Advanced Disc Quality tab in CD-DVD Speed

vbimport

#1

Hello,

I love Geno888’s user guide, and now of course I want to know everything about the new features in version 4.7.5.0 of CD-DVD Speed. The problem is I do not find the same tabs as the one I see in this forum. In the threads here I noticed a TA Jitter tab. I have not this tab, but I have an “Advanced Disc Quality” tab instead.
I attached a view of this tab so that you can see how it looks.

Is it the same tab as the “TA jitter” tab ? Then anybody can tell me how POE should be interpreted ?

Gab :slight_smile:


#2

The available tabs depend on which drive you have.

The Advanced Disc Quality tab is only available for some BenQ drives, such as the DW1655, DW1650, DW1640, DW1620 plus a few others that I don’t recall.

The TA Jitter tab is only available for drives with MediaTek chipsets, such as LiteOn drives. The TA Jitter will only work with drives that are of the 5S generation and later (e.g. the 1635S and later) and only with firmware that supports jitter scanning.

POE = Parity Outer Errors

Error correction for DVD media have two layers, the first being Parity Inner and the second being Parity Outer. PI is used for detecting and correcting most errors, but those errors that fail PI correction (also know as Parity Inner Failures or PIF) are run through the PO layer for further correction.

In the drives I have available that can show POE, it’s clear that you can only have POE for an ECC block if there are PIF for that ECC block, i.e. if there are some bytes that could not be corrected by PI.

There are no official limits for how many POE you can have for a disc to be OK, but there must be zero POF (Parity Outer Failures) because a POF means that the data could not be corrected, and that the drive will have to re-read the sector to try to get it right, or a data layer error correction must be used for correcting the error (if such a layer exists).

It’s very common to have POE error spikes of 200-400 per 8 ECC blocks. I have had one or two discs with zero POE out of all the dics I have scanned for POE, but usually even the best discs have a few POE spikes of about 100 POE.

You don’t want to see massive clusters of POE!


#3

Thank you DrageMester for this detailed answer,

OK, I have a BenQ 1640 Drive (or rather a Philips 8701 crossflashed to BenQ firmware), so I have “Advanced Quality” and not “TA Jitter”. I did not know that the DC-DVD Speed window depends on the drive. Now I know :wink:

Yes, but since PO data is used when there is a PIF, the number of POE should be the same as the number of PIF. Instead the example of my picture shows 694 PIF and 14614 POE. That’s why I was confused.

I appreciate to have those figures as guidelines. But at the bottom line, is it worth to run these advanced quality tests ?

Gab :slight_smile:


#4

An ECC block is arranged into rows and columns where the rows contain PI error correction and the columns contain PO error correction.

It’s possible for a single PIF to result in as few as zero POE or as many as 172 POE. You can see more about this here and here.

I appreciate to have those figures as guidelines. But at the bottom line, is it worth to run these advanced quality tests ?
For CDs definitely yes, because you get to see E22 errors. For DVDs the Advanced Quality scan is nice and it gives you the correct PIE (including PIF unlike the non-advanced scan), but I usually don’t bother running the ADQ for DVDs. Others may disagree.


#5

OK, it took me a while to grasp it , but I understand your argument.

Thanks :slight_smile:

Gabier


#6

Yeah, bit of funny for me! - my Liteon Lightscribe writer had the Advanced Quality tab but now on LL0C this tab is gone.


#7

The Advanced test is the only one I bother to use on BenQ drives now, the correct PIE reporting, aswell as the POE & seperated PIE levels is something I find most useful. Also, by unticking the unwanted boxes, you can get a close look at each individual parameter reported by BenQs.

The normal test seems too uninformative to me once you become familiar to AQS.


#8

RE: Advanced Quality tab disappearing

Bronco04 - If you also have a Benq drive this may be why the Advanced Quality tab appeared then disappeared.

It is nesscesary to re-start CDSpeed if you wish to switch between Advanced Quality on a Benq drive and TA Jitter on a Lite-On.

I have a Benq DW1655 and a Lite-On CD-RW. For the Benq I get the Advanced Quality tab and the TA Jitter for the Lite-On. But when I have to re-start CDSpeed if I want to switch between drives and use Advanced Quality or TA Jitter.

E.g.
I want to scan a CD & start CDSpeed. The Benq was the last dive I used so the Advanced Quality tab is shown. If I then select the Lite-On drive the Advanced Quality tab stays and the TA Jitter tab is nowhere to be seen. To get the TA Jitter scan I have to re-start CDSpeed. I can do a normal scan without re-starting but I cannot use the Advanced Quality scan because the drive doesn’t support it (if I try I just get an error). The reverse is true when I switch from the Lite-On to the Benq.

It would be great if this could be fixed but I can live with it.


#9

I hate that. I’ve been playing with my Plextors lately and i’ve been using PlexTools instead. Nice to get away from crappy Nero CD-DVD Speed. That isn’t all that’s wrong with Nero CD-DVD Speed. Wish Erik would fix it.


#10

Yes, thanks, exactly that’s the problem! :doh:


#11

Has anyone ever managed a “Class 1” scan of a CD? I have never managed one. Even a slow burn on a Taiyo Yuden disc with a BLER average of 1.36, a peak/average jitter of 10%/7.97% and no E22 or E32 was only rated class 2 (scanned with a DW1655 at 32x).


#12

No, never managed better than a Class 2 with any CD-R media (e.g. Max C1 = 12 with Plextor branded Taiyo Yuden).

IMO the requirement for maximum C1 <= 10 is too strict and a requirement for low jitter and perhaps C1 <= 20 would be more useful for a “Class 1” result. That’s not how the requirements for Class 1 are in CDSpeed, however.


#13

I’ve just found this which gives the limits for the different classes -

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1704481&postcount=4

I agree with you DrageMester, <10 max C1 seems impossible to achieve these days. More importantly having such a strict Class 1 limit leaves an enormous range that is rated Class 2, which I think somewhat defeats the point of having such a rating system. Maybe the Class 2 limit should be reduced, I wouldn’t call a C1 average of 49 a good disc. It would make sense to take jitter into account, it might not be that important for data CDs but audio CDs would be a different matter.

Maybe someone with a stock of an excellent vintage of Taiyo Yuden and an equally good CD writer fancies taking up the challenge of producing a Class 1 write? But then that might be a waste of some irreplaceable discs.

Any thoughts on the significance of E12 errors? Should one worry about odd spikes of 100s on an otherwise good disc?

P.S.
DrageMester - Didn’t I see you once in Ankh Morpork? :slight_smile:
(sorry if that’s an old one)


#14

Jitter reporting is too variable between BenQ drives to be usefully included in the Class ratings IMO. I’m sure [B]Erik Deppe[/B] has good reasons for his choices of limits.

To satisfy those who want more relaxed limits, maybe user defineable limits would suffice, with clear marking that the Class system is not the standard one.


#15

Jitter reporting can be different between drives but so can C1/C2 and PIE/PIF reporting. I’ve seen a difference of about 1.5% in jitter for the same disc in two different BenQ drives, but I’ve seen a factor of x2.5 for average/total PIE between my own two BenQ DW1655 drives, and there’s no reason to believe that’s the maximum variation possible. See an example here.

To satisfy those who want more relaxed limits, maybe user defineable limits would suffice, with clear marking that the Class system is not the standard one.
To me that doesn’t really sound like it’s worth doing, and it could cause some confusion.


#16

[OT]

LOL, a Terry Pratchett reader I see :slight_smile:

[/OT]


#17

What range of Jitter values would be usefully included in each Class rating? A Class 3 disc should be widely readable as all error types reported at that class are easily correctable, what is the maximum limit value of Jitter in this case, taking into account a possible 1.5-2% variance between drives?

It just seems impractical to usefully include Jitter in the rating system if the useful range of Jitter values is small and variance in reporting of it is relatively high.


#18

Re: Disappearing tabs.

The latest version of CD-DVD Speed (4.7.7.5) now shows the TA Jitter & Advanced Disc Quality tabs all the time if you have both Lite-On and Benq drives installed. So no more disappearing tabs. :clap:


#19

If anyone’s interested here’s someone who has managed to write a “Class 1” CD (although scanned at only 16x).

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f43/difference-between-plextor-premium-premium-2-a-222416/index2.html#post1825308

Disc : Maxell CD-R PRO (Taiyo Yuden)
Writer : Plextor Premium 2
Speed : 16x


#20

[QUOTE=Ibex;1944015]If anyone’s interested here’s someone who has managed to write a “Class 1” CD (although scanned at only 16x).

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f43/difference-between-plextor-premium-premium-2-a-222416/index2.html#post1825308

Disc : Maxell CD-R PRO (Taiyo Yuden)
Writer : Plextor Premium 2
Speed : 16x[/QUOTE]That’s no problem with a Premium :smiley: