Is there any chance for a "Quality Patched" Firmware for 16XXS drives?

I’m sorry if this has been addressed before, I was just wondering if the code guys had any plans of releasing a quality patched firmware for the 16xxS drives? (As they did with the 8XXS drives.) I know this is probably more difficult then it seems, and I appreciate all the work you guys currently do. I was just curious. Thanks! :slight_smile:

I second this. I perfer better Quality than speed. :iagree:
Why take the risk of your data for a few mins faster…?? :bow:
Why can’t wait a few more mins …? :confused:

but when I buy an advertised 16X drive, I expect it to give me good result at 16X.
I am still hopping for a good firmware, that’s the only reason I still own my 1633.

If you see how less brand of 16x media you can get now,
you should know that the 16x media is not yet mature …!

I agree, but my drive doesnot fully satisfied me even at 8X. I just expect it to better then it is now.

Yeah the 16xxS series needs all the help it can get j/k :slight_smile:

dodges flying balls of lava

After I release CG5E and CY58, I will be starting to spend more time looking at the 3S firmware. Also as I now finally have a 3S drive that works, I can carry out patch testing and know the results are valid.

I was kinda hoping I would not have to do a quality patch for the 3S drives, as I really thought Liteon would get their act together, but it just doesn’t seem to be happening, even with the 1673S :sad:.

I still can’t understand why Liteon has not gone down the path of WOPC/AOPC like NEC and Benq. Half their problem is that they can’t compensate for changes in the media as it moves towards the outside of the disc and for changes in batch quality. Maybe one day they will see the light. :wink:

I still can’t understand why Liteon has not gone down the path of WOPC/AOPC like NEC and Benq.

IMHO, the MTK chipset is not capable. It’s either too slow, or has some other (many) inadequacy. There IS a sort of OPC going on, it’s just not competant.
When doing datadisc burns in CDSpeed, if you see the OPC kick in, you know you have a bad burn going on.

Your probably right about the chipset. shrugs There has to be some reason other than they just haven’t tried. But other than adjusting the laser power at 0.5GB increments, I can’t see any AOPC at all. About the only thing that can cause what you are seeing, is the loss of sync with the wobble groove, which would certainly explain why the resulting burn was very bad.

Thanks for replying C0deKing. You are our lite on savior, of course we can’t rely on the official lite on engineers! :slight_smile:

:iagree: with Talon88 that quality has priority over speed. When my compter is busy for about two hours just encoding a DVD of about 200 minutes, than I don’t mind waiting 14 minutes to burn it the best way possible. I’m very satisfied with BSOS, maybe a good starting point for "“CGsuperfirmware”…?

:smiley: Leo

now that CG5E/CY58 is done, C0deKing can spend his time on a quality patch for 3s series, like CG09 or BS1S :slight_smile:

if the quality was better i would be willing to sacrifice 2 mins of burn time
instead of having to scan every disk i burn faster than 4x to check for bad burns
this adds 15 min to each i do :a :sad:

I have to remind you though, that the 1653S produces formidable results at 16x with MCC004 / Verbatim 16x DVD+R.

So there is some quality in it. Also it would produce great 16x burns with MCC003 at 16x, if it would use the MCC003 strategy for the first third of the disc and then use MCC004 for the other two thirds. Again, there is quality in it, it just had to be tickled out! :slight_smile:

By the way, my 52x Verbatim CD-Rs work flawlessly at 48x burning!

Yes my 1653S drive produces excellent results with MCC004 as well; but my Verbatim MCC003s will not even mount when burned at 8x, using the MCC003 or the MCC004 strategy. The same applies to CMCMAGE01s. Ricoh R02 also produce excellent results with just slightly high PIs at the end, when burned at 16x using the R03 strategy. The read curve falls of very slightly at the end when scanned at 12x. I’ll post the results in the strategy switching thread as soon as I get time. :wink:

I have got a 1213@1653 with checksum mod and it seems to do mcc03 well @8x
Not tried any other speeds though



[OT-humor alert]
@ rdgrimes
thanks for clarifying that, I thought that’s what Keops2004 was trying to say :wink: :bigsmile:
[/OT-humor alert]

very nice mod indeed :iagree:

whats with the deleted posts :confused:

where did all the replies go???
they were here earlier