CD-DVD Speed Disc Quality (PI/PIF) Test

Yes, that's the paper I recall. I'm not into the details of the circuits that much, but it helps a lot in understanding the other terms.

@cd pirate: as the bionic toaster ( ) mentioned, those are excellent results!

G

First, Thanks Erik for the new version of CD-DVD Speed.
From a few of the initial posts it seems it has been improved with Lite-On drives jitter testing, which is something I am diddling with at present.

Quote Dragemester,
I am far less experienced than Dragemester in disc testing, but FWIW I agree with Dragemester on the above.

What follows is pure speculation on my part and intended to provide more fuel for the fire in the discussion on jitter testing.

A. Displayed jitter test graphs are a complex integration of the Disc's attributes which produce jitter and the Scanning Drive's attributes which interfere with the jitter testing--the data resulting from this integration is then processed and displayed by the software. It is the scanning drive's contribution to the jitter test result which is difficult to sort out.

B. In the case of jitter testing, scanning speed has a direct impact on the resulting jitter values reported. Erik Deppe posted as such in the case of Lite-On drives.

C. Higher speed jitter scanning may increase the Scanning Drive's "weight" in the jitter test result and decrease the disc's attributes "weight" in the test result.

IMO much more testing is needed to confirm C. And I would not be suprised if it is not always true.

However, if and when statement C is true, this would easily explain the frequent disappearance of the vertical drops shown in 1X and 2X DVDScan jitter graphs when re-scanned at 4X. The higher 4X scanning speed has resulted in the scanning drive's interference in the final result, "overshadowing" the disc's jitter attributes in the displayed graph.

As inconvenient as 1X and 2X scanning may be, in the case of jitter testing it may be essential in order for the test result to better reflect the disc's jitter characteristics and minimize the scanning drive's contribution to the test result.

Hello, sirs.
I present your attention
comparative test of disk
Sony AccuCore (S11) DVD+RW x1-4
on BenQ 1650 (OEM DVD 880I - ATAPI DVD DW 8X16X8X16) in an interval 1ECC
and LiteOn LH 20A1H in Nero CD-DVD Speed 4.7.5.0

PIF and PIE profiles BenQ 1650 in an interval 1ECC and LiteOn LH 20A1H are almost identical.

I have some questions:
1. an index of quality sсore at test in BenQ DW1655 in an interval 1ECC – probably not adaptedit ( overestimated )

2. At work of program SDSpeed 4.7.5.0 in a position
Disc quality with BenQ 1650 have graphic bug - (the sum) total disappears

Please take a look at the attached scans.

Please, comment: Whether it is possible to trust results of scanning
BenQ DW1655 drives in an interval 1ECC?

Thank.

Please take a look at the attached scans

For comparison: this disk on BenQ 1650 in an interval 8ECC

Question for Erik Deppe:

Tell please, in what interval of scanning
(1ECC or 8ECC) for BenQ DW 1650 results more
correct

Thank

BenQ burners only support 8ECC...

comparative test of disk
Verbatim ( MCC-004) +R16x (43550) Taiwan
on BenQ 1650 (OEM DVD 880I in an interval 1ECC
and LiteOn LH 20A1H in Nero CD-DVD Speed 4.7.5.0

Recording is executed on neutral LG H42L-(SL00)

Please take a look at the attached scans

4.7.0.2 would report that the scan was performed with 8 ECC.
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=208721
But now that 4.7.5.0 reports 1.01 ECC, I start believing.

EDIT: And the number of samples is close to 130k!
Thank you Pinto for the info at the old post.

Edit2: Thank you Mr Deppe! It's nice to know that 1650/5 can perform 1ECC scans. I like my drive even more as time pasts.

Unfortunately, the Quality Score is still calculated as if the scan had been performed as PIF per 8 ECC instead of per 1 ECC.

Well, maybe Mr Deppe can fix it in a future version.
Quality Score isn't something that someone should take into much account, is it? I don't give any attention to it, am I doing wrong?

Edit: Would you suggest using 7.4.5.0 and 1 ECC for scanning from now on?

Let's hope so.

I ignore the Quality Score completely, because I think the quality of a disc is far more complicated than the maximum PIF value and indeed more complicated that can be expressed as a one-dimensional value.

I use CDSpeed 4.7.5.0 for scanning, except for Transfer Rate Tests on some drives conected by USB where earlier versions seem to be be better able to reach 16x without being limited by the burst rate. I have only now discovered the 1 ECC scanning with BenQ drives, so I haven't formed an opinion yet. If it's true 1 ECC scanning, and not some form of approximate conversion, then I would much prefer to use 1 ECC scanning.

One more comparative test of disk
Verbatim DVD – RW 2,4-4х (МСС 01RW4x)

on BenQ 1650 (OEM DVD 880I in an interval 1ECC, 8ECC
and LiteOn LH 20A1H in Nero CD-DVD Speed 4.7.5.0

Recording is executed on neutral LG H42L-(SL00)
Please take a look at the attached scans

Supervision on results of all tests lead on this theme:
in Disc Quality on BenQ 1650 in 1ЕСС in the basic component of the test – PIF turns out a practical clone of schedule LiteOn LH-20A1H (LL07)
Quantitatively: Pif average and Pif max – are practically identical
Pif total differ insignificantly
Jitter – differs insignificantly

Index Quality score not updated.

Wow. Amazing news.
ErikDeppe continues to make the BenQs even more valuable long after they've been discontinued (AQS, and now 1ECC scanning)... a gift that keeps on giving

Maybe I should REALLY get a BenQ 1650/55, 1640 or 1625 now (some shops here still have those or the Philips equivalents)...?

My BenQ DW1655 (BCIB) performs scans at 8 ECC even if I select 1 ECC scanning interval.

Has anyone managed to get 1 ECC scanning working with DW1655 drives, or is this for some reason limited to DW1650 drives?

Benq 1640 (BSRB) & Cd-DVD Speed 4.7.5.0 - 1ECC setting is available, but 1ECC works really only for 4x CAV speed:
8x CAV - ECC interval report in statistic is 8ECC,
6x CLV - 8ECC,
6x CAV - 8ECC,
4x CLV - 8ЕСС,
4x CAV - 1ЕСС.

For 4x CAV real ECC interval is 1ECC independently of ECC setting (1 or 8).
Quality score calculates always for 8ECC.

It's the main question. Speed dependence may mean both chipset feature or soft implementation.

---

Last edited by GeoN; 18-03-2007 at 21:43.

I've tried the 1 ECC setting in CDSpeed 4.7.5.0 and all possible scanning speeds with my BenQ DW1655 BCIB and I always get an 8 ECC scan instead.

Ohh... what about an 8ECC (emulation?) for LiteOn? KProbe can do this
Just kidding

After I saw this earlier today, I tried doing a scan @1 ECC with my Philips DVDR 1660K @ BenQ 1650/BCIC (8x speed).

As far as I can tell, it ignores this setting and does the scan with 8 ECC. The average scanning interval is 8.01 ECC (vs. 8.02 ECC).

Count patterns look similar and the PIF maxima are too high for 1 ECC.

[edit]just did a partial scan @4x CAV and it's 8 ECC as well.

G

I've checked this and it seems that this may be a firmware bug/feature.
The scanning interval settings are not supposed to work with the high performance scanning function of BenQ drives but only with the low performance scanning function (ie. the slow scans with no PIFs or POFs).
Changing the scanning interval setting does not affect the high performance scanning. It's the command which is sent to query the drive's features which somehow triggers 1 ECC scanning at 4X CAV.

To enable 1 ECC scanning simply press the Advanced button (no need to change anything) and close the window.

So 1 ECC scanning with BenQ drives is real, Nero CD-DVD Speed doesn't convert 8 ECC samples to 1 ECC samples (which would not be very accurate).
The nice thing about 1 ECC scanning with BenQ drives is that you will get about 20000 samples more than with LiteOn drives

Thanks for the info Erik

OK, I've checked this with my BenQ DW1655 BCIB and I can get 1 ECC scanning at 4x CAV only, not at any of the lower or higher speeds. It's triggered as you say by clicking on the Advanced button, but the Scanning Interval is ignored - it will scan at 1 ECC even if Scanning Interval is set to 8 ECC.

The drive reverts back to 8 ECC scanning if any of the other scanning speeds is used, even if you subsequently perform a 4x CAV scan without first clicking on the Advanced button.

I'm not sure how useful this is, but it sure is confusing.

I ran into this awhile ago if I remember correctly, but I just assumed it was scaling/estimating 8 ECC down to 1 ECC. Glad to hear that it's not just scaling it, though I don't personally think I'll have a lot of use for it. Maybe on occasion with unique or problematic discs, and comparing with other 1 ECC scans (having more speeds other than 4x CAV would help though).

Here's same disc burned with LG H42N at 8X:
1. Scanned at 1 ECC @4X
2. Scanned at 8 ECC @8X

---

Last edited by Bob; 25-10-2007 at 22:20.