aviationwiz wrote:Which is a more accurate determination of writing quality?
In my opinion it's a little dangerous to think of any single scan as being "accurate" in some way.
Any scan you perform will only discover one or a few aspects of how the disc and drive interact, and that is why I think that you can only get an "accurate" understanding of disc quality by performing different types of tests at different speeds in different drives.
The excellent PIE/PIF results you get in your Plextor drive at 2x reading speed may look quite different if you were to scan those discs at high speed, because the TA scans show high jitter, and that could adversely affect the readability at higher speeds (e.g. 12x or faster).
So what I'm saying is, that even though it is much simpler to just pick one type of scan and say that scan is the most important one, you won't really know that your disc is good without having several different tests show the same thing, and in this case your TA test disagrees with the PIE/PIF tests.
A real reading test such as a Read Transfer test will also provide information that is difficult or impossible to get in other ways - whether the disc is easily readable.
Personally I don't think a disc has been tested properly without at least a Read Transfer test (preferably in at least two different drives), a PIE/PIF test at high speed (12x if possible), and a Jitter/Beta test.
I don't test all my discs like that of course, but the Jitter/Beta test will usually be the same if I use the same media/drive/firmware/speed, so I only do a read test and a high-speed PIE/PIF test for most discs.
