Opinions wanted on error checks

There are a few error check results at
http://home.comcast.net/~xxxyyz/CD-test/ . The top 4 are the same disk,
the top two checked at max speed (not quite 52x), and the next two at 16x
and 8x as indicated. What prompted me to post this was the C2 spikes in
the top two. Note that they occur at different spots, so I guess that
indicates that it isn't about the burn quality, so I'm wondering what the
deal is. Could vibration be the cause? Or maybe a slightly sticky rail
that the laser rides on. Or? I see spikes like that every once in a while
that don't seem to be about the burn quality because they don't show
consistently from check to check, but they always show up in the second
half of the disk. The 16x and 8x checks look OK... to me anyway. What do
you guys typically see for error rates?
They look *really* good compared to the bottom two, eh? ;-) I included
them to share my amazement at how error tolerant CD technology is. I
burned those disks about 3 years ago, and the error checks were done
about two years ago. The problem there was a mismatch between media and
burner. The amazing thing is that disk 108 reads fine according to a CRC
file I burned with the disk, and the CRC check moved along smoothly. It
took about 3 minutes, which is in the "normal" range on my machine. I
thought disk 124 was going to read fine too, but things crapped out at
about the 72 minute mark. But still, there were 112 files on that disk,
and 105 of them were recoverable (I did actually transfer them to the
HD).

Just curious, I just rechecked disk 108. Same drive, same software.
Hmm. So I rechecked 124, too. Well, at least the part where it craps out
at around the 72 minute mark makes sense looking at that graph. :-) Any
ideas? ;-) In general, I see pretty consistent results when checking the
same disk several times.

--
N

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------

Noik wrote:

There are a few error check results at
http://home.comcast.net/~xxxyyz/CD-test/ . The top 4 are the same disk,
the top two checked at max speed (not quite 52x), and the next two at 16x
and 8x as indicated. What prompted me to post this was the C2 spikes in
the top two. Note that they occur at different spots, so I guess that
indicates that it isn't about the burn quality, so I'm wondering what the
deal is. Could vibration be the cause? Or maybe a slightly sticky rail
that the laser rides on. Or? I see spikes like that every once in a while
that don't seem to be about the burn quality because they don't show
consistently from check to check, but they always show up in the second
half of the disk. The 16x and 8x checks look OK... to me anyway. What do
you guys typically see for error rates?

They say error measurement is highly dependent on the reading
environment, especially the scan speed, and that's clearly demonstrated
by your top 4 results. (One site even says the errors are not on the
disc.) Don't have the definitive answer for the C2 spikes, but seem to
recall reading somewhere that burn speed change, like with ZCLV, might
cause C2 spikes. That explanation was plausible enough that I bought
into it. Had that been the case, your C2 spikes should have occurred at
about the same place, but yours don't. So, I don't know.

I usually get C1 avg 2 and C2=0 @ 24x, and C1 avg =50-70 and C22
@48x/52x

They look *really* good compared to the bottom two, eh? ;-) I included
them to share my amazement at how error tolerant CD technology is. I
burned those disks about 3 years ago, and the error checks were done
about two years ago. The problem there was a mismatch between media and
burner. The amazing thing is that disk 108 reads fine according to a CRC
file I burned with the disk, and the CRC check moved along smoothly. It
took about 3 minutes, which is in the "normal" range on my machine. I
thought disk 124 was going to read fine too, but things crapped out at
about the 72 minute mark. But still, there were 112 files on that disk,
and 105 of them were recoverable (I did actually transfer them to the
HD).

Just curious, I just rechecked disk 108. Same drive, same software.
Hmm. So I rechecked 124, too. Well, at least the part where it craps out
at around the 72 minute mark makes sense looking at that graph. :-) Any
ideas? ;-) In general, I see pretty consistent results when checking the
same disk several times.

Some "professional" had a scan result showing error rates increased at
the outer edge (and thus surmised that 90/99 min will have high error
rates at the outer edge). So crapping out at 72 min shouldn't be a
surprise.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:07:14 -0700, smh wrote:

....

I usually get C1 avg 2 and C2=0 @ 24x, and C1 avg =50-70 and C22
@48x/52x

Thanks for the info. Yikes, 50-70 + C2 errors sounds like a lot. I know
nothing about those speeds, my lame old hardware can only do 12x. ;-)

....

Just curious, I just rechecked disk 108. Same drive, same software.
Hmm. So I rechecked 124, too. Well, at least the part where it craps out
at around the 72 minute mark makes sense looking at that graph. :-) Any
ideas? ;-) In general, I see pretty consistent results when checking the
same disk several times.

Some "professional" had a scan result showing error rates increased at
the outer edge (and thus surmised that 90/99 min will have high error
rates at the outer edge). So crapping out at 72 min shouldn't be a
surprise.

Did you notice the two graphs of the rescans at the bottom? Any ideas
on why the two scans of the same disk at the same speed would look so
different?

Thanks for the feedback.

--
N

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/6eldj

(No Mikey S-Lickers have been able to prove ANY of the above is a LIBEL)
( -- despite Mikey claimed to have proof of misquotes !! )
'

Noik wrote:
smh wrote:

I usually get C1 avg 2 and C2=0 @ 24x, and C1 avg =50-70 and C22
@48x/52x

Thanks for the info. Yikes, 50-70 + C2 errors sounds like a lot. I know
nothing about those speeds, my lame old hardware can only do 12x. ;-)

24x and 48x/52x are the read speed. (Write speed is usually 24x.)
What program did you use for the scan and what's the burner?


Just curious, I just rechecked disk 108. Same drive, same software.
Hmm. So I rechecked 124, too. Well, at least the part where it craps out
at around the 72 minute mark makes sense looking at that graph. :-) Any
ideas? ;-) In general, I see pretty consistent results when checking the
same disk several times.

Some "professional" had a scan result showing error rates increased at
the outer edge (and thus surmised that 90/99 min will have high error
rates at the outer edge). So crapping out at 72 min shouldn't be a
surprise.

Did you notice the two graphs of the rescans at the bottom? Any ideas
on why the two scans of the same disk at the same speed would look so
different?

No idea. Now it's your turn: Had a disc with low C1 and C2=0 at 16x
speed, but CD Speed showed yellow blocks at max speed. When scanned
again at max speed, however, no more yellow blocks!


Thanks for the feedback.

You are welcome.

smh wrote:

. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------

Hmm, quite an obsession you got there, don't you? Such personal kiddy
**** may be placed in a signature (if you want to express being
immature that is) but at the top of all your posts? Strange.

Anyway...:

Some "professional" had a scan result showing error rates increased at
the outer edge (and thus surmised that 90/99 min will have high error
rates at the outer edge). So crapping out at 72 min shouldn't be a
surprise.

The outer edge of a cd or any disk rotates with a higher speed, so this
would explain why errors occur more commonly there.

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/6eldj

(No Pipsqueaks have been able to prove ANY of the above is a LIBEL)
( -- despite Mikey claimed to have proof of misquotes !! )
'

(Pipsqueak) squeaked:

Hmm, quite an obsession you got there, don't you? Such personal kiddy
**** may be placed in a signature (if you want to express being
immature that is) but at the top of all your posts? Strange.

Shove it up yours.

Some "professional" had a scan result showing error rates increased at
the outer edge (and thus surmised that 90/99 min will have high error
rates at the outer edge). So crapping out at 72 min shouldn't be a
surprise.

The outer edge of a cd or any disk rotates with a higher speed, so this
would explain why errors occur more commonly there.

Ain't you one smarty cookie!
..

================================================== ======
Who Is Mike Richter and
Why Are They Saying All These Horrible Things About Him?
================================================== ======
http://tinyurl.com/9lr57

Mike Richter & Tim Kroesen's Abuse Crap

Mike Richter, Is the Sky Falling?
Mike Richter is a LIAR (chicken little)(ii)

Mike Richter: CD-R FAQ Conflicts with References
Mike Richter: CD-R FAQ makes a Common Mistake
Mike Richter: CD-R FAQ has Significant Errors

Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (Mixed-Mode)(i)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (Mixed-Mode)(ii)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (Mixed-Mode)(iii)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (Enhanced CD)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (CD Extra)(i)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (CD Extra)(ii)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (CD Extra)(iii)
Mike Richter & Half-Baked Research (CD Extra - SAO/TAO ?)

Mikey, whatever happened to "quirky", "anomalous" or "trickier"?

Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(only dao)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(yes/no)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(i)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(ii)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(iii)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(iv)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(v)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(vi)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(vii)
Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(viii)

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on C1/C2 Errors

Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (i)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (i)(b)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (i)(c)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (i)(d)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (i)(e)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (ii)(01/05)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (ii)(09-01)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (ii)(10-04)
Mike Richter's Gibberish on C1/C2 Errors (ii)(12-00)

Mikey, do you ever see any C1 errors with CDSpeed on your machines?

Mike Richter, where's the Beef (Error Rates)?
Mike Richter, where's the Beef (Error Rates)? (ii)
Mike Richter, where's the Beef (Error Rates)? (07-02)

Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (01-04)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (01-05)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (03-04)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (04-03)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (05-03)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (06-02)(i)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (06-02)(ii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (06-03)(i)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (06-03)(ii)
Mikey Richter, Digging C1 errors out of Assholes? (07-02)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (07-03)(i)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (07-03)(ii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (07-03)(iii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (08-02)(i)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (08-02)(ii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (09-02)(i)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (09-02)(ii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (09-02)(iii)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (09-02)(iv)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (09-04)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (10-02)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (10-04)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (10-05)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (12-03)
Mike Richter, Digging C1 Errors out of Assholes? (Feurio)

Mikey, still digging C1 errors out of assholes? (07-02)(cdrw)
Mikey, still digging C1 errors out of assholes? (09-02)(cdrw)
Mikey, still digging C1 errors out of assholes? (10-02)(cdrw)

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Packet Writing Format
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Packet Writing (ditch)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Packet Writing (lethal)

Mike Richter's Slimy Words on Packet Writing Format

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (iii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(06-02)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(06-02)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(Camper)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD-RW Media (4x)(iii)

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD Extra (SAO/TAO)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on CD Extra (single/multi)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Enhanced CD (half-baked)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Enhanced CD (cRoxio ****)

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on "udf-iso"

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (half-baked)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (silent)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (mislead)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (conflict)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (summary)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (Wow!)

Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (asshole)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (error)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (error)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (single-multi)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (single-multi)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (audio)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (latrine)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (crap)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (baby food)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (caught)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (references)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (Sphincter)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (elementary)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (elementary)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (elementary)(iii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (elementary)(iv)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (value)(i)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (value)(ii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (value)(iii)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on Mixed Mode (DAO)

Mike Richter is a LIAR (dvd multisession)(ezcd/tao/dao)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (ezcd/tao/dao)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (only dao)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (multi-GB)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (Ezcd-No)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (yes-no)
Mike Richter's Cockamamie Mumbo Jumbo on DVD Multisession (pioneer)

Mike Richter & Asshole Digging
Mike Richter & Asshole Digging (DVD error rates)
Mike Richter & Asshole Digging (professional)

(To be continued)

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 00:08:59 -0700, smh wrote:
....
24x and 48x/52x are the read speed. (Write speed is usually 24x.)
What program did you use for the scan and what's the burner?

I see. I'm using CDDoctor with a Liteon 52327s. Turns out my "slightly
less than 52x" was "slightly" off. I thought I remembered that a scan
took 2 minutes, but rechecking shows about 2.5 minutes, so I'm only
scanning at around 32x avg. Well, that's probably about right for 52x
max, isn't it? How long does one of your scans that yields the 50-70 C1
avg take?

....

No idea. Now it's your turn: Had a disc with low C1 and C2=0 at 16x
speed, but CD Speed showed yellow blocks at max speed. When scanned
again at max speed, however, no more yellow blocks!

Umm, I don't know what a yellow block means. Maybe that's similar to
the C2 spikes I was seeing? So you want me to answer my own question? ;-)
It seems to me that when reading at high speed that the slightest little
mechanical thing could affect the result. I tend to think that a scan
that shows a good result is closer to the truth than a scan that shows a
bad result.
OK, here's a theory. Cosmic rays are getting into the laser reader. ;-)

--
N

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/6eldj

(No Mikey S-Lickers have been able to prove ANY of the above is a LIBEL)
( -- despite Mikey claimed to have proof of misquotes !! )
'

Noik wrote:
smh wrote:
...
24x and 48x/52x are the read speed. (Write speed is usually 24x.)
What program did you use for the scan and what's the burner?

I see. I'm using CDDoctor with a Liteon 52327s.

Do you read Japanese? Or, is there English version of CDDoctor?

The Liteon is UltraSpeed+. Why were you limited to 12x burn?

Turns out my "slightly
less than 52x" was "slightly" off. I thought I remembered that a scan
took 2 minutes, but rechecking shows about 2.5 minutes, so I'm only
scanning at around 32x avg. Well, that's probably about right for 52x
max, isn't it? How long does one of your scans that yields the 50-70 C1
avg take?

Don't know. Didn't time it.

No idea. Now it's your turn: Had a disc with low C1 and C2=0 at 16x
speed, but CD Speed showed yellow blocks at max speed. When scanned
again at max speed, however, no more yellow blocks!

Umm, I don't know what a yellow block means. Maybe that's similar to
the C2 spikes I was seeing?

You ought to try CD-DVD Speed:
http://www.cdspeed2000.com

So you want me to answer my own question? ;-)
It seems to me that when reading at high speed that the slightest little
mechanical thing could affect the result. I tend to think that a scan
that shows a good result is closer to the truth than a scan that shows a
bad result.

Vibration is definitely a factor. But there might be others.

OK, here's a theory. Cosmic rays are getting into the laser reader. ;-)

Think you've been reading too many sci-fi books. g

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:05:57 -0700, smh wrote:


I see. I'm using CDDoctor with a Liteon 52327s.

Do you read Japanese? Or, is there English version of CDDoctor?

There's a mostly English version. Let me know if you want a copy of it.
The main screen is all in English, but it'll pop up error messages and
other things in Japanese.

The Liteon is UltraSpeed+. Why were you limited to 12x burn?

I forget exactly how I came to that conclusion. Even at 12x it seems
that it will slow down a bit when the underrun protection light comes on
early in the burn, which happens fairly often. I do remember that trying
high speed was a bit of a disaster; not that it wouldn't work, but the
underrun protection light would stay on constantly and it would take an
hour to burn a disk. The docs say 500 MZ recommended, I have a P-150, so
I figured that was the bottleneck. 12x was fine by me and I never
revisited it till now. Turns out I have plenty of processor overhead at
12x and I don't max it out until I get up to 32x. I guess I'll do some
more fooling around.
....
Umm, I don't know what a yellow block means. Maybe that's similar to
the C2 spikes I was seeing?

You ought to try CD-DVD Speed:
http://www.cdspeed2000.com

I've tried it, but still prefer the simplicity of CDDoctor. And those
graphs I posted weren't from screenshots, they were compressed images
created by CDDoctor.
--
N

.. --------------------------------------
Mike Richter, were you born with
"Scam Artist" emblazoned on your face?
--------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/6eldj

(No Mikey S-Lickers have been able to prove ANY of the above is a LIBEL)
( -- despite Mikey claimed to have proof of misquotes !! )
'

Noik wrote:
smh wrote:

I see. I'm using CDDoctor with a Liteon 52327s.

Do you read Japanese? Or, is there English version of CDDoctor?

There's a mostly English version. Let me know if you want a copy of it.
The main screen is all in English, but it'll pop up error messages and
other things in Japanese.

Thanks for the heads up. May try it as I know the site.

The Liteon is UltraSpeed+. Why were you limited to 12x burn?

I forget exactly how I came to that conclusion. Even at 12x it seems
that it will slow down a bit when the underrun protection light comes on
early in the burn, which happens fairly often. I do remember that trying
high speed was a bit of a disaster; not that it wouldn't work, but the
underrun protection light would stay on constantly and it would take an
hour to burn a disk. The docs say 500 MZ recommended, I have a P-150, so
I figured that was the bottleneck. 12x was fine by me and I never
revisited it till now. Turns out I have plenty of processor overhead at
12x and I don't max it out until I get up to 32x. I guess I'll do some
more fooling around.

Make sure you have plenty of free hard disk space and defragmented. You
may also tinker with burn software cache settings.

Umm, I don't know what a yellow block means. Maybe that's similar to
the C2 spikes I was seeing?

You ought to try CD-DVD Speed:
http://www.cdspeed2000.com

I've tried it, but still prefer the simplicity of CDDoctor. And those
graphs I posted weren't from screenshots, they were compressed images
created by CDDoctor.

They are in log scale. The only other scan software that displays in log
scale is PxScan, afaik.