Any problems with PX-716A TLA 0307?



Just came back with my new drive and wanted to know if I made the right decision. I could of purchased TLA 0304 but went with the newer build (April 2005 TLA 0307). Is there any known problems with this TLA?

:eek: I just noticed on the box it says 6x DVD +/- R DL with firmware upgrade :bow:


@CyberPlex. Think you are one of the first to post with this TLA number which is probably a TLA 03xx with 1.07 FW. So maybe you will let us know how the drive works for you.:smiley:


No problem :bigsmile: But it will have to wait till the weekend. I still have more things to do to my new rig. But if anyone does have this TLA, please share your results.



TLA is generally not indicative of performance…as exemplified by several owners of 01XX and 02XX drives here (myself included). best thing you can do is test it out yourself…


…and as crossg pointed out, TLA0307 drives are identical in every way to any other TLA03xx drives, but for the firmware that came pre-installed.


But I am wondering if the drives are identical why this remark on the Plextor website:


If your drive originally came with firmware V1.05 installed, it will not be possible to install a lower version of firmware. If your drive originally came with firmware lower than V1.05, it will be possible to install a lower version of firmware after upgrading to firmware V1.05.[/I][/B]


Honestly, i hadn’t problems yet with my plex drives, one of them is tla 0306, this one is goin to rma, got a new one and all is workin fine again. As the
guys above said, just makin some tests. :wink:


DrOktor, I thought that TLA#03 only came with at least firmware 1.05 installed, not a version below that. So, ftp1020’s comment still holds. For the topic starter, there is a section in the FAQ that explains TLA: What is “TLA” and how do I know what TLA number my Plextor drives are?


@GF TLA#0304 which I have and when they released 0305 they said it could not be flashed backward to 1.04 FW or below. Don’t think anyone ever hit the nail on the head as to why TLA 0305 couldn’t be flashed backwards.:slight_smile:


Ah I see, thanks for correcting me crossg :wink: The only conclusion I can think of is that there are still variations between drives with the same hardware revision. That’s of course a guess and one that will probably never be answered.


I think there is an ID in the drive eprom that check and stop it from being flash to lower version of the bios than the one which was installed at the factory.


Or maybe if you flash backward, you wont be able to get 6x DL?


@ zevia that makes the most sense so far, but I have a 0304 and it came with the 6x -/+R DL sticker. Maybe people were flashing back before 1.04 and then complaining to Plextor that their drive wouldn’t support 6x DL? :wink:


It most likely reflects a change of some supplier for an electronic part for cost cutting. I’ve seen similar statements in changelogs for mobile phones or GPS receivers.

Firmware nowadays does a lot of tweaking and finetuning of the hardware. Imagine this: There is a certain electronic circuit that regulates something. It needs to do so at a very high precision. We all know temperature can influence the behaviour of electronics. So to assure proper working of the part you add a temperature sensor and add a parameter table to the firmware that compensates for this parts error at various temperatures. Now when you replace either the temperature sensor or the electronic part that gets checked by that sensor you will have to adjust the table of compensation values for the characteristics of the new combination. Since older firmwares will not know about that change in hardware you won’t be able to use them properly. Newer firmwares however will always know all hardware versions and have the relevant code for them. As easy as that.


@hwp. That sounds logical. Just inquiring minds! I can switch back and forth between firmwares but have no desire to do so as Plextors 716 FW seems pretty solid in the DVD department anyways and I dont do the CD thing. Their FW updates seem a lot better than some of the other brand names I own. Thx for the insight.:bigsmile:


The main problem that I have in my third drive that I got with RMA was the Jitter measurements on CDR that was awfull to all the thee drives that I tested so far Does anyone nows if its a software or hardware mechanism problem. Just keep in mind that every other measurment its very smooth and tend to excelent especially to my last RMA drive. And the cd was measured on a Premium and the jitter is very good. I have seen the thread about jitter but it seems there many others with the same problem do we have any tha t solved the problem


I’ve had mine for about 2 weeks now and not a problem. I’ve done around 25 burns, used it for quality testing…and everything is fine so far. :slight_smile:


because i bought a bestbuy replacement warranty for 716a (costed me about 10usd for 1 year period), i went to bestbuy & got the replacement; it was tla 0306; one thing i noticed was that this drive is quieter than my old one with tla 0202. i have not tested many burns, but richojp01 showed improvement over tla 0202.

i also noticed from web searching that tla# at least reflects main chip revisions. all drives with same first two tla# has a chipset with same revision


please provide a link supporting your statement that TLA # has anything to do with the “main chip revision”. AFAIK (and majority of experienced users including official CDF reviewers, etc.) are in agreement that nobody but Plextor knows what any of the differences are between TLA revisions…



The only source i’ve ever found on this topic was YSSs research on TLA#:

Have a look at the three column tabella about one fourth down of the page. The numbers in the second row quote the markings of the chip. You can have a look at the pcb-boards with the links above the tabella.

However (IMHO) it is not clear whether the different numbers cited on the Sanyo chip really reflect a hardware revision. It might also be a production run batch number or even a serial number for licencing reasons.