Home News Reviews Forums Shop


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

General discussion about recordable CD, DVD and BD media and write quality testing.

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

Yep, I currently have ~1.3TB of data to burn (whenever I can motivate myself to bother... at 16x and with two burners going, I can get it done at a rate of ~8.4GB/hr verified... about 9.3min/disc... So, about 165 hrs total, or 6.9 straight days! Oh, I'd still have to PREPARE the data for burning too, so, that hurts the total time... Partly why I am so reluctant to start burning...)

I have burned about 400GB of it this month though... (Wow, guess that means I started with 1.7TB?)

It is all sorts of junk: captured a/v I did myself (most of it still needs to be edited), stuff off of the usenet (ever been in the alt.binaries.multimedia groups!? You can find some ultra-cool stuff there!); actually, that might be it...

I'm basically a digital packrat: I haven't deleted a darn thing in at least seven years now...

I bought the cd-r back in spring '01, then I started doing all kinds of OT at work, realized I had no time to burn the stuff (way too busy, 85 hr weeks, at work 6a-10pm M-F then 6-12 Sat), but realized I had the money to buy a ton o' HDs! So, I did! 8) :D After having way too many of them fail though (never lost any data, I am one lucky SOB!), I have now gone the RAID 5 route... But it just isn't the same as having the stuff burned, obviously...

80GB x 7 = ~480Gb RAID 5

160GB x 5 = ~640GB RAID 5

Soon I will throw a few more drives on the controller:

120GB x 3 = ~240GB RAID 5

So, basically 1.3TB in RAID storage available...

I still have (had more though) a real Heinz-57 of drives: 12 80GB Maxtor, 2 80GB Maxtors (different model), three 100GB Maxtors (two unused, ALL are returns from RMAed 80GBers though! :o ), one 120GB IBM, and seven 160GB Maxtors... Obviously not all RAIDed...

In case you are wondering:

Grab a good book (Clarke/Sagan/Dick/Harris/Card as of late) and say 48 cd-r and you are set for at least four hrs! Read for nine minutes, switch discs, repeat... :D


Regarding the inability to test for C2 errors: Yah, that was my thinking too, UNTIL I grabbed some of 'em and threw them into my Sony 40x burner and saw the errors! :evil:

And if you think that's bad: I have a 24x TDK burner that seems UNABLE to burn an error-free SECTOR! (NOT DISC, BUT SECTOR!) The entire discs are YELLOW that I burned with that POS! :o :o :o :roll: :roll: :roll: :evil: :evil: :evil: :cry: :cry: :cry:
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby TheWizard on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

PennyArcade wrote:no lite on 40125w with latest firmware on the chart?

I've been having incredibly bad luck with

Durabrand cmc's and Mitsumi Postechs :evil:


Which firmware version are you using?
TheWizard
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:56 pm

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

Tolyngee wrote:In case you are wondering:

Grab a good book (Clarke/Sagan/Dick/Harris/Card as of late) and say 48 cd-r and you are set for at least four hrs! Read for nine minutes, switch discs, repeat... :D

Well, that sounds like a good system, given the size of the task with which you are faced. :)

Tolyngee wrote:Regarding the inability to test for C2 errors: Yah, that was my thinking too, UNTIL I grabbed some of 'em and threw them into my Sony 40x burner and saw the errors! :evil:

And if you think that's bad: I have a 24x TDK burner that seems UNABLE to burn an error-free SECTOR! (NOT DISC, BUT SECTOR!) The entire discs are YELLOW that I burned with that POS! :o :o :o :roll: :roll: :roll: :evil: :evil: :evil: :cry: :cry: :cry:

Keep in mind that just as CD writers are of differing quality, so are CD readers. Thus, a disc that may show no errors when read by one drive may show a number of errors on another. Of course, if every single sector is damaged as on the discs burned by your TDK 24x burner, then you can pretty safely blame the burner+media.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

cfitz wrote:Keep in mind that just as CD writers are of differing quality, so are CD readers. Thus, a disc that may show no errors when read by one drive may show a number of errors on another. Of course, if every single sector is damaged as on the discs burned by your TDK 24x burner, then you can pretty safely blame the burner+media.


It was the TDK that showed the problems writing and reading; the Yamaha was the replacement for the TDK.

I may have burned up to 600 cd-r with that POS though! :o I hope I don't have to go back and re-burn all that data... I am considering it though!

So, in total, that makes about 2.2TB of data between stored on HDs and already burned... :D :o
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

Tolyngee wrote:So, in total, that makes about 2.2TB of data between stored on HDs and already burned... :D :o

The floorboards must be creaking under the strain... :lol:

Have you considered reading War and Peace? It should get you through a big chunk of those discs. And if that isn't enough, try Atlas Shrugged :wink:

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby aztechya on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:04 am

Tolyngee wrote:80GB x 7 = ~480Gb RAID 5

160GB x 5 = ~640GB RAID 5

Soon I will throw a few more drives on the controller:

120GB x 3 = ~240GB RAID 5

So, basically 1.3TB in RAID storage available...



I don't mean anything by this but... Isn't RAID for redundancy only??.. Which means 80GB x 7 = ~480Gb RAID 5 = 80GB reduntantly present 7 times? In other words 80GBx7RAID5 = 80GB Data?? Etc...

Does the above even make since???
User avatar
aztechya
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 12:23 am
Location: CLT, NC, US, EARTH, SOL, UNIVERSE, ORIONS BELT

Postby aztechya on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Never mind my last question. I figured it out....
User avatar
aztechya
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 12:23 am
Location: CLT, NC, US, EARTH, SOL, UNIVERSE, ORIONS BELT

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Ah RAID, an apparently simple but actually fairly complex topic. RAID can be used for speed, redundancy, or even for creating large virtual disks from multiple smaller disks.

Tolyngee is correct. In RAID 5 configuration, conceptually one of the disks is used for parity while the others are used for data. So 7 80GBytes disks yields 80 GBytes worth of parity and 6x80 = 480 GBytes of data.

Check out this as a starting point:

http://www.raidweb.com/whatis.html

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Oops. Our posts crossed in transit. Well, the link is still worth checking if you are curious to learn more.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

cfitz wrote:
Tolyngee wrote:So, in total, that makes about 2.2TB of data between stored on HDs and already burned... :D :o

The floorboards must be creaking under the strain... :lol:

Have you considered reading War and Peace? It should get you through a big chunk of those discs. And if that isn't enough, try Atlas Shrugged :wink:

cfitz


Actually, I am using Rubbermaid containers that will hold ~700cd-r (in paper sleeves), and I have four of 'em currently, so they'll hold ~2,800cd-r... No where near as heavy as you may think... and it gives me quick easy access to 700 (490GB) of 'em at a time...

W & P!? Isn't that the one in that commercial with Jeff Gordon!? :o Hmmm, to be honest, if it is worth reading, at this point, I'll read it!

Beats American television! :roll:

I plan to read/watch All Quiet on the Western Front sometime here soon... I'll be going to the library tomorrow, and I will be looking for both... Along with figuring out a list of all of Crichton's stuff... That guy has written so much of the cool sh*t you've seen over the past ~30 years (at least)!!! :o (I cannot believe Schwarzenegger/Stallone/Willis are teamin' up to do a remake of his WestWorld, YEESH!!!! :o :roll: )

I also want to get around to reading some good history/biographies...

Unfortunately, I really wish I would read faster. :( I'm not a slow reader by any means, but I am reading for pleasure, which means NOT speed-reading... I probably should just speed through 'em though, as I tested myself before on stuff, and found speed-readin' stuff I picked up the same amount of info as if I read it much slower for pleasure...

Frankly, the history stuff isn't for pleasure though; it's stuff I feel I need to know... After reading Black Hawk Down (finally), I felt it necessary now to read Somalia on $5/day (to read better HOW we ended up to the point of BHD), and Me Against My Brothers, on the civil war(s) in Africa, and the African Somali viewpoint of BHD... Did you know just weeks prior to the raid in BHD the Somalis were PEACEFULLY (they weren't armed, anyway!) demonstrating, and we opened fire on the, killin' over a hundred of 'em! THey were pretty pissed! Somehow, BHD and Scott didn't want to mention the dark side of our military "humanitarian" mission there...

(The military doesn't confirm the 100+ person massacre, but I've yet to read a denial... But, I also haven't read MAMB yet, though I bought it, so I'm not yet sure what the Somalis say on the issue...)

Also, I should read Alive yet again, since the 30-yr anniv of the crash was just last Sunday... Unfortunately I can't seem to find anyone interested in reading the book; the book is no where near as awful as you may assume (though it is worse than the movie, I guess), but I think it is an unbelievable story on the instinct of humans to survive and how it may cause some to question their beliefs...

It's still rather awful though (and almost hidden in the back of the book, quite frankly) that not only was their search for the tail with its battery a waste of time (different battery than what they needed), but their entire ordeal was unnecessary: Civilization was just mere miles from the crash scene. The uninjured could have easily walked to it immediately after the crash! They had no map though, and no real idea where they were. :(

I don't blame the ones who ate the pilot(s) first. :wink:

Well, enough blabberin' about books. If you have more suggestions, lemme know.

(Oh, I found some cool ones on code breakin'... I wanna see if there are some Nash entries in 'em!)
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby dodecahedron on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Tolyngee wrote:I cannot believe Schwarzenegger/Stallone/Willis are teamin' up to do a remake of his WestWorld, YEESH!!!! :o :roll: )


OH YEAH !! 8)
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie
-- JRRT
M.C. Escher - Reptilien
User avatar
dodecahedron
DVD Polygon
 
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2002 12:04 am
Location: Israel

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

dodecahedron wrote:
Tolyngee wrote:I cannot believe Schwarzenegger/Stallone/Willis are teamin' up to do a remake of his WestWorld, YEESH!!!! :o :roll: )


OH YEAH !! 8)


Yeah, guess it could be worse: They could be teamin' up to do a remake of West Side Story!!! :lol:

But, did ya see D-Tox!? Who the heck greenlighted that ultra-turd!? :o

And to think that film (?) has an all-star cast! :(
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby TheWizard on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Normally I wouldn't mind, but don't you think we are straying from the subject a little too much now? :)
TheWizard
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:56 pm

Postby dodecahedron on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:05 am

Tolyngee wrote:
dodecahedron wrote:
Tolyngee wrote:I cannot believe Schwarzenegger/Stallone/Willis are teamin' up to do a remake of his WestWorld, YEESH!!!! :o :roll: )


OH YEAH !! 8)


Yeah, guess it could be worse: They could be teamin' up to do a remake of West Side Story!!! :lol:


i coulld'nt care less for Schwarzenegger/Stallone. Bruce Willis is a great actor!
but i was excited about WestWorld, not about the actors. loved that film. hopefully a remake will be just as good.

sorry, Wizard, won't stray anymore :o
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the land of Mordor, where the Shadows lie
-- JRRT
M.C. Escher - Reptilien
User avatar
dodecahedron
DVD Polygon
 
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2002 12:04 am
Location: Israel

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:06 am

TheWizard wrote:Normally I wouldn't mind, but don't you think we are straying from the subject a little too much now? :)


Oops, you're right Wiz, I'll rephrase my comment:

So, when WestWorld 2005 is available on the 'net for download from alt.binaries.movies two full months before it is released in the theaters, just what cd-r should I burn it to so that I can feel confident I am giving my pals the highest-quality burn possible?

Better? :D

Speaking of which, does anyone remembering hearing the insane number of discs that were used in the making of Dinosaur? IMDB doesn't mention it, but Newsweek mentioned it in their article on the making of the film...

But, in regards to the topic of the thread, something I don't get: If your concern is burn quality, considering how cheap media is, why not just stick with all TY media? Longevity and initially having an error-free burn are two different things; no?

I would think all burner manufs. design 'em with the intention of working best with TY cd-r, since they wrote the standard... So, if TY is so darn cheap (especially these days!), why even bother considering buying potential crap?

Unlike me, most users don't have many old low-rated media to be curious about... I'm the only person I know that has bought cd-r at more than 100 pcs at a time...

Though it is kinda interesting to know what drive/cd-r combo equates to junk. :D
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby TheWizard on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

Personally speaking, I like varying my CD-R purchases just to see the quality of each CD-R in certain CD-RW drives...which is why I started this thread in the first place. :) I could only buy TY media, but that wouldn't be very fun. Besides, I think that other manufacturers' media, like CMC and Ritek, can last just as long as TY without producing any errors on the discs.
TheWizard
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:56 pm

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

TheWizard wrote:Personally speaking, I like varying my CD-R purchases just to see the quality of each CD-R in certain CD-RW drives...which is why I started this thread in the first place. :) I could only buy TY media, but that wouldn't be very fun. Besides, I think that other manufacturers' media, like CMC and Ritek, can last just as long as TY without producing any errors on the discs.


I'll admit: I haven't read (or don't remember) the entire thread, so I may have missed that. :(

I'm no longer into testing or curiousity with my media: it better show quality burns or I'm not using it. And it better be quality media as I don't have money to burn. I figure TY should practically be guaranted.

I must admit though, that out of all the cd-r I have used, they all seem to be fine, and some are years old now, letting me know the ol' generics from way-back-when are (at the least) of very acceptable quality...

I may buy some Ritek/CMC this week, just so I can get in on the (with MIRs) <$0.08/cd-r deals out there!

If I should not trust the deals at Office Depot (whatever brands they have), LEMME KNOW!

(I have no idea why you may see this post in 'Double-Vision', but it's only in the window here once!!!)
TheWizard wrote:Personally speaking, I like varying my CD-R purchases just to see the quality of each CD-R in certain CD-RW drives...which is why I started this thread in the first place. :) I could only buy TY media, but that wouldn't be very fun. Besides, I think that other manufacturers' media, like CMC and Ritek, can last just as long as TY without producing any errors on the discs.


I'll admit: I haven't read (or don't remember) the entire thread, so I may have missed that. :(

I'm no longer into testing or curiousity with my media: it better show quality burns or I'm not using it. And it better be quality media as I don't have money to burn. I figure TY should practically be guaranted.

I must admit though, that out of all the cd-r I have used, they all seem to be fine, and some are years old now, letting me know the ol' generics from way-back-when are (at the least) of very acceptable quality...

I may buy some Ritek/CMC this week, just so I can get in on the (with MIRs) <$0.08/cd-r deals out there!

If I should not trust the deals at Office Depot (whatever brands they have), LEMME KNOW!

(I have no idea why you may see this post in 'Double-Vision', but it's only in the window here once!!!)
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby TheWizard on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

As Buddha pointed out in his Office Depot post for this week hot deals, watch out for the Spin-X discs, they may be poor quality CMC's inside.
TheWizard
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:56 pm

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

Okay, lemme rephrase:

Are Spin-X poor quality because CMC's media is of poor quality, or because Spin-X uses poor-quality CMC media?

Even clearer English: Is all CMC media poor quality, or just some, which now gets sold as Spin-X-branded media?

Now you see why I just stick with TY! :D
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby TheWizard on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

Some CMC discs are poor quality, not all. Although, to be frank, I have never come across a bad CMC disc. Maybe I'm lucky in that the CMC discs I have purchased are of good quality. I have come across shoddy Hitachi Maxell discs branded under the CompUSA name, I would stay away from those.
TheWizard
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 2074
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 6:56 pm

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

TheWizard wrote:Besides, I think that other manufacturers' media, like CMC and Ritek, can last just as long as TY without producing any errors on the discs.

Not only as long, but potentially longer. The cyanine dye that TY uses in their media is inherently unstable when exposed to light in its natural form, while the phthalocyanine dye used by Mitsui, CMC, Ritek, etc. is not. The Metal AZO/Super AZO dye used by Verbatim is also less susceptible to light degradation. I believe that TY has added stabilizers to their cyanine dyes to increase the life expectancy, so that you don't need to worry about your favorite TY disc fading away to nothing the fist time a sunbeam hits it, but cyanine dye still starts out at a disadvantage to other dyes. Thus, brands other than TY may have a longevity advantage.

So there are reasons to consider brands other than TY. One must consider both the quality at the time the CDR is burned and how long the media will last. This thread can't help with longevity angle directly, but can guide you to the best initial quality media, and thus allow you to narrow your choices when considering the longevity part of the equation.

What is best for you depends on your application. I am archiving digital photos that I want to be around 30 years from now (or whenever I am forced to convert them to a new format because CDs become old and outdated technology). Thus, even though I like TY, it would be foolish of me to burn only on TY media. What if something unexpected goes wrong and we discover that TY discs self-destruct in 7 years, while other brands do not? I'm not intimating that this will happen, I am just reminding everyone about the "don't put all your eggs in one basket" aphorism.

Anyway, my strategy is to cover all the bases, burning one copy on TY cyanine media, one copy on Verbatim Super AZO media, and one copy on phthalocyanine media. I would like to use Mitsui for the phthalocyanine media, but because it is so expensive I am still considering alternatives - which is where this thread comes in handy.

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:08 am

Tolyngee wrote:Even clearer English: Is all CMC media poor quality, or just some, which now gets sold as Spin-X-branded media?

Now you see why I just stick with TY! :D


Now you should see why this thread is very useful, even to you, Tolyngee. We don't just blindly lump all discs together under their manufacturer. Instead, we break out by brand, manufacturer, and speed rating. Thus, with enough contributions to this thread, one can look up exactly what he or she needs. In your case, Tolyngee, you would be able to see that Spin-X CMC isn't so great, but Imation CMC works fine (just as a hypothetical example).

So, the more data we get, the better. Test some of your media on that F1 of yours, Tolyngee, and help us all out! :D

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:09 am

cfitz wrote:
TheWizard wrote:Besides, I think that other manufacturers' media, like CMC and Ritek, can last just as long as TY without producing any errors on the discs.

Not only as long, but potentially longer. The cyanine dye that TY uses in their media is inherently unstable when exposed to light in its natural form,


That's why all of my media are stored (with me) down here in my dark, dark basement!!! :D

"You don't know what pain is!" :o (sorry, couldn't help myself...)

cfitz wrote:Anyway, my strategy is to cover all the bases, burning one copy on TY cyanine media, one copy on Verbatim Super AZO media, and one copy on phthalocyanine media. I would like to use Mitsui for the phthalocyanine media, but because it is so expensive I am still considering alternatives - which is where this thread comes in handy.


RAID is always an alternative! Trust me, I know! :wink:

Actually, I have 240GB to spare! :D

E-mail if interested in storage fees on my server... :P
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby Tolyngee on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:09 am

cfitz wrote:So, the more data we get, the better. Test some of your media on that F1 of yours, Tolyngee, and help us all out! :D


I thought I had?

All of my 8x media will most likely be dealt with all the same by my F1. The GAT 12x probably treated same as the 8x. The 48x TY had BETTER (there's that word again! :o ) work fine at 48x!

The only unknown quantity is the 32x TDK...
Tolyngee
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:53 pm

Postby cfitz on Thu Jan 01, 1970 6:09 am

Tolyngee wrote:I thought I had?

You thought wrong. You just posted some generalities with lots of "assume", "appear", "better", "dunno" and "???" scattered throughout. You didn't post any hard data following the testing protocol for this thread. You said it yourself:

Tolyngee wrote:Though not what you asked for (you'd have to give me a little time to run test properly on all of my different media...)

We obviously have differnt opinions regarding the value of the table TheWizard has assembled so, speaking for myself and not TheWizard, perhaps it is just as well you don't contribute.

But, that is okay, we all have different views. 8)

cfitz
cfitz
CD-RW Curmudgeon
 
Posts: 4572
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 10:44 am

PreviousNext

Return to Recordable Media Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

All Content is Copyright (c) 2001-2022 CDRLabs Inc.