What is the significance of this "BP Rec activity: 7 occurences. (BP Counter)" message I get in PlexTools?
See, to me it looks like it's saying I had 7 buffer underruns - This in itself is ludicrous because my system should easily be able to keep up the required datat rate for a 4x DVD-R burn.
What makes it even sillier is that I specifically disabled BurnProof (I have found I get, on average, slightly better scans with it disabled, on CDs anyway.), so according to that I have had 7 buffer underruns, but the perfectly burnt DVD-R (Although with a fairly high error rate... damned Verbatim 4x's...) which I hold in my hand tells me that it was written okay...
That’s correct. But, if BURN-Proof was disabled then you would have had a coaster since then a buffer underrun would be fatal. Why do you want to disable BURN-Proof? I’ve never seen this feature have an effect on burn quality. What are your system specs? Even though your system may be fast this does not mean that the drive is working as it should. There could be a problem with the DMA setting or IDE drivers (nVidia drivers installed perhaps?). Let us know.
I have noticed this with my 716 also. the buffer has never been depleted and the burner never enteres a burnproof state (ie stop blinking amber) yet it reports having 6 or more burn proff ocurances. what it may be counting is the zone linking like alex said as it does seem to be higher on longer burns.
That’s what I don’t understand - It claims to have had 7 buffer underruns, but that should be impossible given that:
a) I disabled BURN-Proof (In which case a single buffer-underrun should have halted the whole burn), and
b) The disc seems perfectly okay - All files are readable, error rate, tracking and jitter measurements seem to be within tolerances with no uncorrectable errors.
If I do a similar burn in Nero, it doesn’t report any buffer-underruns at all…
I am starting to think PlexTools is giving out bogus data there, espescially given the suspicious observations from other people about similar bugs that I’ve discovered in other threads.
The reason for disabling BURN-Proof is a bit of a side-issue, but basically I seem to get slightly better burns with it off. (With BP off I get a slightly flatter error chart; With it on I’ve noticed subtle peaks and troughs - Might be my imagination I guess, although I did a quick’n’dirty test and the error variance (on average) seems to be about 20-points on -R, and negligible (~5 points) with +R. Since I usually leave my compy unattended while doing burns, BURN-Proof is pretty superfluous for me anyway 'tho.)
alexnoe can probably explain this better than me but I think PlexTools is reporting how many times the laser was recallibrated during the burn process. Take a look at the image below for example. Here you can see seven slowdowns during the burn process (which is completely normal). Maybe PlexTools is reporting these as “BPRec” activities.
You can find that out pretty easily: Use a recording app which shows the drive buffer status, like Nero and DVD Decrypter, and watch the recorder buffer level. If the buffer goes down when the drive is recalibrating, then this could be the reason
The spikes in the burn speed could be the result of you doing something with your system during the burn session (like starting an application or something). At what speed did you do your last burns? If you’re using a speed like 4x then the drive will use the CLV write method (which means the recording speed is the same throughout the entire disc) and this shouldn’t produce any BPRec Activities. However, if you’re using a higher speed then the drive will recalibrate during the burn session which may cause the BPRec Activities. But, then again, maybe PlexTools is just reporting wrong info. I’m just speculation on this one
Weird isn’t it?
The burns were done on 4x Verbatim -R media, so it should have been CLV.
The spikes are a bit odd - Usually caused by stuff like starting an app or something? Mmm. As I said I don’t normally touch my compy while running a burn (Old habit from The Old Days ;)), but I wouldn’t be surprised if was just Win2k - I have no idea what crazy crap Windows does when idling these days…