About K's CD/DVD Probe

vbimport

#1

Here I need to point out one thing about write quality inspection.

Most of you using K's CD/DVD probe tool to see if the writing
quality is ok or not, but it is not enough and maybe wrong!

K's CD/DVD probe is just a tool made by LiteOnIT engineer to see
some idex of disc status, as you know like c1/c2 on CD and pi/po on DVD.

But c1/c2 or pi/po don't mean all of writing quality, and most of all, the value of pi/po is not getting from a standard testing machine(drive), it would have a large variation and become unreliable.

That's why this tool can't be used for write power and strategy adjustment. Some time we can see the pi/po value is very large but no problem for reading at most drive and some time the value is very small but read fail at most drive.

You can use K's CD/DVD probe for reference of cause, but remember one thing:

If you want to test something with a tool, please make sure the tool is suitable and not broken.


#2

The best test is whether or not your players can read it. (but you better know how to burn properly)


#3

:rolleyes:


#4

From my experience thus far, either CD’s or DVD’s that show sky-high error rates during a K-Probe scan will not be playable (or can be played/read very sluggishly only) in most DVD-ROM devices.

Howeber, incompatibilities between certain DVD media and standalone players do not necessarily relate to media quality or write strategy and thus PI/PO rates …

From my point of view, K-Probe has been a very reliable and handy tool thus far … on both my 52246S and my 411S …


#5

I am agreed with Wind about KProbe outputs…

I have 411S and tried every mod from MK1 to MK4. Tested media YUDEN00T01 burnt at 8x had very dissapointing results when KProbed using any of HS0x FWs.

I almost gave up when see all the amazing scans having results avg PI under 20 and avg PO under 1 and so…

Then I decided just for fun to try scan such media using not overclocked 411S and FS07 (BTW OC-Freak do this all the time). I got shocked :rolleyes: (see below why)

DVD+R YUDEN00T01, burnt at 8x, HS0E, MK4, scan using HS0K and 4x8ECC:



#6

Terrible scan for such good media brand would everyone say until he see other scan of the SAME media. This time used FS07 for scanning.

DVD+R YUDEN00T01, burnt at 8x, HS0E, MK4, scan using FS07 and 4x8ECC:



#7

People are always blaming Kprobe for their crappy scans. The fact is that Kprobe has nothing to do with how your scans come out, only the drive can make a nice scan or a bad one.
There are some self-proclaimed experts who say Kprobe is inaccurate, but they are wrong. It’s only as accurate or inaccurate as the drive that’s doing the reading. It is physically impossible, given correctly functioning hardware, for errors to be reported that did not occur.


#8

In my case I am not blaming KProbe for nothing.
This forum is full of pretty 411s@811s scans and I wanted to show people having same (not good looking) HS0x scans if they switch to FS07 they could get noticeably better looking results.

Believe or not all my scans with HS0x look like the upper one and HUGE improvement is visible when same disc get scanned using FS07.

Another example goes here.
DVD+R Memorex 4x (RICOH), burnt using HS0K at 8x scanned at 4x8ECC:



#9

DVD+R Memorex 4x (RICOH), burnt using HS0K at 8x scanned at 4x8ECC but this time using FS07 (same disc as above):



#10

Originally posted by melda
[B]In my case I am not blaming KProbe for nothing.
This forum is full of pretty 411s@811s scans and I wanted to show people having same (not good looking) HS0x scans if they switch to FS07 they could get noticeably better looking results.

Believe or not all my scans with HS0x look like the upper one and HUGE improvement is visible when same disc get scanned using FS07.
[/B]

ok but the program is not changing… you realize that right?

what is changing is the firmware.

FS07 reports the errors differently than HS0K that is all. Kprobe stays the same and reports errors the same but the firmware is changing how it decides on bad vs good blocks.


#11

have you tried to do a test with your 811 in 2x speed? From what I’ve experienced I can tell that my testresults are way better in 2x speed, and even 8x!! It’s like this on every scan I do.

Here’s the result in 2x:



#12

Here’s the test in 4x



#13

Originally posted by rdgrimes
People are always blaming Kprobe for their crappy scans. The fact is that Kprobe has nothing to do with how your scans come out, only the drive can make a nice scan or a bad one.
There are some self-proclaimed experts who say Kprobe is inaccurate, but they are wrong. It’s only as accurate or inaccurate as the drive that’s doing the reading. It is physically impossible, given correctly functioning hardware, for errors to be reported that did not occur.

Agreed. I don’t know the whole story behind Kprobe. But my belief is thatKprobe is just that scan disk without re-read / error correction reported directly via hardware. Although, number of C1C2/PIPO should be taken with grain of sault, it should be at least good to compared between 2 discs on the same drive. If the drive is functional correctly, I still think that the one with lower error has more chance of working better than the higher one. At least on that drive you use to scan the disc.

Of course, set-top/car head unit compatibility is another story.


#14

Can anyone run K’s Probe without a drive?

Who can make sure the drive he used to run with K’s Probe has no any problem in firmware, hardware, testing speed or something like that?

I suggest not to using K’s Probe as the only one tools for writing quality checking if you want to use it.

Unfortunatly, there seems no other tools can easy be obtain by end user.

Be careful using K’s Probe and save your time if possible.


#15

Originally posted by Wind
Can anyone run K’s Probe without a drive?

What are you talking about?

[b]
Who can make sure the drive he used to run with K’s Probe has no any problem in firmware, hardware, testing speed or something like that?

I suggest not to using K’s Probe as the only one tools for writing quality checking if you want to use it.

Unfortunatly, there seems no other tools can easy be obtain by end user.

Be careful using K’s Probe and save your time if possible. [/B]

I never really take the number that serious. The only thing it means to me is that one of my drive is reading a disc i burned with that many errors. I could have done similar check with CDSpeed. But kprobe graph is just much more pretty. :bigsmile:

If you have more info on this, please do share.


#16

Originally posted by cnlson
[B]ok but the program is not changing… you realize that right?

what is changing is the firmware.

FS07 reports the errors differently than HS0K that is all. Kprobe stays the same and reports errors the same but the firmware is changing how it decides on bad vs good blocks. [/B]

Thank you for this scholarly research… I think even my grandmother would realize that when looking at those graphs.

Anyway, you probably haven’t caught the point. I just wanted to point out, that sayings about maximum tolerable KProbe values doesn’t have general validity. According to my HS0K scans, every second disc would be a “BAD BURN”. On the other hand according to scan of the same media using FS07 everyone must mark such media as “EXCELLENT ONE”.


#17

Originally posted by Wind
[B]
I suggest not to using K’s Probe as the only one tools for writing quality checking if you want to use it.

Be careful using K’s Probe and save your time if possible. [/B]

If you do many testings such as different media, FWs, EEprom mods and so, this tool is VERY useful. But only for the user who has made scans. It is another source of knowledge about burnt disc and it helps to make decisions.

But it is wise to be careful with any definitive conclusions about burn quality judging by the KProbe values.


#18

Originally posted by melda
[B]Thank you for this scholarly research… I think even my grandmother would realize that when looking at those graphs.

Anyway, you probably haven’t caught the point. I just wanted to point out, that sayings about maximum tolerable KProbe values doesn’t have general validity. According to my HS0K scans, every second disc would be a “BAD BURN”. On the other hand according to scan of the same media using FS07 everyone must mark such media as “EXCELLENT ONE”. [/B]

There is no need for a little insult there. :slight_smile: I think what cnlson was saying is that kprobe is not that the one that reporting error, your drive did. With different firmware and your 411-811 hack, who know what could have changed.

Like wind said:

If you want to test something with a tool, please make sure the tool is suitable and not broken.

In this case, are you sure that the drive is working properly after the hack?

Just my thought.


#19

Once again, I guess it’s time to point out some basics on error scanning. (Aren’t there some stickies around on this?)

  1. You are not measuring “burn quality” per se, you are not measuring any sort of error on the disc itself. You are measuring the “readability” of that disc in the scanning drive. There are a number of factors that come to play in this interaction between disc and drive. Any one of these numerous variables will affect the outcome of the scan.

  2. Error rates are not a predictor of how a disc will perform in any other drive. However, once you have done enough scans in your own burner you will begin to see a correlation between error rates on the burner and playability on your other machines. This is specific to each different media type. Media #1 with a certain error rate may be playable, while media #2 with the same rate will not.

  3. Comparing error scans from one burner with scans from another burner is NOT an exact science by any means. Differences in error rates of a factor of 2x or even 10x are not necessarily meaningful.

  4. Again, Kprobe is not “measuring” anything, it’s just reporting what the drive is measuring.


#20

rdgrimes wrote:

Again, Kprobe is not “measuring” anything, it’s just reporting what the drive is measuring.

Yes, I have come to understand that. What I´m curious about is why some 811 with fw HS0K is reporting some + media so totally different than 411/451?
In the case you and I discussed earlier in another thread it was a difference close to 200 times more average on my 811.

I´ve tested that same disc in two more readers and they say it is a very good burn.

I saw OC freak mentioned something about that some fw on 411 also gave very high errors.

I´m just curious, I have quitted using KProbe.