Media Compatibility With CD-RW Drives - Which Media Is Best?

[TheWizard]

Good question! Nobody has asked or posted results of CD-R discs on DVD-RW drives. "Quite the computer quagmire, isn't it Mr. O?" Die you Dell kid, die!

Sorry, I got a little carried away.

[Colonel Panic]

Good question! Nobody has asked or posted results of CD-R discs on DVD-RW drives. "Quite the computer quagmire, isn't it Mr. O?" Die you Dell kid, die!

Sorry, I got a little carried away.

*laffs* yeah....a bit carried away.

I ended up buying a 50 spindle of Iomega by verbatim, manufatured by Mitisubishi Chem, for like $27can (compucentre, btw). Unless it's sub-manufactured by another company. *lol*

Since I got a couple verbatim CD-Rs and DVD-Rs with my G4 mac....I feel comfortable using them. Dark blue writing surface, if that makes a difference (though my DVD-RW disks are dark grey or something)...

[TheWizard]

You can't go wrong with Verbatim CD-R's, as long as they are DataLifePlus and not plain old DataLife or ValuLife. Verbatim DataLifePlus uses the dark blue Super AZO dye, and it withstands anything...almost.

[cfitz]

While I was at my local Circuit City picking up a 50-pack of Memorex CDR's on sale for $5 (after MIR), I came across a lonely 50-pack of Taiyo Yuden made TDK blanks with a $7 rebate (all of the other TDK packages were Ritek, I believe). I bought the TDK spindle and one Memorex spindle (also made by Taiyo Yuden - the distribution on the shelf was about 35/65 Taiyo Yuden/other for the Memorex branded spindles). Here are my results:

Code: Select all

Yamaha CRW3200EZ
Firmware: 1.0d
........................TDK/TY 80min 32X........................24X
........................Memorex/TY 80min 32X....................24X


The Taiyo Yuden TDK's are head and shoulders above the Ritek made TDK's I tested earlier. Full speed burns with no errors and no toxic fumes either!

Taiyo Yuden scores again...

cfitz

[TheWizard]

"Heeeeeeeeeeee shoots and scores!"

Good deal, cfitz, TY rules! I'm surprised because usually Ritek discs perform better, maybe the CRW3200EZ doesn't like them.

[cfitz]

I'm surprised because usually Ritek discs perform better, maybe the CRW3200EZ doesn't like them.

Which is why we thank you for starting this thread - so we can share what particular media work/don't work with particular burners.

Of course, there is always the possibility that I got a bad batch of Ritek TDK's. I wasn't kidding in my earlier post when I said that they give off a noxious odor.

cfitz

[dodecahedron]

well, we're glad to still have you around, what with the TDK fumes and the nitrous oxide - what a mix!

[TheWizard]

And I thank you for reading this thread. I'm just trying to help however I can.

[cfitz]

Hi Wizard,

I need to make a small correction.

I was doing some cleaning up and found the wrapper from the Memorex Cool Colors CD's I reported for the Yamaha CRW3200EZ. They are rated 16x, not 32x like I thought. They still burned okay at 24x, though.

cfitz

[TheWizard]

Noted, thanks.

[cfitz]

This isn't particularly informative since my burner peaks out at 24x and I didn't have any trouble with the 32x Memorex/TY media, but for the sake of completeness here is my report on the 40x variant:

Code: Select all

Yamaha CRW3200EZ
Firmware: 1.0d
........................Memorex/TY 80min 40X....................24X

[TheWizard]

Completion is better than incompletion, thanks.

[cfitz]

This is not for actual addition to the list because it is so silly, but I thought I would share it anyway:

I found a couple of three- or four-year-old 74 minute, 4x (yes, only 4x) rated Imation CDR blanks made by Taiyo Yuden in my junk drawer. Just for fun I decided to try to burn them with my Yamaha CRW3200EZ. With the so-called "optimum write speed control" enabled, the first burned at 16x. With the OWSC disabled, the second burned at my drive's maximum speed of 24x. Both disks tested out fine with no errors.

4x "overburned" to 24x... only on a TY

cfitz

[cfitz]

I just received a new Lite-On 166S DVD-ROM drive and replaced my old AOpen CD-950E 50x CD-ROM drive. Why is this relevant? Because the Lite-On has significantly better read quality than the AOpen. Those TDK/RTK discs that the AOpen had so much trouble with are no problem at all for the Lite-On.

Ideally I would have liked to perform the read testing on the same drive that I used to burn the CDR's. This would have eliminated an extra variable - the quality of the reader. But the Yamaha CRW3200 does not report C2 errors, so I was forced to use the AOpen CD-ROM for my read tests.

I guess to be fair to the Yamaha and TDK, I should report the better results. What do you think?

Here is my revised result for the TDK/RTK along with three new results:

Code: Select all

Yamaha CRW3200EZ
Firmware: 1.0d
........................TDK/RTK 80min 40X.......................24X
........................Imation/CMC 80min 32X...................24X
........................Memorex/CMC 80min 24X...................24X
........................Yamaha/MS 80min 24X.....................24X

Now I feel bad for trash-talking the TDK's earlier... On the other hand, they still must be lower quality than the other discs, since the AOpen could read those others without errors. And the Lite-On doesn't make them smell any better....

cfitz

[dodecahedron]

Ideally I would have liked to perform the read testing on the same drive that I used to burn the CDR's. This would have eliminated an extra variable - the quality of the reader.

i disagree. it would not eliminate an extra variable. the burner is a reader like any other reader, and there's no more reason the test the burned CD on it than on any other reader.

i remember quite a few posts about CDs that test fine on the burner that burned them but bad on others. so if you test your CD on the burner, what does that prove? only that's it's readble on it.

i have a Plex 40x and a (shitty) LG 52x CD-ROM. i almost always use the plex for reading because many CDs test bad on the LG and good on the Plex. i know that the plex has a reputation for being a very good reader. fine. so what am i to conclude? that the LG is faulty or just lousy? i can not tell how the CDs will read on other readers until i go and test them.

[cfitz]

i disagree. it would not eliminate an extra variable. the burner is a reader like any other reader, and there's no more reason the test the burned CD on it than on any other reader.

Well, it doesn't eliminate it in the sense that it does away with the reader altogether. I wasn't trying to say that. Obviously some reader is required to test the end-to-end quality. But if the disc is tested on the same drive that wrote it, there aren't any questions about whether the writer or reader is to blame if the results aren't good, because they are one and the same.

i remember quite a few posts about CDs that test fine on the burner that burned them but bad on others. so if you test your CD on the burner, what does that prove? only that's it's readble on it.

That's the unfortunate flip side, and it is certainly a valid point. But doing the read test with the same drive that wrote the disc does at least provide a single, well characterized result, whether or not that result can be extrapolated to other readers. Using a reader other than the writer, and not reporting that reader, means there is an unknown variable in the results that dilutes their usefulness somewhat.

The way I look at it, the truly important aspect of these tests is the end-to-end quality of the data transfer. That transfer requires three main components: a writer, a reader, and the medium on which the data is transferred. To me those are probably the three most important variables in the equation. Next are the write and read speeds. Then come presumably tertiary variables such as the ambient temperature and humidity at the time of writing and reading, etc.

Neglecting the tertiary variables, in my opinion the ideal database of media compatibility would include a multi-dimensional matrix that had entries for every combination of writer, write speed, media, reader and read speed. Obviously this is impractical.

The next most ideal setup, in my view, would be to use a single "gold standard" reader and read speed for all combinations of writer, write speed and media. This also is impractical since we are relying on end users to contribute what they can, and we don't all own the same reader.

In this thread we are making it manageable by omitting the reader and read speed altogether, concentrating instead on the writer and media, and including only a single data point for write speed - the maximum speed at which the media could be written without errors (although, again, we can’t actually know this without reading).

Given that we are omitting the reader, my thinking was that cleanest way to omit it is to use the same device for both writing and reading wherever possible. As you noted, this, like all practical solutions, isn't completely ideal. But I think it does do the best job at reducing unknown variables. A bad result is known to be the fault of the reported media/drive combination, because there isn't a separate, unknown reader (as I was forced to use due to the limitation in my writer) thrown into the mix. When you do test with a different reader, you run the risk of reporting a bad writer/media combination when in fact it was a bad reader/media combination. That’s what happened to me.

Maybe we should also post the reader we used while testing, and the top speed at which it read the media without errors. Or, if we have access to more than one reader, post the best results we can obtain. Anyone have more thoughts?

cfitz

[dodecahedron]

ok cfitz, i understand your point better now.

Given that we are omitting the reader, my thinking was that cleanest way to omit it is to use the same device for both writing and reading wherever possible. As you noted, this, like all practical solutions, isn't completely ideal. But I think it does do the best job at reducing unknown variables. A bad result is known to be the fault of the reported media/drive combination, because there isn't a separate, unknown reader (as I was forced to use due to the limitation in my writer) thrown into the mix. When you do test with a different reader, you run the risk of reporting a bad writer/media combination when in fact it was a bad reader/media combination. That’s what happened to me.

and i totally agree with what you said.

i'm frustrated since, like i said, i have a plextor burner, which is also a very good reader, and a LG 52x reader which apparently is crap.
i burn a CD. i want to test it to see if the burn was good. i test it on the plex - perfect, no errors. i test it on the LG - errors. so what am i to conclude? is the burn good or no? no way to tell except to start testing it on other drives in other computers (which is quite a hassle).
therefore i am forced to settle for the plex's results, and hope that the burn is indeed good, and that the CD will be readable on other drives, mediocre ones, not as good as the plex but not crappy like the LG, just average ones.
so i hope...

[TheWizard]

Just to clarify, the table I compiled are to be used as any other statistics; they provide an average and are not to be taken as the gospel truth. As with any statistics, there are tons of extra variables that are not always taken into account. After hearing this, it may sound like statistics are inaccurate, but as long as the statistics are used to find an average and to spot patterns then statistics can prove to be worthwhile.

[cfitz]

Hi Wizard,

I certainly wasn't implying that the table you and others have kindly worked to create is inaccurate or without value, and I hope my comments didn't come across that way. I was just pointing out some limitations in the data we are collecting so that people would be aware of them and make use of the results accordingly. Do you think it would be a worthwhile policy to include the reader in the results?

In any event, I still think that compiling this table is a worthwhile exercise, and that is why I have continued to contribute to it.

Along those lines, here is another entry for the CRW3200EZ f/w 1.0d:

Code: Select all

........................Verbatim Super Azo/MC 80min 48X.........24X

When I get a chance, I will also post some results for Mitsui/MS 24x media.

cfitz

[TheWizard]

I know you weren't implying that the table should be thrown out, I just wanted to clarify to anyone thinking that the table is useless would be incorrect. Not to worry.

Again, just use the table as a reference. It's easy to spot patterns and see which media performs well with which drives and so on.

[cfitz]

Two more for the CRW3200:

Code: Select all

........................Maxell/RTK 80min 40X....................24X
........................Mitsui Silver/MS 80min 24X..............24X


The Mitsui Silver are really quite nice. Subjectively speaking, even better than the Taiyo Yuden I have tested. Too bad they are so expensive. In addition, Mitsui is a little tight-lipped about the speed ratings on their discs. They don't promote the speed ratings on their website, and the packaging doesn't state the rating, so it is a little hard to know what one is buying. But I did find a press release that stated their intention to begin selling 48x media by June 2002. The retailer from which I purchased the discs guaranteed them to 24x, hence that is what I reported as the rating. But I think they would easily go higher on drives that support higher speeds.

cfitz

[TheWizard]

I agree that the Mitsui discs can probably burn faster on faster CD-RW drives. I have one Mitsui disc that was given to me by a friend, and although it contains audio on the disc, it is terrific quality.

[aviationwiz]

LTR-48125W VS06

Fuji 48x/TY Smartburn speed: 48x Burn without errors speed: 48x

[TheWizard]

I love TY, don't you?

Thanks aviationwiz.

[hjs]

I think this media will do best on Plextor burner's



at least that's what plextor will tell soon

some more info on cdfreaks

Plextor Europe, one of the leading manufacturers of CD-ROMs and CD-writers in the world, are proud to present its new range of CD-Recordable media

Nowadays, one cannot imagine a modern PC without a CD-writer anymore. Photographs, music and data can be preserved quickly, in full safety and at little cost. The present generation fast CD-writers imposes raised requirements with regards to CD-R's. It is thus essential to choose an adequate support. Thanks to its long experience with CD-writers, Plextor is able to propose a range of CD-R discs which fulfil the most severe quality requirements:


Quality of exceptional writing
Reliability and higher precision
Is appropriate for all the CD formats
Surface of the disc protected by a coating against scratches

The above text was translated from French so please excuse any weird sentences

Plextor will sell the discs in quantities of 10pcs. and spindles of 50pcs. The discs will (of course) have a capacity of 80 minutes (700MB) and will be certified for 48X writing. Plextor will start selling the discs as of mid-November 2002.