Is 1x too slow?

Hi guys. Back for a little while. :slight_smile:

I’ve taken your, greatly appreciated :bow: , advice, burnt another copy at 2-2.4x in Clone DVD and run some more tests, images of which follow.

By the way, you are right about the 1x speed not really being possible although selected, as the difference in time between the two speeds was only about 12 minutes (30min at 2-2.4x).

Before doing anything else, I’ve read the Nero CD-DVD Speed tutorial (thanks to Geno888 :clap: ) and also downloaded its latest version (which surprisingly seems to be kinder to my burnt media :confused: ).

As you will see, these images perfectly illustrate the validity of all your comments. :wink: Look at the disc quality score in comparison to the rest. :doh:

My final and most crucial question now is: Given my hardware and media configuration and also considering the fact that the disc plays just like an original in my dvd player, should I only perform and actually trust the Transfer Rate Test from now on every time I burn a disc and is this enough to ensure, within reason, the quality or success of my burns?

Given that you have an Optiarc drive that is known to be an unreliable DVD disc quality scanner, I’d rely only on the Transfer Rate Tests and playback tests if I were you.

You may be able to find a reasonably useful scanning speed with your drive, e.g. at 16x 12x 8x or 1x (5x seems flaky for your drive) but I wouldn’t count on it. My Optiarc AD-7170A and my now dead AD-7173A didn’t have any useful scanning speeds for DVD media.

:iagree: How’s playback on that disc Strat? TRT and playback will be the best for you at this time. Nice smooth TRT by the way :slight_smile:

Here’s also a test, in pics, performed with VSO Inspector on the same disc.
The Surface Scan and File Test are ‘equal’ to the C1/C2-PI/PO Test and Read Test respectively in Nero CD-DVD Speed.

Thanks DrageMester. :slight_smile: Nice to see your cat ‘moving’ again Rolling56. :wink:

If by “playback” test you both mean actually watching the movie again, then yes, this is good, but it is also what I’m trying to avoid having to do every time by trying all these other tests.

The 5x speed I’ve used for the Disc Quality and the C1/C2-PI/PO tests is the one suggested in the CD-DVD Speed tutorial for NEC drives. If I tried other speeds, how would I know if I found a ‘useful scanning’ one? Should I be looking for “agreement” between the Disc Quality and TRT tests?

Unfortunately there is so much variation between individual NEC/Optiarc drives, that suggesting a single scanning speed is about as useful as rolling dice to pick a number.

If I tried other speeds, how would I know if I found a ‘useful scanning’ one? Should I be looking for “agreement” between the Disc Quality and TRT tests?
Now that’s a really good question, and not at all easy to answer. You can’t really find a “useful” scanning speed directly, but you can look for signs of a scanning speed/drive being not useful.

If you have huge PIE/PIF spikes that move between scans or move if you change the scan starting point to something other than 0 MB, then it’s not useful.

If scans of the same disc in the same drive at the same speed show wildly varying results, then it’s not useful.

If there is no correlation between grossly out-of-spec PIE/PIF values in the scan and actual readability in the same drive with a Transfer Rate Test, then the scan is not useful.

The way in which NEC/Optiarc drives are not useful always takes the form that they show too high values (as opposed to too low values), so if you find a scanning speed that shows more “sane” values without huge spikes, then chances are that it’s the most useful scanning speed for your NEC/Optiarc drive. The same is not true for e.g. LiteOn drives, but that’s another discussion.

DrageMester, since you’ve been ‘burnt’ :wink: with NEC ones, could you recommend a good drive for running scanning tests on, not necessarily with Nero CD-DVD Speed. What do you think of Plextor PX-760A for example?

Very good, but even with modified firmware to allow 12x scanning with PxScan, it’s still too slow for my taste for everyday scans, since it cannot scan for PIE, PIF and Jitter at the same time. So I only use it when thoroughly testing a disc.

For everyday scans I use 16x scans in my LiteOn SHM-165P6S combined with Transfer Rate Tests, preferrably in my NEC/Optiarc drives.

Oops, I’ve missed your reply by a minute before sending mine.

As you said and have just realised myself, that was a really good question I asked with a not at all easy answer, which you [B]did[/B] nevertheless provide. :clap: Still, I think I’ll pass and just invest in a new drive sooner rather than later. :wink:

Do you at least consider my NEC AD5170A drive to be a good burner?

For CD media, most probably. For DVD media, I don’t know since there’s quite a bit of difference between my current AD-7170A and my dead AD-7173A. I will say that I’m not impressed with the burn quality at 18x and never burn at that speed except for testing.

Believe it or not but I usually burn at 8x or 6x with this drive, and rarely burn faster than 8x with any of my drives (on DVD media).

My 7170 is great with MAXELL 002 media and with MCC 004 media, but a bit disappointing with YUDEN000 T03 media.

My 7173 was poor with TTH02 media and with CMC MAG. AM3 media.

I think the difference between individual drives is at least as large as between different batches of the same media. Three of my four drives of this series were dead on arrival or dead in a few months (with little use) so I’m quite unimpressed with their quality control.

[B]DrageMester[/B], thanks for another full answer which actually brings me even closer to buying a Plextor drive soon. [I]Slow but thorough[/I], as you described it, in scanning tests, will do just fine for me. :slight_smile: Till then, I’ll stick to TRTs which you also seem to favour on Nec/Optiarc drives.

Having made it to the second page in this thread, inevitably the topic of discussion has little to do any more with both its title and the subforum one. [B]AZImmortal[/B], (good answer by the way, short and to the point, you gave me yesterday) will you be moving us again? :wink:

Good night.

I have not long got the same Optiarc DVDRW AD-5170A drive and after I had searched this forum (because IMO its about the best) and not found an Optiarc AD-5170A review. What I was doing was putting two drives up against each other and since I have only kept one in the computer I use everyday its turned into some sort of running review on the drive.

In the last week I have been testing the scanning ability of the drive with disks that it has made and also with my LG drives, what i have found by running the tests in both the Optiarc and my Lite0n that it ‘seems’ to be a more truthful scan the faster it goes, and I feel much better with the results I get at 12x and 16x scan speeds, with 12x being about the best… but its very close between the 2 speeds. But all in all I trust my Lite0n more.

This is the thread if your interested and I will be adding more to it as I keep on learning the drive,

I had changed the firmware to ‘112bt_orig.bin’ - 1.12 firmware including booktype patch from the page and I am pleased with the results I have had with the limited amount of media I use (Verbatim and TY).

Just to be clear, the “thorough” testing I was referring to means testing in several drives at multiple speeds, not simply testing in the Plextor drive at one speed - although I do consider Plextor scans more reliable than any other single scan (on a non-professional drive).

Having made it to the second page in this thread, inevitably the topic of discussion has little to do any more with both its title and the subforum one.
If you want the title of the thread change, then just ask me or Arachne and we’ll do it for you. :slight_smile:

[B]Lenny Nero[/B], thanks for your useful contribution to this thread. :slight_smile: I’ll certainly be running a few tests at 12x, as 16x is not an option for my Nec/Optiarc AD-5170A drive in Nero CD-DVD Speed and let you know what happens.

[B]DrageMester[/B], thanks for making this clear. :slight_smile: It actually makes me keep the LiteOn drive as an option, since you do use your Nec/Optiarc drives for TRTs, and as I intend to keep mine.

As for the title/subforum change, this is something you, as a moderator, may want to consider. I just feel that there’s a lot of useful information in this thread which may not be as easily ‘accessible’ to some under the specific name or subforum.

This is just to quote an excellent example, relevant to this thread, given by [B]Francksoy[/B] in which in my opinion puts things in perspective when interpreting media scans or having unrealistic expectations of them.

Although far less knowledgeable than everybody else in this thread, I would dare, in the light of this example and in combination with the comments made by [B]cd pirate[/B] in the above thread, to suggest that if one could choose just one test to do with their media, the single most determinative or revealing one would have to be the Transfer Rate Test. Any thoughts are most welcome.

Here it is:

"In the digital world, as far as user data is concerned, and if no processing is applied to the data, either the copy fails, or it’s perfect, there is no in-between.

The so-called “errors” referred to here are not user data errors, they are low-level errors.

Think of a text on a piece of paper. User-data is the actual words and sentences, and low-level errors are like small artifacts in the letters, uneven lines, defects in the paper etc… If the text can be read despite the little defects, the message is intact and the copy will be perfect. A human could mix a word with another one because of small artifacts etc…, but because of the way digital data is handled (control algorythms etc…), this will never happen in the digital world, a successful 1:1 copy is always a perfect copy of the user data."

Here they are, at 5x, as suggested in the Nero CD-DVD tutorial for Nec drives, and at 12x. Conclusions are yours, as we say in Greece. As far as I’m concerned, I don’t think I’ll be doing any more Disc Quality tests on this drive. :disagree:

I agree but only if you take care to chose a drive that is well suited to this purpose.

Using e.g. a LiteOn 6s series drive for Transfer Rate Tests will show a lot of discs to be flawless, even though they would be almost completely unreadable in many other drives. Some other very strong readers might be just as bad for Transfer Rate Tests.

That’s why I think it’s important to carefully choose one or two drives for TRTs that are not strong readers, but which will still show a smooth TRT for a really good disc burned well.

I use one of my NEC/Optiarc drives as the primary drive, since these drives will read recordable media at 16x and are among the pickiest readers I have, while still being able to read good burns smoothly.

I also run a TRT in my BenQ DW1655 which is a very strong reader, sometimes even better than my LiteOn drives, except that it’s the weakest of all my drives when it comes to reading past certain re-linking points.

I’m glad that you found my input interesting, :flower: but I’m not sure why you think it’s particularly relevant to this thread… :confused:

Thread titles can be easily changed on request by myself or DrageMester, but renaming whole sub-forums would require input from the rest of the staff team, too. :wink:

Unless you meant moving the thread to another sub-forum, which again is easily done. :slight_smile:

Edit: Sorry, it’s late here.

DVD recorders burn real-time, slower than 1x. And those machines are just stripped-down computers, for all intents and purposes. They come with an OEM stock DVD burner. Too slow depends on the media, and the burner, and the media/burner interaction (partially controlled by firmware, partially by other factors).

Optiarc isn’t what I’d called the best burner or reader. That might be part of the problem.