scans from my new litey SHM-165H6S

Discussion in 'DVD / Blu-ray drives' started by Mort81, May 19, 2006.

  1. Mort81

    Mort81 Senior member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    116
    Here's some scans done on a 8x verbatim dvd+r lightscribe disc burned with my new SHM-165H6S @ 8x. For some reason the score of nero quality scan is always better when scanned with my benq 1620 even though the scan done with my litey the PIF totals are lower. I don't put much validity in scans anyway but tend to trust those done with kprobe more over nero disc quality. Just my personal preferance I guess.

    I was torn between this drive and a benq 1655. This one was on sale and liteys have always performed well in my experiences so I chose this one. I plan to upgrade my benq 1620 to a 1650 in the future.

    Time will tell as this drive has a feature similiar to solidburn called hypertuning and although the burns are by no means bad they might even improve as it is used.

    Edit: looks like now is the time to upgrade my 1620 with a 1650. $36.98 total. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101010

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2006
  2. Mort81

    Mort81 Senior member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    116
    Here's a couple scans of my 1st DL burns with this drive. The 1st scan was burned at 2.4x and the 2nd one was burned at 4x. They both play back fine.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  3. zebadee

    zebadee Regular member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Hi Mort81,
    Reason why you get this difference is down to scanning interval.
    [​IMG]
    Burns are good too. Way to go.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2006
  4. Mort81

    Mort81 Senior member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    116
    zebadee,

    Thanks for the info. I knew there was a difference in the way nero interperted the scans between those drive makes but wasn't exactly sure what it was. That is still a better burn @ 4x on DL media than I could get with my old litey 1653 or benq 1620. The burn @ 2.4x is comparable to what they would do in regards to PIF but better in regards to PIE.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2006
  5. Mort81

    Mort81 Senior member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,030
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    116
    This is the same DL disc burned at 4x with my 165h6s only this time scanned with my benq 1620. One reason why I don't put much validity on scans. Quality score of 77 when scanned with one drive and quality score of 94 when scanned with another drive. Same disc.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2006
  6. zebadee

    zebadee Regular member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    26
    Hi Mort81,
    The scans between the the Litey & BenQ for SL, when taking into account the scanning intervals. Plus the fact that no 2 drives will give the same result. Look good & are close enough to each other to confirm said results.
    With DL it appears the Litey has problems, this maybe layer break related. Bring on the f/w updates.
     

Share This Page