Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > (HD) DVD, Blu-ray & (S)VCD > DVD burning

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 27th April 2016, 19:13   #1  |  Link
tao101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 8
Laptop DVD drive can't scan for errors

I recently bought a refurbished Lenovo laptop with a Matshita UJ8C2 CD/DVD burner and was surprised that it doesn't support disk error checking...likely because I always buy better quality hardware when building my own computers. Programs like Nero DiscSpeed and OptiDriveControl reply with "drive does not support this function". The Matshita does seem to burn disks acceptably. Might there be a solution to this, like a firmware update...or are there better drives that will fit in the slim bay? I'm guessing the only solution will be buying an external Lite-On (etc.)?
tao101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th April 2016, 19:30   #2  |  Link
StainlessS
HeartlessS Usurer
 
StainlessS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 5,995
Seems to be down to manufacturer.
Many/Most drives do not support those functions and in those cases I think you are simply out of luck, unlikely
that any firmware update will make any difference.
Lite-On drives do indeed support those error checking function, but many do not (more than do I think).
I miss my old Lite-On drives (current main drive was quite a bit more expensive than my Lite-Ons, but does not support).
__________________
I sometimes post sober.
StainlessS@MediaFire ::: AND/OR ::: StainlessS@SendSpace

"Some infinities are bigger than other infinities", but how many of them are infinitely bigger ???
StainlessS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 10:12   #3  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,587
It's good this way, the results were anyway not relevant at all.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 10:36   #4  |  Link
Groucho2004
 
Groucho2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
It's good this way, the results were anyway not relevant at all.
Could you elaborate on that claim?
Groucho2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 18:45   #5  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004 View Post
Could you elaborate on that claim?
To get no-nonsense results, the drive must performed as Philips laid down the specs. The standard requires a single beam single-speed (the ONLY speed back then) Philips optical pickup among other things.
Then and only then, the results would mean something and they will also be reproducible and comparable with others and, of course, with the standards. Only then 134 C1 would mean something.

Very few drives can actually provide this level of confidence. One of them ids the Plextor 40x (SCSI) which is BTW also used, with a modified firmware (to provide a few other parameters) in the past in industrial testers.



Now, let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that one doesn't need the perfection, and he needs only approximative results, like one wanting to know the voltage of the mains doesn't need the "Fluke"-perfection, but may consider a gas-station-AVM.
The difference is that the cheaper AVM still is calibrated, whereas a drive is not.
The drive is designed to give the best results at reading (and hopefully by burning) not to assess the quality.

Therefore, a lot of idiots in the past started to "poison" the optical recording fora, by suggesting people to get eg LG burners for testing, arguing that they are better (the best, actually) readers than the crowd.
Why idiots? Because it's even worse - to be convinced that you have a good CDR/DVDR when you actually have a bad burn, but the LG can read it, for being a better reader. As long as the CDR/DVDR is played in another, regular, drive, the magic disappears like the smoke.
The PX40 is only an average reader.
In fact, people should use the WORST reader, because if the worst reader can read the CDR/DVDR, then ALL OTHERS will do the same

Therefore, in this case, a simply WRITE/VERIFY would suffice.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 19:02   #6  |  Link
Groucho2004
 
Groucho2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
To get no-nonsense results, the drive must performed as Philips laid down the specs. The standard requires a single beam single-speed (the ONLY speed back then) Philips optical pickup among other things.
Then and only then, the results would mean something and they will also be reproducible and comparable with others and, of course, with the standards.
So, the quality scans I ran for years with my Plextor PX-B950SA and Sony BWU-500S (both re-badged Lite-on) were pointless?
Groucho2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 20:15   #7  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004 View Post
So, the quality scans I ran for years with my Plextor PX-B950SA and Sony BWU-500S (both re-badged Lite-on) were pointless?
The Plex is an LG IIRC, so it should be a good reader. One can see if it's a true Plextor by the eject button.
The Sony is indeed a LiteOn.

The results are not entirely wrong. Actually, the LiteOn can provide good results in terms of precision. It is OK to compare with the standards, keeping in mind that is only an approximation.

In other words - if you consistently use the Sony for checking up the quality (and only for quality - that is the reading properties stay as constant as possible) - you can build your own database with quality parameters. Keep in mind that the LiteOn is better than the average and thus the results may be better (less errors).


There are a few caveats - some drives do not provide all the parameters required for a full analysis. Sometimes not even a basic info like the jitter.
Also the way data is presented may differ from one manufacturer (or even model) to another and/or from the standards. For instance the Plextors made by LG are obviously different form the original Plextors. The reading speed is also of paramount importance. Foreseen was 1x for both. However, with some precautions, industrial testers may use higher speeds, like 2x or 4x. The errors are corrected by a certain factor. Some drives only give all infos at a particular speed, eg the Plextors should run at 1x or 2x (some also at 4x but no more).



However, instead of approximate values that might tell nothing, better is to do a WRITE/VERIFY and pay attention to the reading graph - it should approximate the reading curve of the drive - id est, the drive reads the CDR/DVDR with full speed (if there are errors, even small, the drive reduces the speed - one sees the graph falling and/or hears the noise changing).
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 20:53   #8  |  Link
StainlessS
HeartlessS Usurer
 
StainlessS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Over the rainbow
Posts: 5,995
I used to use one drive for burning (dont recall make) and scan on Lite-On, I dont now have drive bays for a second
burner on No 1 machine (4 internal hard drives in use). I also at that time had an LG rom only, and it could pretty much read anything
that others would baulk on, because of the LG rom, my current burner is now LG (not as good a reader as the rom only was).
So, I have to agree with Ghitulescu on LG "(the best, actually)", at least as far as LG DVD/ROM is concerned.
__________________
I sometimes post sober.
StainlessS@MediaFire ::: AND/OR ::: StainlessS@SendSpace

"Some infinities are bigger than other infinities", but how many of them are infinitely bigger ???
StainlessS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 21:23   #9  |  Link
Groucho2004
 
Groucho2004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
The Plex is an LG IIRC, so it should be a good reader. One can see if it's a true Plextor by the eject button.
The Sony is indeed a LiteOn.
They're both re-badged Liteon iHBS212. Also, I know of no LG or LG-based drive that can perform quality tests.
Groucho2004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 04:56   #10  |  Link
tao101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 8
@Ghitulescu:

I'm glad you walked that back a bit. I don't burn very many disks, but do have a big movie collection, and for years have been buying DVD's and BD's faster than I can watch them. Just a few years ago, I started scanning my commercial DVD's and was amazed at what I saw. Some studios (notably Warner Brothers USA) are selling disks that are virtually coasters, and I suspect they pressed around a million of them that way. That I can sometimes guess the studio that made the disk just by looking at the scan tells me that while the scan may be far from 100% accurate, they are at least consistent and comparable with other scans made on the same drive. When I find a DVD that OptiDriveControl won't read completely (I think the programmer didn't finish that subroutine...it cites a hex error and just stops), I've been able to trace the location of the error to the bad track on the disk and visibly see the playback problem. Then I return it or exchange it with the merchant.

I completely agree that the quality of the drive actually doing the production work (in my case, my Oppo) is the final arbiter, I do find the scans from my Lite-On very helpful. When I build a new desktop later this year, perhaps I'll move it to an external housing?
tao101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 14:48   #11  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groucho2004 View Post
They're both re-badged Liteon iHBS212. Also, I know of no LG or LG-based drive that can perform quality tests.
You're right, I paid no attention to Plextor since its last true burner, the 760. Back then they used LG and I start now remembering that some people reported these new ones cannot work with PlexTools for error reporting.

I have a LiteOn, IIRC a 112, but it refused to burn some BDRs so it is now somewhere stored (that's why I don't remember its model). I currently use the external LG for its ability to burn m@discs and (rarely) the Pioneer 205 for qualityarchival burns.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 15:09   #12  |  Link
Ghitulescu
Registered User
 
Ghitulescu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 5,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by tao101 View Post
... and for years have been buying DVD's and BD's faster than I can watch them.
Sounds very familar this side, too
Quote:
Originally Posted by tao101 View Post
Just a few years ago, I started scanning my commercial DVD's and was amazed at what I saw. Some studios (notably Warner Brothers USA) are selling disks that are virtually coasters, and I suspect they pressed around a million of them that way.
Like with vinyls (the last "resurrection" since Jesus), the stamp (which BTW is much much much finer and thus much much much more sensible and also wears much faster) is the key to a good "pressed" CD/DVD/BD. Some premium markets get the first pressings, the lees valuable ones the last, just before the stamp-change.
Therefore, for some people it is customary to find pressed CD/DVD that have worse parameters than a good recorded CDR/DVDR.
Nevertheless, unless the market is really disregarded, the pressed CD/DVD must pass the minimum specs (eg less than 280 PI and 4 PO for DVDs, together with jitter and stuff).


However, there may be another reason.
Some discs are intentionally faulted, to render the ripping more difficult if not impossible. These are called "defective sectors" and these are not read back when the movie is played, as they are skipped. There are not too many and usually concentrated at the beginning (it may depend also on the trailers and stuff PRECEEDING the movie).
For Music-CDs (CD-DA), the second layer of correction is deliberately erroneous, so the drive will report C2 errors when the sector was correctly read back. Being a CD-DA the drive then interpolates the audio so one cannot hear (they claim) the errors, but the computer drives will not rip it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tao101 View Post
I completely agree that the quality of the drive actually doing the production work (in my case, my Oppo) is the final arbiter, I do find the scans from my Lite-On very helpful. When I build a new desktop later this year, perhaps I'll move it to an external housing?
From my post one should remain with the idea that, while not according to the standards, the personal scanning is nevertheless a means to approximate the quality of a disc.

For instance, assuming one does the scanning at 24x to save time, if the disc reports eg 1200 errors and it is still readable at full speed, then one should draw the red line there (not at 280, or 220, or whatever the standard says and the type of the error). Any disc below 1200 is much better. 1200 replaces the limit set by the official standard. And I believe this is what you wanted to know.
__________________
Born in the USB (not USA)
Ghitulescu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 18:46   #13  |  Link
tao101
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu View Post
For instance, assuming one does the scanning at 24x to save time, if the disc reports eg 1200 errors and it is still readable at full speed, then one should draw the red line there (not at 280, or 220, or whatever the standard says and the type of the error). Any disc below 1200 is much better. 1200 replaces the limit set by the official standard. And I believe this is what you wanted to know.
FYI, as an example, too many dual layer Warner Brothers DVD's look just like this:



While I haven't watched these films lately, I recall that they played without issue. Every DVD in the boxed set is the same (except for a lone DVD5, which is within spec) and scanning at 1x makes no difference. I would complaint to WB, except that over the years I acquired duplicates of some of their disks, bought from different merchants at different times, and they always look the same. Simultaneously, DVD9's from Sony and Universal, and most smaller studios never look like this. That's why I say WB pressed a million this way and their QA department must have been on holiday. I don't think any DVD should look like this.

Last edited by tao101; 29th April 2016 at 18:53.
tao101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
dvd laptop matshita

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:10.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.