Question re: TDK BD-R SL 4x (weird jump in errors?)

vbimport

#1

moderator note: this is a sanctioned cross-post of http://club.myce.com/f179/tdk-bd-r-sl-273605/index3.html#post2775290, to facilitate discussion. -Albert

MID: TDKBLD-RBB-000
Media: TDK 4x rated BD-R SL (Inkjet)
Burner: Pioneer BDR-208EBK
Firmware: 1.10
Burn Speed: 6x
Made In: U.A.E.
Size: 22.67(GB)
Sold as: Falcon Pro/Premium BD-R 4x 25GB /WS with Smart Guard, part no. 0759

OptiDrive Control v1.70 test was done in Samsung SE-506CB/AUBD F/W=TS00 (portable USB burner) as BDR-208EBK does not work with OptiDrive Control.

The first ~10.5 GB of the test looks good, then there is a “step-up” to much larger LDC and BIS values, something which other users often seem to avoid. I am wondering why this “step-up” occurs and how others avoid it? Would a LiteOn burner like iHBS312 give better burns/scans, especially lower IDC and BIS values?

Of 19 p/n 0759 discs tested, the posted scan is middle of the range.


#2

It may be the scanning drive, or it may be a result of the burning drive, OR it may be the media.

First, let’s see what the scanning drive does at a different speed. Drop the scanning speed to 2x or 4x temporarily. A full scan at these speeds takes a while, I know, but you can click “Start part” in the lower right to tell it to only scan a little bit before and a little bit after the jump in errors. (Or, if that doesn’t work, I think you can alter a setting in the Options to only scan a certain range).

Or you could see what happens when you drop the WRITE speed to 4x with the Pioneer.

Oh, and I doubt a LiteOn would give better BURNS. Scans…we’ll have to see.


#3

I’d suggest to update the Pioneer’s firmware to v1.50.
I had some (very few) weird results with firmwares below v1.40, too. Since v1.40 I haven’t seen anything like that anymore. It could be previous versions had some problem adjusting the write strategy during the walking OPC with certain media.


#4

Seems to be the scanning drive. Look at this scan of OPTODISC PlexDisc Liquid Defense Plus:

MID: OTCBDR-002-000
Media: PlexDisc Liquid Defense Plus BD-R 25GB 6x
Burner: Pioneer BDR-208EBK
Firmware: 1.10
Burn Speed: 4x
Made In: ?
Size: 23.18(GB)
Sold as: Part no. 633-C13

Showing OptiDrive Control 1.70 scans at 6x… (truly dreadful)

then the same disc scanned @ 4x… (nothing to write home about but at least acceptable)

Looks like I should upgrade my Pioneer firmware anyway.


#5

I wonder what aspect of the drive’s design causes it to do that. It seems that the drive starts reading differently beyond 4x. I’m accustomed to seeing drives have that awkward cliff only because of the writing, or (with some old DVD-RW drives) when scanning jitter.

But glad you narrowed it down.

Does it occur with the 506CB updated to TS02? I expect it will, but a little curiosity shouldn’t hurt.


#6

[QUOTE=Albert;2776043]I wonder what aspect of the drive’s design causes it to do that. It seems that the drive starts reading differently beyond 4x. I’m accustomed to seeing drives have that awkward cliff only because of the writing, or (with some old DVD-RW drives) when scanning jitter.

But glad you narrowed it down.

Does it occur with the 506CB updated to TS02? I expect it will, but a little curiosity shouldn’t hurt.[/QUOTE]

Previously I looked long and hard for the SE-506CB firmware upgrade but couldn’t find anything better than TS01… until you told me about TS02. It seems that one must know that it exists before one can find it.

What is the rationale for scanning/testing speed? In the past I did briefly scan at 4x and noted the result were significantly better (lower), though I didn’t look for whether the “cliff” was present or not. If a disc is burnt at 4x, should it be scanned at 4x?


#7

http://www.tsstodd.com/kor/firmware/fwdownload/ Select BD Writer Slim External, then the drive, then you should see links to pages with TS02, TS01, and TS00. Click the link for the TS02 page, and the download link should appear in English (it’s an executable, .exe).

You scan at a consistent speed. Scanning speed is not linked to burning speed at all. Depending on the drive and what you’re scanning, that speed could be anything. Since you see your 506CB seems to report differently at 6x and 4x, you settle on whichever produces output that makes sense. You could stick with 6x & just learn what a good disc looks like when scanning at that speed,what a mediocre disc looks like, etc. You’d have to do the same for 4x if that’s the speed which produces results that make sense to you.

And since results are different from drive to drive, make sure you don’t try toooooo hard to make direct comparisons; that said, you can get the general idea of how your scans look versus how the scans made by others look, and you should have an idea of when things are amiss (like when you asked your original question).


#8

[QUOTE=Albert;2776068]http://www.tsstodd.com/kor/firmware/fwdownload/ Select BD Writer Slim External, then the drive, then you should see links to pages with TS02, TS01, and TS00. Click the link for the TS02 page, and the download link should appear in English (it’s an executable, .exe).[/QUOTE]

Yes I found it thanks to your telling me it existed.

You scan at a consistent speed. Scanning speed is not linked to burning speed at all. Depending on the drive and what you’re scanning, that speed could be anything. Since you see your 506CB seems to report differently at 6x and 4x, you settle on whichever produces output that makes sense. You could stick with 6x & just learn what a good disc looks like when scanning at that speed,what a mediocre disc looks like, etc. You’d have to do the same for 4x if that’s the speed which produces results that make sense to you.
I started tabulating results (almost all scanned @ 6x) in a spreadsheet. I used basic statistic to eliminate outliers, results where the average LDC and BIS exceeded group average + 2.5 std dev.

And since results are different from drive to drive, make sure you don’t try toooooo hard to make direct comparisons; that said, you can get the general idea of how your scans look versus how the scans made by others look, and you should have an idea of when things are amiss (like when you asked your original question).
I think I will get an iHBS312 to replace the pioneer (if the new FW makes little difference to the BDR-208EBK) as it is a pain to have to mount and unmount the SE-506BC all the time.


#9

Here are results from an “M-Disc” burnt 34 days ago and deemed “bad”. The disc was printed with M261 in faint, small characters only.

MID: MILLENMR1 (000)
Media: M-Disc rated BD-R SL (Inkjet)
Made In: Taiwan (probably)
Size: 22.55(GB)
Sold as: Verbatim M-Disc BD-R White Inkjet Hub Printable part no.98917

Burner: Pioneer BDR-208EBK
Firmware: 1.10

Scanner: SE-506CB
Firmware: TS01 or TS02 (see screenshot)
Scanned @: 4x or 6x (see screenshot)

My conclusions: TS02 made little difference @ 4x scanning, but there was a significant improvement @ 6x IMO, though not nearly enough to bridge the gulf between 4x and 6x as 6x/TS02 still contained the “cliff”.

It remains to be seen if BDR-208EBK FW 1.50 improves scanning @ 6x, but looks like while I continue with SE-506CB for scanning, 4x makes a lot more sense.


#10

Scanning will show more errors when you scan at higher speeds (almost always).

I am a strong advocate of high speed scanning. The best discs and the best burns will show nice scans even at high speeds.

I would advise you to take it all with a grain of salt though! It’s just scanning with a consumer drive. It’s really just a representation of the scanning drives error rates with that disc. It does not mean other drives will show the same amount of errors or that the disc is actually faulty. Although in many cases, a [B]truly problematic disc[/B] will show similar error trends regardless of the scanning drive used.

So don’t be hasty to throw any burns away because that particular samsung drive shows there’s a little more errors than what’s deemed acceptable. You could be throwing away money.


#11

FYI, I have some PlexDisc BD-R also. They also show higher error rates towards the end of the disc. This is a good example of the same problem being picked up from two different users with different scanning drives.

Of course, a part scan at 4x in the problem area shows less errors.


#12

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2776204]Scanning will show more errors when you scan at higher speeds (almost always).

I am a strong advocate of high speed scanning. The best discs and the best burns will show nice scans even at high speeds.[/QUOTE]

The more I think about it, I am coming to the conclusion that SE-506CB with its strange “cliff/jump” when 4x scanning speed is exceeded is not a suitable scanning drive.

I am trying to get my hands on an iHBS312 to do both burning and scanning.

Thanks for your contribution.


#13

You may indeed be right about the samsung not being the best scanning drive as it has shown that same jump in errors in exactly the same spot, on different discs.

If you can find a liteon cheap enough, that would definitely be a good starting point. FYI I do think Pioneer are a better writer than liteon branded drives. My Pioneer shows similar write quality but with way more selectable burn speeds, which is a big help if you encounter problematic discs.


#14

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2776246]If you can find a liteon cheap enough, that would definitely be a good starting point.[/QUOTE]

Scored this iHBS312 on eBay a few days ago for $AUD54
http://tinyurl.com/zk24rq2

Arrived today and have yet to try but it is new, sealed in box.


#15

Nice find. That should do the job!


#16

[QUOTE=cd pirate;2776599]Nice find. That should do the job![/QUOTE]

Hmmm deployed the device tonight but find it does the OptiDrive Control 1.70 Disk Quality test at a glacially slow rate, like 1 % in half an hour.

Upgraded the iHBS312 firmware from PL15 to PL17 but that did not fix.

Any suggestions?

For all its faults the SE-506CB would do ODC Disk Quality scans OK @ 4x.

The iHBS312 reads BD-R 25GB content OK, it just won’t do a normal Disk Quality test.


#17

Did You change the speed on top from 8x to 4x, after the spinup has reached 100%?


#18

(If you need more reference material on that suggestion, that info should be somewhere, either in the LiteOn FAQ or in the iHBS112/212/312 crossflashing thread)


#19

[QUOTE=Albert;2776614](If you need more reference material on that suggestion, that info should be somewhere, either in the LiteOn FAQ or in the iHBS112/212/312 crossflashing thread)[/QUOTE]

It’s right here. :wink:


#20

[QUOTE=Oinker;2776615]It’s right here. ;)[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the workaround, it restored the glacially slow scan rate from ~2.4 % complete in 4 hr (which would have taken about a week to complete) to normal levels.

See following post for scans.