Harry Potter - Goblet of fire

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Chokito
    Member
    Member
    • Jul 2006
    • 82

    #16
    Thanks Chewy.
    Even though you don't bring good news you've been tremendously helpful.
    I can confirm seller and price (I paid euro equivalent).
    All who read be warned.

    Comment

    • Chewy
      Super Moderator
      • Nov 2003
      • 18971

      #17

      maybe that old btc will burn them better?

      Comment

      • Chokito
        Member
        Member
        • Jul 2006
        • 82

        #18
        Will try and let you know.
        Thanks for the link for firmware.

        P.S. I particularly appreciated the picture of the serial number

        Comment

        • Chokito
          Member
          Member
          • Jul 2006
          • 82

          #19
          Here are the results of yesterday's burn. As Chewy suggested I burned with the BTC.
          Instead of using RI4M I tried DVD Shrink on it's own and instead of burnunig with Nero I used IMGBurn. I did a scan with both burners to see if there was a difference and these are the results. (I hope I attached correctly)

          P.S. I still don't understand how I can get different scans on the same disk and why does my pc read these disks a lot better than my standalone.

          Click image for larger version

Name:	Goblet of fire - DVD Shrink - IMGBurn - scan BTC.png
Views:	1
Size:	54.7 KB
ID:	912466

          Click image for larger version

Name:	Goblet of fire - DVD Shrink - IMGBurn - scan LITEON.png
Views:	1
Size:	53.8 KB
ID:	912467

          Comment

          • Chewy
            Super Moderator
            • Nov 2003
            • 18971

            #20
            you scanned at maximum speed with the btc, graphing read errors on top of
            disk errors, not a reliable scanner anyway, that liteon is a very good scanner

            that a good burn, not great

            Comment

            • Chokito
              Member
              Member
              • Jul 2006
              • 82

              #21
              I forgot to set speed for the BTC scan, so i reckon it took default speed.
              Might not be a good scanner, but it sure did a hell of lot better burn. Or do you think it might be the software? Not saying Nero is bad, just maybe IMGBurn is more compatible with the media?
              Definitely better burn than the previous, even if nowhere close to excellent.
              If anybody is interested I'll keep testing and posting burn results for whoever has ended up with fake TYs.

              Comment

              • Chewy
                Super Moderator
                • Nov 2003
                • 18971

                #22
                the burn software does not impact the quality of the burn, nero might not be able to burn for many reasons

                my benq wouldn't even hardly start to burn my fakes, it spit them back at me, my nec's would give it a go and a bad burn with high errors, my lg might give me about 50% of the burns as good as yours

                Comment

                • Chokito
                  Member
                  Member
                  • Jul 2006
                  • 82

                  #23
                  So, if I understand correctly, your advice is to stick with the BTC.
                  It's a shame 'cause my LITEON has been giving me great burns since I upgraded the firmare in july. Practically no coasters (of course the media was better quality).

                  Comment

                  • Chewy
                    Super Moderator
                    • Nov 2003
                    • 18971

                    #24
                    if you get some authentic premium media you will find the liteon is much better than the btc, verbatim 16x dvd+r's for instance, bitsett to dvd-rom and burned at up to 12x.

                    BTC gave up on the optical drive business

                    Comment

                    Working...