Quality + BitSetting FW for the 3520?

vbimport

#1

Hi,
(I originally posted this in http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?p=853367#post853367 ).

I mainly use MCC003, and I’m not interested in overspeeding this media above its 8X certified speed. I’m only interested in maintaining the stock’s FW burn quality for this media, but adding the BitSetting capability.

Would it just be best for me to flash my drive with the I/O Data 1.25 FW?
Any drawbacks in using the I/O Data FW?

Has anybody done a quality comparison of stock vs. LDbeta3 for MCC003 when both done @ 8X ?

Thanks!
Tom


#2

Although not the same discs that you are using, I find using the 1.25 firmware gives almost identical quality as latest 1.04 versions. This along with its excellent auto bitsetting capability makes it is a winner for me.


#3

I’m in the same boat as you - if you’ve found anything out please share! Let me make my case:

I too am only interested in quality. I am not even considering hacked firmware for this reason. I currently run the 1.25 firmware for the bitsetting, otherwise I’d be running the 1.04. Today, I just got a BenQ 1620. Here are 2 scans of the same media from the same spindle. The first one is burnt on with the 1620 @ 12X (maximum), and the second with the 3520 @ 8X (maximum). I got the BenQ for scanning, but it seems to burn marginally better than the 3520, and at a higher speed too. Too bad it’s verify (read) speed is crap - in the end, burn+ verify cycles take the same, 15 minutes 3520 burns slower but reads way faster, 1620 burns faster but reads much slower.

<img class=“attach” src=“attachment.php?attachmentid=25930&stc=1” border=“0” alt="" />



#4

I’m currently using FW v1.25 for the exact reasons as you.
I think that higher burn speed is worth for nothing if there’s a chance you’d experience read/play problems in any drive/player.
U currently don’t have any PI/PIF capable drive available, but the read test I’m doing after each burn show a perfect speed curve each and every time.
I haven’t experienced any read speed curve dips, even though Dee and some other forum users are convineced those are common for the 3520 as it is “a poor reader”.

I’ll stick with FW 1.25 and MCC003 for now.


#5

Why is everybody implying that only the stock firmware gives the best quality?

The firmware from Dee, for example, is created for better quality in the first place, and if possible writing at a higher speed.

I think you’re assuming the wrong thing if you think that the writing quality of this firmware (e.g. 1.U6) is inferior to that of the stock firmware.

Can anyone proof me wrong?


#6

@Muertez

Clearly because they are stupid and ignorant people, who have no idea about modified firmware.


#7

Personally, I think results speak louder than words.
A full disc burn, not one at 4gig :slight_smile:
We also tend to measure the quality of a burn on the total amount of PIF (errors that can’t be corrected) Not the Quality score which means very little.
In any case. 4 times less errors than the ND-3520 burn a few posts above. And 3 times less errors than the Benq 1620

Firmware LD3520 1.U6



#8

Is this a joke? I don’t have a problem with you putting a coffee can muffler on your ride - as long as you keep it at your house, and don’t tell me what to do.

P.S. Stupid and ignorant are synonymous - no need to include both when trying to get a point across.


#9

Is this a joke? I don’t have a problem with you putting a coffee can muffler on your ride - as long as you keep it at your house, and don’t tell me what to do.

I do not care what firmware you use, but i find it sad that you make stupid remarks about firmware which you have never even used or have any clue about (see below).

Plus hypocrite your using a modified firmware, I0DATA 1.25 firmware is not official firmware for NEC 3520A users, 1.04 is. you warranty is now void.


#10

Neither is the latest 1.U6 firmware, or any modded version for that matter, official. Using any of them voids a warranty. So not sure what point you are trying to make ???

Why not just leave people to make their own judged choices !

And for your info, I also choose to use earlier versions of 3520a firmware because they gave a quality I am currently happy with.

Just for interest, I have tried virtually all modded versions as they became available and found no real benefit to my situation.

The only firmware mods I choose to have where available are Auto-bitset, Riplock and RPC1. And to that end, I am currently trying the appropriately modded 1F3.


#11

So not sure what point you are trying to make ???

Simple. the guy goes around this forum telling people how nasty and evil “hacked” firmware really is without facts, makes out helpful people like Dee,Liggy,TDB etc are out to cause NEC users harm, while he uses this bad firmware which he believes is official from NEC and his warranty is still covered.

That guy is just poison with a capital P.

Why not just leave people to make their own judged choices !

If someone is happy with something then good but if they turned around and made totally untrue comments, would you ignore it? i would not.


#12

OK, lets chill please :slight_smile:


#13

Indeed, I didn’t mean to start off a fight, I just wanted to say that the official firmware doesn’t necessarily have the best writing quality.
Modified firmware’s have quality improvement in mind also.

But hé, let’s not argue further, just look at some results in the modified firmware topics. :iagree:


#14

If you don’t agree with something, it’s stupid - now I gotcha! You must be fun at parties. You have quite a mouth on you - it’ll get you in trouble in real life.


#15

You love to stir up a hornets nest don’t ya? :bigsmile:


#16

Hahaha, I really should put on some insect repellant :bigsmile:


#17

When I received my NEC 3520A, I immediately “upgraded” to the IOData 1.25 firmware based on some recommendations in this forum. That firmware struggled with medium-grade Optodisc OR8 media (8x). I then tried out Dee’s 1.U6 firmware and the burn quality is incredible, even at 12x. If you’re getting flakey burns with another firmware, I highly recommend trying out 1.U6.

As for booktype setting, any firmware will do. Just get WinBTypeV2 and set the booktype to whatever you wish. Do a forum or Google search to find a download link.


#18

Dee - the only reason I’m sticking with the I/O Data 1.25 FW is that for some strange reason, it creates MCC003 burns that show a perfect read curve each and every time even without lower the read speed to 15X.
This is a strange situation, cause I sure can see that the 1.U6 creates less PI/PIF errors?!

Can anyone explain how come the I/O Data 1.25 FW does not have the read issue (the need to lower the read speed to 15X in order to have a reliable read), or does not creates discs which have this read issue, even though PI/PIF wise it’s inferior?


#19

You have to use the firmware that best suits your needs. I’d say if your getting good results with 1.25, your drive and media, stick with it. :wink:

EDIT : What we are learning though is.
Some 3520 react badly to a rise in Jitter. Mines is such a drive, if Jitter values rise. my drive finds it difficult to read a media, while my 3500 drive seems unaffected by the same rise in jitter and will read the same media without a problem.


#20

Yep, I too suspect that Jitter is to blame for those read issue even though the PI/PIF levels of that media are very good.