I burned, which appeared okay visually (so no obvious issues as far as I could tell by looking at the disc), and did past ImgBurn's 'verify', had about a stable 450-500 PI/6-8 PIF area for roughly the first 10% of the disc(and not much beyond this the burn looked pretty good, as usual), which is the worst I had seen from the iHAS324B burner so far as all others it's done have been basically pretty good to great. but I am confident it boils down to MCC 003 disc quality fluctuation as that just happened to be a so-so disc right from the start.


    so I guess in summary... given my experiences so far, at least using my iHAS324B burner at 8x write... while the 'MCC 003' old stock I got seems to be largely good quality (at least based on the 15+ discs I burned so far from that initial 50-pack), putting aside the 5 scratched discs in that initial 50-pack (of which I still have two unburned and can probably safely use as long as I don't fill the disc to near the edge)), I pretty much only ran into one suspect disc so far even though it does pass ImgBurn's verify and I can copy data from disc back to hard drive okay enough (even the small amount of burns on my 7240s I would say are more towards Thumbs Up than Thumbs Down, but the iHAS324B is probably the safest to use when burning these discs out of the few DVD burners I got). because I have not gotten any outright failures with ImgBurn's 'verify' besides what is obviously a scratched disc issue in why it failed.

    p.s. I might just hang onto that 3519MB disc that failed just as a reference for future burns if I happen to run into other scratched discs in the remaining, unopened, Verbatim DVD+R 8x (MCC 003) media. because it will probably give me a ball park estimate on how much data I can burn before the burn process will hit the scratched area of a random disc in the future.


    but here is the disc scan I mentioned that's pretty much now the overall best so far (but only 3519MB, not full 4.7GB)...


    KProbe - D66 - iHAS324B burned at 8x on 4-22-22.png

  12. Yeah, I can see that as I think even in terms of pressed CD's, if I recall correctly, my 7240s is pickier than my Liteon drives when it comes to reading them. but I do seem to notice that the 7240s is a bit snappier in general.

    but yeah, I think in a basic sense if a burn on known quality media passes the 'verify' with ImgBurn, and especially if it can be read by a handful of drives without any obvious issues, chances are unless there is more obvious degradation it will still be readable 10-20+ years from now.

    but I just did another burn/scan with iHAS-324B and this time it's close enough to the high quality burns I have been seeing for a long time on media I have had for a long time now ;) ; so there might be a bit of quality variation on these discs, but probably nothing too major. but short of 'maybe' those couple of suspect sections already mentioned the quality of my burns I think one could say is 'good enough' at the least, especially on my 7240s/iHAS324B burners...

    ...but even my 1673s is probably not outright horrible given it's scan (which I already posted above) compared to one disc that actually failed to verify the data (which are the Verbatim DVD-R 16x Azo's I sent back to Amazon), which is this one...

    I 01:36:04 Verifying Session 1 of 1... (1 Track, LBA: 0 - 2292719)
    I 01:36:04 Verifying Track 1 of 1... (MODE1/2048, LBA: 0 - 2292719)
    W 01:41:17 Failed to Read Sectors 2215488 - 2215503 - Reason: L-EC Uncorrectable Error
    W 01:41:27 Failed to Read Sector 2215493 - Reason: L-EC Uncorrectable Error

    that was on the ImgBurn log, but here is the KProbe scan that matches it (because as you can see given what the ImgBurn log said, it pretty much matches up with the KProbe scan in that the failure was late into the disc which is where the spikes of PI (which PI's are already over the 280 limit which I think is official spec) and especially PIF's are at (so this might give me a ball park idea on when a drive will error in ImgBurn and in this regard even my 1673s drive is noticeably better)...

    KProbe - FOD89 720p iHAS324B 8x 4-15-22 ERROR READING DISC - AMAZON RETURNED Verbatim DVD-R Azo 16x.png

  13. Here is a burn I tried on my old Lite-On 1673s (Oct 2005 dated firmware basically) from 2005 as I burned at 8x. but, while the PI's ain't great (the overall worst of the three burns so far (two on 7240s(8x and 6x) and one on 1673s(8x))), they are still within spec and are not close too close to the edge. but the PIF's are what has me concerned, especially late into the disc where everything is solid red from 6+ and tops out in the 16 range. even putting aside that portion of the disc, you got a peak of 8 PIF, which I don't like, and just the total volume of PIF's are a bit too high for my liking as you can see it's pretty much solid red across the whole burn at about PIF 2 (I could have probably dealt with this if it where not for those higher PIF peaks). I suspect a slower burn on that 1673s drive 'might' help a bit, but overall I just don't see this drive competing with my two newer burners, so I doubt ill be using this 1673S drive any further for this media. but copying data from that disc burned on the Liteon 1673s with my iHAS-324B to my hard drive it did not seem to have any obvious problems reading the disc, which is a good sign.

    so I guess at this point ill have to try my Liteon iHAS-324B at 8x and see how that fairs etc. I might even try going back to 8x on 7240s just to see if that PI 800 spike was a fluke or not. because short of that PI 800 spike, the burn quality was the best so far overall and even my Liteon 1673s did not have any obvious trouble reading that PI 800 disc with copying data back to hard drive.

    but lets say what I am seeing so far here in the first couple of burns on the 7240s is about what I can roughly expect from this media, it should still be reliable enough to use on some level of important data, just nothing TOO critical and given I got them for $0.20 a disc, I can't complain. so I guess at the end of the day... even if the burn quality I got on my 7240s at 6x is consistent (like it is in the picture posted in my previous post), chances are these discs will last a long time given they are probably somewhere in the 2000's decade, I would guess somewhere around mid-2000's, and they still burn well enough as if they are still okay after probably 10-15+ years I suspect they will remain that way for many years to come.

    EDIT: after burning a disc on my Liteon iHAS324B burner at 8x this is the best burn yet. but I think if it were not for that major PI 800 spike on the 7240s, both drives would be similar with the 7240s might be coming out a bit ahead. on a side note: I recently overburned a Verbatim CD-R (CMC Magnetics media code), which I recently got a 100-pack of CD-R's, to 82:14:66 (82min15sec) and the CD plays without issue on my original audio CD player which has a April 1991 mfg date on it as it shows up as 82min12sec on that CD player. that's the furthest I ever attempted a overburn on a CD-R and had no errors whatsoever in ImgBurn either and ImgBurn completed the 'verify' at max speed without issue, nor any slow down.

    but here is the KProbe scan for the Liteon 1673s burned at 8x in first picture and second picture is burned on iHAS-324B at 8x...

    KProbe - TBL07 - burned 1673s at 8x on 4-21-22.png

    KProbe - MKA97 burned on iHAS324B at 8x on 4-21-22.png

  14. Burned on Sony Optiarc 7240s at 6x. Scanned with Lite-On iHAS-324B at 8x and this time, while there is a spike initially, the spike is much lower and should be safe given I heard up to 280 PI is within spec I think and I got 159 very briefly at start but after that things are good but not as good as the 8x burn but the 8x burn had a huge PI spike to 800+ at beginning. so in other words... short of the huge PI 800 spike on the 8x burn, the 8x burn is actually better than the 6x burn overall, but the 6x burn should be 'safe' even though not in that more 'perfect' range of say around 10 PI etc. plus, you can see the PIF's are higher on 6x to (there are more solid red sections but at least it's at the low point of '1'), but nothing I would be too concerned about. but ImgBurn burned it in 10min (about 5MB shy of a full 4.7GB disc) and verify was at max speed on 7240s with no slow down. I have not tried a basic transfer test with copying files to hard drive yet on either drive but I suspect it won't have the initial 100-200MB slow transfer speed on the iHAS-324B like the 8x burn with the 800+ PI spike did.

    I wonder if it's worth trying 4x burn on the 7240s, or maybe try 8x burn on the iHAS-324B (or maybe even my old IDE Lite-On 1673S from 2005(?)) as maybe the Lite-On will handle the burns a bit better on these older media etc?

    but anyways here is the KProbe picture (EDIT: added another picture with just a quick scan of the first 1.7% of the disc to see a little more detail on that initial spike)...

    KProbe - FOD89 7240s 6x 4-21-22.png

    Kprobe 1 point 7 percent scan and stop.png

  15. Well based on the first disc I burned at 8x on the 7240s, and then scanned with KProbe at 8x with the IHAS324B drive... short of a really high burst of PI's at the very beginning (peak spike is 828, which is bad, but this might be a fluke(?)), the burn quality is pretty strong overall as you can generally see earlier on besides that really short but high PI burst of 828 (which you can't even really see in the KProbe picture) things tend to top out around 50 for a bit after that and eventually hits a point where the PI's are really low for a good portion of the disc. PIF peak spike was 5 (which this general area is the worst of the PIF's), but they are pretty minimal overall.

    or to just give you the quick numbers...

    -PI = 828 MAX(might be a fluke(?)), average 7.80, total 127559. note: but like I say short of that really bad 828 thing, which does not really show in the picture, PI's pretty much top out in the 50 or so range early on and then things eventually reach that more top notch range for a good portion of the disc etc and just given the 7.80 average says a lot about overall quality of the burn.

    -PIF = 5 MAX, average 0.15, total 2447. note: so this is pretty much top notch as short of a small area around the '5 peak spike' there is not much red color on the rest of the disc as when this peak happened, and in that general area, the PI's are pretty low as during that initial PI spike area of 828 there is barely any PIF's registering.

    but doing a quick copy of data back from the iHAS324B burner to the hard drive you can see read speed is a bit slow for about the first 100-200MB at about 4-5MB or so transfer speed (so it's slower than it should be, but the drive does not seem to struggle too much reading it either) but then you can hear the drive ramp up and goes full speed for the rest of the transfer.

    doing that same transfer from 7240s drive back to hard drive, it goes full speed the entire time. I would post the picture but the very brief super high 828 spike basically kills the graph to where you can't really see the details of the PI's like you normally can. so I figured it's not worth posting.

    ill have to try more discs here in the coming days/weeks but do you think it's worth lowering write speed at all, or any tips? ; because that disc could have been a bit of a fluke issue with the PI as it's too early to say for sure. because I am hoping that really large PI spike in the beginning does not show up in the future as short of that I am not worried about write quality at all overall (as it's pretty much usual Verbatim Azo level standards, give or take a bit) as even compared to more of that 'perfection' standard, it's probably not far off from it.

    but I guess I could play with write speed, or try burning on iHAS324B, but I usually just burn stuff with the 7240s and have for quite a while now. but I suspect what I might do is try another disc or so at 8x write just to see if it consistently acts similar or not. if so, then I might try lowering write speed or try burning on the iHAS324B burner at 8x and if anything is funny there try 6x.

    come to think of it... is there any chance the reason I seen that spike and then it pretty much smooths out not long after is due to the drive trying to learn the media etc? ; because this is the very first MCC 003 discs it's ever burned.

    so at the end of the day... at least based on a single disc I burned so far, short of the really high, but brief, PI spike, these burns are pretty strong overall.


    34 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    Yeah, no one packages optical discs well enough for shipping.  The cake stacks are almost always damaged in transit from Amazon.com.  That's why I save the cake stacks whenever they arrive undamaged.

    Good point.

    because I basically transferred the damaged stack over to a old CD-R stack I had that was almost gone and put those old general CD-R's onto the semi-broke stack.

    33 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    However, they are good enough for using CD markers on to write to.

    That's pretty much the bottom line for me as I never use that print feature if the discs have it or not as I always opt for markers as the market I am currently using is made for writing on recordable discs as it says 'Maxell Disc Writer' and under that 'Permanent marker for recordable discs'.

  16. Hell, they just got here a moment ago, a bit earlier than expected. ImgBurn shows... "Disc ID: MCC-003-00" 🤩  ; supported write speeds, at least on my 7240s drive (from 2009), shows '4x, 6x, 8x'. on my iHAS-324B it shows '6x, 8x' for supported write speeds. I did not check my Lite-On 1673S (from 2005) which I suspect will be similar to the 7240s.

    but I noticed the top of the Verbatim DVD+R disc itself it's different looking than my TY (TYG02) media is as while both are white, these Verbatim DVD+R 8x are shiny/smooth/hard surface looking where as the TYG02 (Taiyo Yuden DVD-R 8x) media I got back in 2005-2007 looks more like typical paper surface.

    I attached a screenshot of what each of the four containers looks like as I imagine these are hard to find nowadays, so assuming there burn quality is up to a higher standard, ill likely have gotten a solid buy on them at pretty much $0.20 a disc since it seems nowadays everything of quality is at least $0.25+ a disc if not around $0.30-0.35 or so.

    but ill probably burn some in the next day or so and use KProbe to do a disc quality check but I can't imagine ill have any problems given this is probably media from the 2000's decade (maybe early 2010's MAX(?)).

    p.s. one is opened, as in no plastic wrap on it (but the other three are still in plastic wrap), but it appeared that way when I bought it, so no big deal, and there is a bit of damage on the bottom of the plastic container of the one that was opened, but the discs are likely uneffected.

    21 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    Well, near as I can tell, AZO dye is not metallic.  Only BD-R has metal oxide in it.  The nature of recordable CD and DVD is they use organic dye, which decay faster than metal oxides.  But, I don't know that for sure.

    I see. so that's the general word, but it's hard to say with certainty. but thanks for the info


  17. Thanks for the info.


    15 hours ago, dbminter said:

    Those "pearl white" ones sound like thermal printable label surfaces, though I don't know that for sure.

    the comment on the following link gives me hope they are not...  https://club.myce.com/t/pearl-white-verbatim-cmc/160979/7

    another comment from that VideoHelp link... "Excellent full hub printable media with the metal azo dye!"

    but at this point ill just have to wait and see when they get here ;)

  18. Given what you just said... I am starting to think it's probably a lack of proper firmware support for those Verbatim DVD-R 16x Azo discs I had issues with recently, which while sucks for me, at least that means Verbatim's reputation for quality media is still top notch with the Azo's.

    were those DataLife Plus DVD-R discs you had issues with 8x or 16x certified? ; the ones you said some worked on v1.02 firmware and some did not, but the ones that had trouble burning resumed working like normal after you updated to v1.03 firmware.

    I guess at this point I am just hoping those Verbatim DataLife Plus 8x DVD+R discs I ordered are old enough ;) ; but if I knew when they pretty much stopped making the Verbatim DataLife Plus 8x certified DVD+R, then I would almost know for sure if those discs I ordered will work or not. so if they stopped making them about 11-12+ years ago, chances are ill be fine. but looking at that the VideoHelp site there should be a good chance these are 'MCC 003'... https://www.videohelp.com/dvdmedia?dvdmediasearch=verbatim&dvdmediadvdridsearch=&type=3&size=4.7&dvdburnspeed=8&order=Name&hits=50&search=Search+or+List+Media

    because on that link besides the 'Verbatim (Pearl White)' (any idea what these discs look like?, which could be 'CMC MAG E01' or 'RITEK R03') the rest of the media codes listed should be top notch, which is pretty much 'MCC 003'. plus, all of the comments there seem to be pretty much in the 2000's decade which gives me more confidence my burners will work okay with it since mine is basically 2009/2011 (and one from 2005).

    because the discs I ordered are those printable types with a blank white label on the surface apparently. so as long as these are not 'Pearl White', it appears the discs should be nearly guaranteed to be 'MCC 003' ;)

  19. 46 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    However, with older drives with older firmware, you do run the risk that more modern media may be incompatible.

    I wonder if that happened to me on Verbatim DVD-R Azo's recently? (if not, possibly a faulty batch of DVD-R's(?)) ; because the disc burn quality was pretty much horrible compared to the usual standards and both of my burners (7240s (from 2009) and iHAS-324B (from 2011)) reacted similar (I did not try my older Liteon 1673s since I assume that would not fair any better since it's from 2005).

    still, it don't seem like they would change anything significantly because if the media only burns half way decently with a handful of fairly recent burners, a lot of people would be complaining since the majority of DVD burners out there are probably in the last 10-15 years or so I would guesstimate. like you would think it would have to work on the majority of burners out there as I know my burners were on the better side of things in their day. my Liteon iHAS-324B burners firmware date should be from Oct 2011 from a quick look online.

    but looking on Amazon for example it seems a good selling DVD burner is "ASUS DRW-24B1ST" and even checking the ASUS website for firmware updates, the newest one it shows is from March 2014. so 2 years and 5 months newer than my iHAS-324B's firmware. so unless something got tweaked in a fairly short time window it don't seem like this would effect much. unless maybe they tweaked that Verbatim DVD-R 16x Azo stuff shortly after I bought my current batch in Jan 2014 (which still burns great to this day on my burners). but who knows, maybe that's a possibility.


    46 minutes ago, dbminter said:

    I do know that Verbatim changed the process for its DataLife Plus DVD-R and DVD+R so that the 1.02 firmware in the WH16NS60 did not write properly to it anymore when it had worked before.  1.03 firmware fixed that.


    That's weird, because taking a quick look online it shows it's (WH16NS60) a BD-R burner and I would assume that drive is much newer than general Verbatim DataLife Plus DVD-R(or DVD+R) media, correct? ; because it seems like all of the newer Verbatim media that's good is the 'Azo' label and the 'DataLife Plus' label, as far as I can tell, is probably older stock (roughly 10+ years ago to take a guess(?)) at this point.

    so I would tend to assume even with initial release firmware on that WH16NS60 drive it should be up to decent working standards. or where you saying that it was working okay initially, but a update to v1.02 firmware messed it up, and then they released another update to v1.03 to correct it?

  20. They should be 'Made in Taiwan' given the picture shows that.

    but in terms of burn speed on DVD media... I suspect it's possible my drives will burn faster than 8x with them as I know I can burn faster than 8x with TYG02 media (which as Taiyo Yuden 8x certified DVD-R) as I think I can do 12x with those and I know my drive allows I think it was 20x on 16x Verbatim DVD-R Azo media etc but I suspect going too fast might increase jitter etc. but probably not a big deal for general data backup. I think the only media code that allows my burner to burn at 24x is TYG03 (so TY 16x certified media), which I never owned any of those so far. NOTE: I am running newest firmware for all of my CD/DVD burners, which probably means early 2010's firmware.

    because from what I read on other forums... some have mentioned they generally stick to about 16x for standard audio CD-R's as a pretty safe bet in terms of keeping jitter a bit more reasonable (which makes it more likely a standard audio CD player will work) vs burning max or near max CD-R speeds.


    but regardless of all of that... I am in no rush when it comes to burning as it seems like as long as a person can burn at least 4x speed, burn times are reasonable and at 8x is plenty fast enough unless a person is constantly burning a lot of media.

    thanks for the info.

  21. Well hopefully I got a solid deal (about $0.20 per disc) as I found 200 Verbatim (4x 50-packs) DVD+R 8x DataLifePlus, which I am guessing are 'MCC 003' media code.

    now I just got to wait until they get here as hopefully everything runs smooth since the seller does not accept returns. but since they are probably older media (since it seems 16x (MCC 004) has been standard for a rather long time now) I suspect I should not have problems as I don't mind burning at 8x speed as I am primarily concerned with longevity of the media.

  22. 5 hours ago, dbminter said:

    As long as you get the AZO or DataLife Plus DVD+R from Verbatim, they should be fine.  Not the Life Series, which will be CMC.


    Yeah, I am aware of the 'Azo' etc being the best due to them being Mitsubishi dye as these tend to be the only ones I trust long term (and Taiyo Yuden media to. but I usually avoid TY given Verbatim is typically about the same quality but less $. but I still have around 50-75 TYG02 media (8x TY DVD-R) left from 2005-2007 time frame which I strictly use for higher importance data backup. so they will likely last me many more years before I run out of those as I typically burn a copy of my high importance data to Verbatim and TY discs as the odds of both of those failing at the same time should be slim and I also have backups on regular hard drives to).

    but the Verbatim Azo DVD-R, are the ones I had a problem with recently, which was surprising given my experience in the past with top notch results.

    but thanks for the info ;)

    p.s. but I am going to wait until Amazon processes my refund before ordering the Verbatim DVD+R 100-pack from another major retailer for $24.99. because this way, even if those turn out to be bad, it will be much easier to return those since I can just go directly to their store locally for a refund. but assuming they keep the price at $24.99 ill probably be ordering a 100-pack within the next week or two and I might make a quick post here with the results of the burn quality.

  23. 8 hours ago, dbminter said:

    If you're going for long term storage, you'll want M-Disc.  They cost more, but they last far longer than organic dye discs do.  Organic dye discs decay much faster.  M-Disc is akin to chipping pits in stone in terms of writing bits of data.  As long as your device supports reading DVD+R DVD discs, it will most likely read M-Disc DVD's.  And, of course, you will need a burner that supports writing to M-Disc.



    I have heard about those M-Disc in the past, and they appear to be a good option, but they seem harder to find and if you can find them they cost a arm-and-a-leg. plus, given my experience and others (like yourself from another post), it seems like regular quality media that was burned good initially and lasts a while without any obvious degradation will likely last decades since I got media (from Verbatim and Taiyo Yuden) around 10-15 years old since I initially burned it and it still scans well with KProbe and I figure if media lasts 10-15 years without any obvious degradation issues, it will probably last for the foreseeable future.


    but thanks for the info ;)


    NOTE: my Sony Optiarc 7240s is probably from 2009 and my Lite-On iHAS-324B from a quick look is May 2011. but they should still be solid burners with the right media. my oldest DVD burner for a PC is my original one, which still works to this day, which is a Lite-On 1673S (IDE) as I got that in 2005. hell, you can still buy Lite-On drives in the iHAS-x24 series, so I imagine my iHAS-324B has got to be pretty much up to modern enough standards even today and I am running newest available firmware for all of my burners.

    p.s. I might look into the Verbatim DVD+R 100-pack as I found it online at a major retailer (for basically same price I got those Verbatim DVD-R 100-pack that does not like my burners (or possibly a bad batch of discs(?)) ) that will be easier to return (since I can just take it directly to the store instead of having to ship it back) should those disc fail to be up to the usual standards I am used to. I am hoping those fair better with my drive since they probably have a media code of "MID: MCC-004-00" since that's what my previously burned DVD+R Verbatim media has from many years ago now which still scan well on the handful I have re-scanned not all that long ago now.

  24. In short... given my recent experience, I would probably suggest getting Taiyo Yuden media over Verbatim if you want to be safe. because I recently had a issue with Verbatim DVD-R media (MCC 03RG20) which used to be rock-solid for me as the discs I still have from Jan 2014 still burn with high quality (as I recently burned some of those without issue as they are still up to their usual high quality standards on my burners (7240s/iHAS324B) unlike the ones I just bought here in April 2022.


    because I recently got a 100-pack of Verbatim DVD-R Azo media (MCC 03RG20) from Amazon and, unless I got really unlucky, the disc quality is pretty much shot. because I know it's unlikely my burners (7240s/iHAS324B) are the issue given I can burn basically the same media I bought back in Jan 2014, and did recently, without issue. but that batch I got from Amazon, which is same media code, with KProbe the PI/PIF's are basically on the edge of failure if not failure level. because I burned a few discs, two on 7240s and one on my iHAS-324B and while the two completed the 'verify' process on ImgBurn on the 7240s you can tell the quality of those discs are pretty much shot as the PI's are generally in the 175-225 range with peaks being over 300 (even if this remains readable, the quality would be on the edge as I would not personally trust it) and the PIF's, while not as extreme, is still so-so compared to my usual standards as it's not far from solid RED on the 1's with plenty of 2's, some 3's and a tiny amount of 4's. but total PIF's were generally in the 8000 range, which is quite weak compared to my usual standards of probably around a couple hundred or so. I might have tolerated the PIF's had the PI's not been so bad (even total here was around 2.7mil where as the scan I posted above was only 87k, so a rather large difference in total PI's). I think ImgBurn still managed to verify this one though if I recall correctly. but either way, I don't trust the disc for long term storage of data.


    but the other disc, which ImgBurn outright failed to verify (read error etc), so there is definite data corruption, had a general PI start off around 175-200 and slowly declined as the burn went forward down to around 75-100 or so for roughly 1/3rd of the disc. but then near the end of the burn the PI's went off-the-rails and shot up to around 250-350 range and during around this point in regards to the PIF's were basically SOLID RED in the general 10-25 range with some around 30 and a single spike of over 70 and another might have been around 50 etc, which is straight up horrible as it seems you want to keep that to around 3-4 tops (a little over that occasionally is probably not a huge concern though) for more of a optimal burn. even the total PIF's on this failed disc were nearly 16k and like I mentioned above I probably routinely float around 200 total PIF's on good media, or at least something sane, like you can see on the scan I posted in my previous post of 1500 or so.


    so bottom line for me is... unless I got really unlucky with a bad batch of discs, I suspect Verbatim did something with their media(?) and if so, TY is probably a safer choice at this point even though it costs around $5-10 more per 100-pack. it's a shame as my opinion of Verbatim has been basically top notch in the DVD recordable market until recently.


    p.s. but when I bought those Verbatim DVD-R 100-pack I also picked up a cheap Verbatim CD-R 100-pack for about $18. these are CMC Magnetics (Phthalocyanine dye) which I imagine are generally considered weaker than Verbatim's Azo variations. but I only use them for AUDIO CD's and in this regard, considering the price I got them for, are probably 'good enough' so far as they work okay on a couple of CD players I got from about 1991 and one from 2003 as even if a occasional disc fails, I can manage for the price I paid and I am not relying on them too heavily for any long term data storage. but if the hub code decoding info I read online is accurate these CD-R's are probably made on Jan 11th 2010. but if true, they would have been sitting for 12+ years now.

  25. On 4/22/2021 at 3:53 PM, dbminter said:

    It's not too far fetched to say a quality DVD-R will last 20 years at least


    Yeah, I don't think it's far fetched at all and is likely at least plausible, if not outright true to last 20+ years on quality DVD recordable media. because while I get no brand is "bullet-proof", I am willing to bet a high percentage of the good brand discs are built to last at least 20+ years for a conservative estimate given what we now know with the passage of time ;)

    but you can see some people online (like comments from years ago etc) seem to think DVD recordable won't last (like won't last more than 5 years or so etc) but that's only if your using so-so media as if you stick with the known good brands like Verbatim/TY (Taiyo Yuden) I like my chances of those lasting 20+ years at least and could potentially be well over that. but my best guesstimate is if a disc can last 10-15 years and still read back well on a drive (as if the drive can read it easily, like with no slow down, chances are the disc is still going strong) and give a good disc quality check with KProbe etc, it will probably last for the foreseeable future.

    I have many Verbatim recordable DVD's around 10-13+ years now (I never got into DVD burning until I think it was 2005 and CD burning I first got into in 1998), and while I have not rechecked all of them, I recently scanned a couple random ones with KProbe. in short, given the scan info with PI/PIF's the discs will likely last for the foreseeable future if they have lasted this long. so I figure unless I am way off, like say if it's possible for a disc to remain reliable for 10-15 years or so and then shortly after suddenly start declining rapidly, which I don't think will happen with a disc that lasts that long as it will likely be a slow degradation of the data, then ill safely get at least another 10+ years out of them.

    but recently I tried to image some generic CD-R's with ImgBurn as a few I burned in Sep 2002 and a re-burned that general set onto another generic different brand of disc sometime in 2004 and basically 2 out of the 3 were okay on original 2002 burn, but one disc was shot (I tried reading it in multiple burners I have and basically same results) and it was a three disc set. so I pitched it in the trash. but I already had the data backed up elsewhere so no real harm done.

    but I think sadly, not many care about DVD's anymore and probably don't even consider it as a solid storage medium for long term data backup which I personally trust it more than what most are probably using which is flash media storage like SD memory cards and the like. because while SD memory cards and the like are nice and convenient, I don't trust them for storing data 10-20+ years like I do with quality DVD media. but being it's not really practical to burn a ton of data to DVD these days, especially given hard drive space is cheap enough now and has been for quite a few years, I can understand why many just opt for hard drives since they are the best all-around option for general data backup. but it's still nice to have quality DVD media around on that occasion you got a bit more limited higher importance data you want backed up like family pictures and videos as a bonus with DVD media one does not have to worry about accidental data deletion etc.

    side note... I think it was RITEK G05 that were horrible and failed quickly if I recall correctly. but thankfully I never had any of these.

    also, I see you mentioned 'Mitsubishi' which makes me even more confident those very recently purchased (here in March 2022) new old stock of Verbatim CD-RW 700MB 2-4x rated discs (2005 date on back of box) I got will last for more limited amount of data backup I might use those for that I might update from time-to-time as it lists that name and even some new old stock of Verbatim DVD+RW 2.4x 4.7GB discs I bought in March 2019 but have a '2002' date on the jewel cases seem to be from them to with the "MCC-A01-00" media code.

    the only 4.7GB recordable DVD media I still have that I can burn are Verbatim (which I bought the 100-pack in Jan 2014 of which I still probably got around 80-90 of these left) and some Taiyo Yuden (TYG02 media code, which are 8x discs) which I probably got roughly 75 of those left, which I almost certainly bought in the late 2000's (2007 at the latest given a date on one of the disc I just noticed a moment ago, which basically means they got to be bought somewhere in the 2005-2007 time frame) since I first got into DVD burning in 2005 (which I still have my original DVD burner, which is a Lite-On 1673s as it's installed in my backup computer). I got a little more beyond these, but those are the only ones I will count on lasting. then I got some CD-RW and DVD+RW Verbatim media which I use a bit for testing here and there and for a limited amount of storage where data is more likely to change and need to be updated from time-to-time.

    hell, here is a KProbe scan (using my Liteon iHAS324B drive on Linux Mint v20.3-Xfce using Wine v4.0.4 x86(32bit) through PlayOnLinux) I just did on a Taiyo Yuden DVD-R 8x (TYG02) disc burned Nov 29th 2007 (so it's 14+ years old now) at what was likely burned at 8x or 12x (my guess is probably 12x and disc is basically full to. but nowadays I am in no rush as if I burn some more of these TYG02 discs, ill probably stick to 8x from now on as it may increase quality of burn slightly etc) and had to be burned on a Liteon 1673s (this burner is still connected in my backup computer) given I never bought another DVD burner until the Sony 7240s, which is likely 2009-2010, and as you can see, while not 'perfect' (seems it's preferred to keep PIF spikes to 3 or less and I hit 4 briefly and even in regards to the BLUE PI's, which are not as important as the RED PIF's, from what I noticed from memory in the old days around 10 spikes and less are about as good as your going to get and I am generally in that ball park with some exceptions), is still pretty strong overall as this disc will likely last 20+ years easy (i.e. so at least another 6+ years from now) and I would not be surprised if it goes well beyond that...

    KProbe scan 3-28-22 TYG02.png

  • Create New...

Important Information

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