Playing with my new drive!

vbimport

#1

Hi Guys,

FedEx showed up today with my new drive from NewEgg! :slight_smile:

The drive installed easily, but I was miffed that the 80 conductor cable I ordered with it as it was listed as “Connector Type: FC 40P socket x3” - I thought the “x3” meant THREE connectors (i.e. “times three”) but it only has TWO connectors - one for the main board and one for the drive. I wanted to keep my old LiteOn 451 and use it as a reader (my LiteOn 166 died), oh well I’ll run downtown tomorrow and pick one up (when I can see what I’m buying!).

I played a movie with it, burnt a disc with it, and then viewed the burnt disc. All seemed to be working fine so I upgraded from the original G7H9 firmware to B7T9 firmware following the procedure Sarcoptic outlined in an earlier post. All went well! :bigsmile:

I downloaded CDSpeed and scanned the disc I made with the original firmware. I’m used to KProbe, and KProbe 1.1.29 at that, so I’m not sure what I’m looking at . . . PIs below 280 and POs below 32 still apply? There’s a nasty downward spike in the read speed at the start of the scan, anything to worry about?

So far I’m happy - the drive is much quieter than my old LiteOn.

Thanks!

-Bob-


#2

I’m used to KProbe (v2.4.2) myself…

Now, that is a nice scan, did your (previous) Litey ever give you a scan like this ? :wink:

No kidding, your new choice is a heck of a DVD burner.!

On BenQ 1620 CD/DVD speed Quality Scans, the STRICT and standard limit is (Kprobe style), PIs below 280 and POs below 16.

It is not ONLY quiter Bob, it is another Christmas Tree all together :bow:

Hp. _


#3

Nice scan!


#4

hp1530 wrote:

> I’m used to KProbe (v2.4.2) myself…

I have it, but for some reason I’ve just used the older version most of the time, creature of habit I guess!

> Now, that is a nice scan, did your (previous) Litey
> ever give you a scan like this ? :wink:

Yes, it’s given some good burns. It’s VERY picky on media though - that’s actually why I replaced it. With the new 8x media I just can’t get as good of burns as I got with the 4x media.

> No kidding, your new choice is a heck of a DVD burner.!

I’m thinking so too! So far I’m darn happy!

> On BenQ 1620 CD/DVD speed Quality Scans, the STRICT
> and standard limit is (Kprobe style), PIs below 280 and POs below 16.

Thanks! I appreciate that!

> It is not ONLY quiter Bob, it is another Christmas
> Tree all together

I dunno about a tree, but it’s definitely a nice present! (I bought it with cash given to me for Christmas)

I’ll attach a couple scans - the GS0H_TY_minus_R_2.png is a TY 4x done on my Litey. The TYG02.png is the best scan I’ve been able to get using 8x media. Usually it starts more towards a hundred and then slopes down. Still an acceptable scan, but frustrating when I know it can do better.

THANKS for the input - btw, is that little dip in the read speed at the start of the scan anything to worry about?

-Bob-



#5

Hmm, the most recent scan went through but the earlier one didn’t . . .

OK, I’ll try again - this is what my Litey used to do with 4x media.

============

Hmmm, for some reason I just can’t get that file uploaded! :frowning:

============

Ok, here’s the problem - I’ve already uploaded to to another part of CDFreaks - look for it in the LiteOn forum in the following thread:
New LDW-851S Firmware: GS0H

-Bob-


#6

Still playing with my new drive!

Ritek G04s used to work in my Litey just fine, but this fall I started getting variable results from them.

I still have a spindle of G04s that burnt sucky on my Litey so I tried one on my new 1620 . . . it burnt it much better than my Litey would’ve!

Though the POs are low, there’s significantly more of them than there was with my first that used a TY disc.

Hopefully I can get this scan to upload!

-Bob-



#7

Congratulations on the 1620 Bob - I think you’ll find that it will do 8X - 12X burns as well as the LiteOn does 4X burns. You might want to consider +R discs as a possible option. For example, your BenQ will likely burn cheap 8X ProDisc R03 discs (eg SmartBuy) at 12X - and it will likely scan them a bit better than the ones you’ve just posted.

Most 1620 scans will have this read spike near the beginning - I think it’s the drive recalibrating its read logic at this point, so it likely won’t show up when you get the LiteOn hooked up and scan on it.

When you scan with CDSpeed on the LiteOn drive, you don’t want any PIF’s higher than 4. However, if you scan with CDSpeed on the BenQ drive, you don’t want any PIF’s higher than 16. For example, a scan with a PIF max of 2 on the LiteOn drive will likely scan with a PIF max of 8 on the BenQ drive (4X higher). The PIE’s seem to scan about the same with both drives.

You might want to consider changing the CDSpeed color scheme from its default “Legacy” to “Bright”. CDSpeed will then color code the “good” PIF zone as a background green color. And then any PIF’s higher than 4 on the LiteOn and higher than 16 on the BenQ will enter the light-red danger zone. And if they’re really bad, they’ll enter the dark red danger zone. These colors will help you quickly interpret a scan, since you might scan some discs on the LiteOn and some on the BenQ.

You can change the colors by clicking on menu items “File->Options” to get to the configuration screen. Be sure to select the “Disc Quality” item in the white box along the left, and then change the theme item from “Legacy” to “Bright” in the pulldown box in the “Colors” section near the bottom.


#8

Spartane wrote:
<snip>
> You might want to consider +R discs as a possible option.
<snip>

I am - I’ve been using -Rs simply because they’ve worked well for me. When I got my LiteOn I was buying Sony branded Ricoh JPNR01s at Wally World but they were burning marginally for me. Next I bought some TY +Rs off eBay and they burnt better, but didn’t play well on my players. I think they were either fakes or seconds as they were scratched, inconsistent in dye color, etc… At this time a friend told me to try Ritek G04s - I did and they burnt beautifully for me, so I stuck with them. Late last summer / early this fall the Riteks started getting quite variable for me, so I tried TY -Rs and they worked great. Now that I can’t get 4x media though the new 8x isn’t burning as well on my LiteOn. Drives are cheap these days so I decided to try a new drive . . . might as well try new media while I’m at it! I have some TY +Rs on the way!

> Most 1620 scans will have this read spike near the beginning -
> I think it’s the drive recalibrating its read logic at this point, so
> it likely won’t show up when you get the LiteOn hooked up and
> scan on it.

GREAT! Thanks for the info!

> When you scan with CDSpeed on the LiteOn drive, you don’t want any
> PIF’s higher than 4. However, if you scan with CDSpeed on the BenQ drive,
> you don’t want any PIF’s higher than 16. For example, a scan with a PIF
> max of 2 on the LiteOn drive will likely scan with a PIF max of 8 on the
> BenQ drive (4X higher). The PIE’s seem to scan about the same with both
> drives.

THANKS! Nice to know what to look for! (no real purpose in scanning if you don’t know how to interpret what’s reported!)

> You might want to consider changing the CDSpeed color scheme from its
> default “Legacy” to “Bright”. CDSpeed will then color code the “good” PIF
> zone as a background green color. And then any PIF’s higher than 4 on the
> LiteOn and higher than 16 on the BenQ will enter the light-red danger
> zone. And if they’re really bad, they’ll enter the dark red danger zone.
> These colors will help you quickly interpret a scan, since you might scan
> some discs on the LiteOn and some on the BenQ.

I’ll give that a shot - THANKS!!!

THANKS for all the great input!

-Bob-


#9

That spike it is not on disk it is actualy the drive speed recalibration,also if u play with your pc while scan the reading line might have several spikes


#10

You’re welcome!

One thing I forgot to mention. CDSpeed provides a “Quality Score” number located near the lower right-hand side of the “Disc Quality” window. This quality score is based totally on the PIF’s and completely ignores the PIE’s.

For example, on the BenQ 1620 if you have a PIF spike that hits a maximum of 8, your quality score would drop to 95%. On the LiteOn 451, if you have a PIF spike of 2, your quality score would similarly drop to 95%.

Basing the CDSpeed quality score totally on the PIF’s (and not at all on the PIE’s) is somewhat controversial, but there is some reason to it. All DVD’s write extra error correction data that’s used later on when the DVD is read to try and correct these errors. This is fortunate, since the PIE’s represent these errors as they are read off the disc, and there are typically a lot of them - even with the best discs available.

Once this error correction data has been applied to correct these PIE’s, if there are still any errors left they are shown as PIF’s. Hence the term “PI Failures” - meaning that this “first line error of defense” error correction logic has “failed” to correct some of the “PI Errors”.

The remaining PIF’s are then fed to a secondary (and final) error correction unit, and yet additional error correction data is applied. If the PIF’s aren’t too bad, then they are all corrected and you have a good disc.

If the PIF’s cannot ALL be corrected, then your “PO Failures” (middle, bottom) count box will begin to count up, and you will end up with what might be a “coaster” (although a slower read speed might still allow the disc to be read).

Note that unlike the “PI Failures”, the “PO Failures” are NOT graphed by CDSpeed, since they are usually fatal - they are just counted instead. Their count should be 0 for a good burn.

I’ve attached a scan of a Khypermedia CMC Mag F01 disc originally written on a NEC 3500 as an interesting example. The PIE peak near the end of the graph is only 55, so if you were only to look at the PIE’s (or if your burner could NOT report PIF’s, like the BenQ 1620 with an earlier firmware from only a few months ago), you might think that this burn was a good one.

However these PIE’s are NOT of the correctable variety, even though the peaks are well below the so-called “PIE below 280 acceptable standard”. Besides the obvious “PI Failures” problem, notice the “PO Failures” count of 5818.

Incidentally, if I’d written this disc on the 1620 instead of the NEC 3500, it would have read back fine. Also if I’d written an “HP” CMC Mag F01 disc (same Media ID) on either the NEC or the BenQ at 8X it would have produced a near perfect burn.

Hope some of this is useful!



#11

Thank You Spartane!

I’m going to save that post on my drive so it’s handy!

Going over some scans of my older discs it’s interesting that my Litey though maybe producing low PI/PIF levels it produces a lot more of them than my new BenQ!

My BenQ is also burning anything I feed to it without much complaint - some scan better, some have fewer PI/PIF instances, but all in all all are acceptable and work in my stand alone players! It’s NICE to be able to use some of those discs that my Litey wouldn’t burn well at all!

Thanks again!

-Bob-


#12

I’m curious as to why this is so?

Also curious why this is the case? Thanks for any assistance you can offer as to why you said the above two statements. I also appreciate your long post and nice explanation of PI Errors, PI Failures, and PO Failures.


#13

Yeah that post by Spartane could be included in the FAQs thread.


#14

has anybody else encounter this error with FujiFilm(made in Japan) 8x dvd+r media.

I’ve used firmware B7P9


#15

Mark me down as being curious about it also.:bigsmile:

@Spartane, great post.


#16

Originally Posted by Spartane
Incidentally, if I’d written this disc on the 1620 instead of the NEC 3500, it would have read back fine.

I’m curious as to why this is so?

It’s my belief that the 1620 burns slightly better than the 3500 does. But the 3500 NEC drive is still new to me (at $75.00 Cdn, I just couldn’t resist), and I’m finding that it has some distinct advantages over the 1620. I’ve burned these Khypermedia discs before on the 1620 and while not what I would consider to be a good burn, the 1620 burned disc would NOT have counted any PO Failures.

Originally Posted by Spartane
Also if I’d written an “HP” CMC Mag F01 disc (same Media ID) on either the NEC or the BenQ at 8X it would have produced a near perfect burn.

Also curious why this is the case?

The HP is just a better quality disc, even though it has the same media ID. In fact, they’re so good, that I can write them on the NEC 3500, courtesy of " :bow: Quikee’s :bow: Version 2 Milestone Release - Extreme" hacked firmware at 12X and still get good scans.

I also appreciate your long post and nice explanation of PI Errors, PI Failures, and PO Failures.

Thanks. However, I know it’s oversimplified - but hopefully it’s not too inaccurate.


#17

Thank you for answering my two questions. It was a wonderful simplification that I think even newbies can understand. I think you were right on the mark. :smiley:


#18

I have Philips branded CMC F01, and while they don’t scan as nice as HP, not one has produced data integrity problems. Burned at 8x, the PIE’s jump from 8’s to 16’s on the last 3rd of the scan, while the PIF’s are very few (almost none) and 97% or better score.

I’ll have to admit that CMC is something I just can’t outguess. But, what I want to know is: How do they last in storage? They make nicer scans than Ritek, but. . .

You know what happens to Prodisc’s inkjet printable media in storage (poof! no data). I have not heard anything about CMC lately, but their earlier medias tended to expire in storage. Any news?

I just had a bunch of Memorex media expire in storage (poof! no data): “Is it live or is it. . .dammit!”

It may be urban legend, but it is rumored that a well-written disc lasts longer than most? If that’s true, I sure am glad I have a BenQ!


#19

Along the same lines, how long can I expect a disk like Ritek R03 or CMC MAG E01 to last. Am I looking at a few years or months?
Forgive the noob question, but I’m new to DVD burning
thanks