Who makes Ricoh 4× DVD + media?

[Guzo]

I have found some decent price for these?

I feel boring a little

C U guys

[burninfool]

Ahhh Ricoh.
Use DVDINFOPRO to check media.

[Guzo]

R they good?

[burninfool]

R they good?

Yes,very high quality.

[Guzo]

Thanx burninfool

I found them quite affordable if i buy 25 pieces in cakebox

57$ in Croatia.

I found Traxdata 4× blank at that price per piece as Ricoh, but i believe that Ricoh is miles ahead

[RJW]

The difference with Traxdata and Ricoh is. That with Ricoh you know that you get ricoh. WIth Traxdata you can get ricoh or Ritek. It's allways gambling. The ricoh media is better supported !

[rdgrimes]

Actually, the Ricoh is made by Ritek. It's been alleged that it's made with different materials and specs, but it all comes off the Ritek line in Taiwan.
I would doubt that Ritek is making 2 different spec DVD+R on the same line, it doen't make good business sense. Probably just a different stamper.

[Kennyshin]

Most DVD+R media are made by Ritek. It's being challenged by Taiyo Yuden, CMC, Prodisc, BeAll, and some other manufacturers in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Somehow, Ricoh media are produced in Ritek's lines.

[RJW]

Actually, the Ricoh is made by Ritek. It's been alleged that it's made with different materials and specs, but it all comes off the Ritek line in Taiwan.
I would doubt that Ritek is making 2 different spec DVD+R on the same line, it doen't make good business sense. Probably just a different stamper.

Most of the Ricoh media is made by ritek but some is actually made by Ricoh themselves.

Now is it just the MID (different stamper) that's makeing the difference in write quality.
I don't think so. I think there actually are useing 2 different dye's.
Based on accelerated ageing tests you can clearly see a difference between Ritek DVD-R/DVD+R media (scores quite bad !) and Ricoh media (excellent score)
Also the analyzed disc's on the datarius analyzer showed a difference when it comes to parameters inside and outside the standard.

[Guzo]

is it the same ATIP on ritek and ricoh?

[RJW]

No there different atip and mid codes for ricoh media and Ritek media.
The ricoh media produced by ritek under ricoh quality supervision carries the ricoh atip/mid code.

[Guzo]

So there is no usual way to differ Ricoh and Ricoh by Ritek media , only by hard test

Can i differ by origin (country) ?

[RJW]

ricoh is made in taiwan
ritek is made in taiwan or germany(primedisc !)

So not a country.
So how do I know that I get ricoh and not Ritek ?

Media with Ritek +R MIDcode is so far only sold as under the less known brands (mostly ritek home brands) and the non branded stuff.

Ricoh media can allways be found under the Ricoh brand ! and on most other +R big brands that do not use CMC,MCC & TY.
Examples: Fuji(ricoh), TDK(ricoh/TY), Philips(MCC/ricoh)
now for these brands the country system does work most times.

japan-TY
singapore -MCC
taiwan - Ricoh ( + very small change for MCC)

Memorex uses ricoh or CMC the way spindles from the different manufacturers can be determined is posted on another topic.

[Guzo]

So that's nice.

If i buy Ricoh that means i get Ricoh media, not some Ritek 2nd grade media

[rdgrimes]

With DVD+R, there no evidence that the Ritek media and the Ricoh JPN01 is in any way different in terms of performance/write quality. Ricoh has somehow managed to get an early reputation for being good media, but as far as I can see it's quite variable in quality, and not all that great even at it's best. Ricoh JPN00 is much better and far more consistant.

[RJW]

With DVD+R, there no evidence that the Ritek media and the Ricoh JPN01 is in any way different in terms of performance/write quality. Ricoh has somehow managed to get an early reputation for being good media, but as far as I can see it's quite variable in quality, and not all that great even at it's best. Ricoh JPN00 is much better and far more consistant.

There actually is. I got some Accelerated ageing test and tests about tracking and reflectivity and they show a difference.
Now the tracking and reflectivity tests could be explained by the less good quality controle procedure on Ritek media(longer stamper use). But the ageing tests show a to big difference.
Ritek +R/-R is(It can't hold out for 2,5 years according to these tests) very close to each other but the Ricoh disc's are miles away.(No increase in errors after 5 years according to accelerate ageing)
The other explanation except for the dye would be that Ritek uses a different toplayer or different metal composition.(This last one would also explain the reflectivity difference excellent)
But still there looks to be a difference in production based on these data.

[rdgrimes]

I got some Accelerated ageing test and tests about tracking and reflectivity

Sorry, such tests mean nothing except possibly to demonstrate variations between batches or flawed testing procedures. Ritek DVD+R 4x and Ricoh JPN01 are the same thing.
But if you care to post these "tests", that would be interesting. Not your interpretations of the tests, but the tests themselves.

[jsl]

Ritek DVD+R 4x and Ricoh JPN01 are the same thing.

I doubt it. Just compare the MID code of "RITEK...R02" and "RICOHPJNR01" and you'll see for example that most of the parameters regarding the OPC algorithm are different. It does not make any sense if the dyes would be identical.

Personally I rate Ricoh media very high and I have not seen these huge variations in media you claim. I have only tested a few of the Ritek ones so can't say much about them yet.

[RJW]

Ritek DVD+R 4x and Ricoh JPN01 are the same thing.

I doubt it. Just compare the MID code of "RITEK...R02" and "RICOHPJNR01" and you'll see for example that most of the parameters regarding the OPC algorithm are different. It does not make any sense if the dyes would be identical.

Personally I rate Ricoh media very high and I have not seen these huge variations in media you claim. I have only tested a few of the Ritek ones so can't say much about them yet.

That's the only official proof we're gonna get. Unless I get permission to release the ageing test data. But I think this one proofs even more.
The Reflectivity data and the tracking data can be influenced quite easy in the proces. If the ricoh's are usseing more dye and a more fresh stamper it would explain allready the results.

The Ritek dye is think based on Ritek G04 media. Useing the ricoh dye would cost Ritek money.(Because it is patented ! Trust me Ricoh wouldn't give them this technology for free ! while the G04 technology costs ritek nothing. The same dye can be easily used for DVD+R and DVD-R

Now about the huge variations.
There are mostly sligth variations in the chemical composition of the disc. A good dvd rewriters OPC should solve most of the problems.
Some drives never have problems with this while others are problematic.

A small example from the cd-r world.- Lite On is known for limited optimalisation on MCC metal AZO (Not on Super Azo but real Metal AZO media) a small difference can make a huge difference on a Lite On burner while Plextor and Yamaha with there excellent OPC burns them fine.

Now is ritek media bad ?
No based on the mechanical test it's good. So why should we prefer RICOH over Ritek then.
The problem is mostly RICOH got a fancy name and for that reason is much better supported by most drive manufacturers. Still if a manufacturer did a hell of job the drive might burn the riteks just as fine. Now the truth is we got some
Ritek,CMC, Ricoh +R media tested on manufactureing quality and on
error rate.(K-probe)
Now the Ricoh's and Riteks's were of lower quality as CMC based on production. Still they burned better as the CMC disc on most burners just because CMC has a bad reputation and for that the drive manufacturers will not spend much time on the optimalisation process.
Check the K-probe scans on the net (and you know that I don't think k-probe is a good testing tool) you will see that a Plextor 708 burns ricoh media on 8x much better as RItek media at 8x.
So the Ricoh MID code is allready in favour because of better optimalisations done by drive manufacturers for it.
Another reason is that based on CD-R's we know that Riteks quality standards sometimes really screw up. (What was CDA-3000 score of the ARITA cd-r's on the HCC stand of PC-ACTIVE again. AH Yeah a 0 at 8x. (A 1 year old CMC disc could get a score of 93 at 40x) Which means that the disc are full of E22 and E32 errors when read at 8x on PLextor 40TSI. To put it simple the disc's were completely garbage !)
The Ricohs are haveing an additional quality controle because of there made under RICOH super vision which holds a different quality controle.
For that reason the quality is higher still we see quite some big variances here with some burners in the end quality after burning because some drive manufacturers do not use a decent running OPC.(Not everyone is as good as P.....r. Which burned the CMC disc's excellent because CMC made a quite decent product ones again ! I know there rare but I do encounter the sometimes. )