Official K-Probe Discussion (Tool for Scanning C1C2/PIPO)

[CDRecorder]

I have every disc I've ever tested in spindles on the shelf, don't ask me why. There's a couple hundred there.

I keep all of my test discs, too. I probably have about 60. I thought I was the only one who kept them (or burned that many ) They are good for testing the media and drives, though.

[dolphinius_rex]

Excellently done Mr Wang! I will begin testing with your new version immediatly and let you know how it compares. I've now tested 167 CD-Rs with your software by the way!

on a side note, this new software makes a wonderful birthday present for me LOL!

*hey guys, check out the un-released LiteON 52x32x52x drive he's using for the testing!*

[CDHero]

Excellently done Mr Wang! I will begin testing with your new version immediatly and let you know how it compares. I've now tested 167 CD-Rs with your software by the way!

on a side note, this new software makes a wonderful birthday present for me LOL!

*hey guys, check out the un-released LiteON 52x32x52x drive he's using for the testing!*

Happy birthday to you !

[Abacus]

Happy birthday to you !

Ya ! Today is my birthday too , friends. Thank my friend Karr.
You done a good job.

[dolphinius_rex]

hrm, I have something interesting to report already:

when testing an 87min CD-R with version 1.1.6 I noticed it telling me that it was jumping to sectors a LOT, so I went back to version 1.1.4 to see how it would compare. Obviously 1.1.4 didn't jump past any unreadable sectors, but the end results were INCREDIBLY similar! I don't know how to post pics, so here's the raw data:

version 1.1.4:
Test Speed: 32x
start address: 00:02:00
end address: 86:57:58
C1 - Max: 18 Total: 4282 Avg: 0.941
C2 - Max: 00 Total: 0 Avg: 0.000


version 1.1.6:
Test Speed: 32x
start address: 00:02:00
end address: 86:57:58
C1 - Max: 14 Total: 3373 Avg: 0.703
C2 - Max: 00 Total: 0 Avg: 0.000


And, no unreadable sectors were viewable on the final graph, and I chose a very distinct colour, and later set the size to 10 instead of 1.
[/img]

[CDHero]

hrm, I have something interesting to report already:


version 1.1.4:
Test Speed: 32x
start address: 00:02:00
end address: 86:57:58
C1 - Max: 18 Total: 4282 Avg: 0.941
C2 - Max: 00 Total: 0 Avg: 0.000


version 1.1.6:
Test Speed: 32x
start address: 00:02:00
end address: 86:57:58
C1 - Max: 14 Total: 3373 Avg: 0.703
C2 - Max: 00 Total: 0 Avg: 0.000


And, no unreadable sectors were viewable on the final graph, and I chose a very distinct colour, and later set the size to 10 instead of 1.

The end address is not the final address kprobe tested.
It is the capacity of your disc.
Do you want me to add the final address kprobe tested ??
I can add this information immediately~

[CDHero]

I have modified the end address shown.
Now it is the final addess KProbe tested.

I tested in my shitty disc.



Is it shitty enough ?? If not , please post your disc image here for my reference.Thanks !

[MediumRare]

First of all- happy birthday to Abacus and Dolphinius_Rex!!

This thread is a beautiful example of the advantages and drawbacks of a wordwide audience:
- the main actor Karr Wang is in (I assume) Taiwan, with GMT+8
- Most of the testers are in Noth America with time zone GMT-5 to GMT-8
- the odd interjection comes from Europe (mostly GMT+1) or Australia

So we're spread pretty well uniformally around the world and someone is usually sleeping or at work when others are going great guns on development / testing !!

Isn't life exciting ?

I've made a couple of test with version 1.1.6 but haven't completed the presentation. I've just picked up the zip file again, because of the changed end value and will be back in about 1/2 hour with some comments.

It looks good...

G

[KCK]

Karr Wang:

I have a minor GUI inconvenience while running K's Probe 1.1.6 on my Latitude C840 notebook at its native resolution of 1600x1200.

When I open the Setup window in the Write Strategy tab, its default size is too small to display some right and bottom items (including the Cancel and OK boxes), so I must resize it each time. This is quite difficult because it is rather hard to place the cursor on the window's edges, which are extremely thin.

Apparently this inconvenience could be eliminated by increasing the default size of the Setup window by about 25% (without making it too big for smaller resolutions). Other alternatives (e.g., remembering window sizes) could be more difficult to implement.

I hope you will address this issue at some time, since high native resolutions are becoming popular.

[MediumRare]

It's not my birthday today, but the presents are there anyway! Thank you for the new version which adds still more great features!

The new version 1.1.6 sure handles the seeking problem a lot better. It is at least as stable as 1.1.4 and shows the problematic samples! The following 2 scans are interesting. First my "crappy bleached audio disk" (=CBAD). This is not as much a challenge as the disk Karr Wang prepared but shows what a bad or deteriorated burn can look like:

This scan was made with the first version 1.1.6 (time: 11:48 ). A scan with the newer exe (18:09) had significantly fewer errors, but higher C2 max and average. This may be normal variation or Karr Wang may have improved the reading code as well as the end sector. The completed scan showed the same 2-part time scale as before, but changed to normal after entering and leaving setup (without making any changes).

Now here's a really good disk (18:09 version):

This is the kind of scan I'd like to see on a regular basis!! There are no read errors (the 11:48 version had 6- but that may be normal variation).

The issue here, though, is the time scale. The marked values are shown in the following table:

Code: Select all

m: s: f      LBA   Delta
00:03:73      298
06:19:14    28439  28141
13:25:48    60423  31984
20:39:64    92989  32566
28:02:11   126161  33172
35:33:53   160028  33867
43:15:03   194628  34600
51:05:62   229937  35309
59:12:69   266469  36532
67:31:58   303883  37414
76:07:70   342595  38712
78:06:14   351464   8869

The values are non-linear (deltas increase). It seems to be a problem scaling the sampling bin to time. I looked at the tabulated values (*.csv file) and found that the sample intervals are at ~90 sectors at the beginning of the scan and go up to ~120 at the end. This agrees with the trend in the Delta-LBA values.

The CBAD CSV file (18:09 version) has extra commas in some values towards the end of the scan. This is the first time that has happened.

This is a fantastic tool, and getting better all the time!

G

[CDHero]

Dear MediumRare:
The table is nonsense for KProbe.Why ? It is because the time label on the Chart is auto-adjusted! The same delta is impossible,rear time label always cover front time label.
If you want to see real time label , you must zoom in again and again .
And you will get the real delta for every tick!
If you run C1/C2 with unchecked "realtime chart",you should get the delta = 70~ 75 lba
For LiteOn drives,C1/C2 interval = 75 LBA , PI/PO = 16 LBA

So , the last time label on chart is almost not the real end addess,the same as the first time label.

BTW , If you find the delta between ticks is larger than 80 LBA , you should un-check the "realtime chart" to get a better accuracy.

[MediumRare]

Dear MediumRare:
The table is nonsense for KProbe.Why ? It is because the time label on the Chart is auto-adjusted! The same delta is impossible,rear time label always cover front time label.
If you want to see real time label , you must zoom in again and again .
And you will get the real delta for every tick!
If you run C1/C2 with unchecked "realtime chart",you should get the delta = 70~ 75 lba
For LiteOn drives,C1/C2 interval = 75 LBA , PI/PO = 16 LBA

So , the last time label on chart is almost not the real end addess,the same as the first time label.

BTW , If you find the delta between ticks is larger than 80 LBA , you should un-check the "realtime chart" to get a better accuracy.

Hi Karr Wang,
We may be talking about different things. By "ticks" I mean the (main) marks on the time axis, not the time of sample values, e.g. in the CSV file. I agree that the values in the CSV file don't have to be at whole seconds or equidistant. The values from the latest scan (see below) of my CBAD="crappy bleached audio disk" vary from 80 to about 120 sectors (but not uniformly). This is not an issue if the LBA is scaled to time correctly.

If the values on the time axis on the charts are useful at all, they should correspond to the ticks. And if ticks are useful at all, they should be equidistant for a linear scale. So if I take the time values for the ticks and look at the differences, these should be the same (even if auto-adjusted). And they're not.

To eliminate possible errors, I restarted the probe, turned Realtime Chart off, and specified separate C1/C2 charts. This is what it looks like just after the scan (note the funny time scale):


Then I entered setup, quit immediately and got this picture:

which is what it should be.

Now if I convert the times shown here for the ticks to LBA, I get these values:

Code: Select all

C1 m:s:f       LBA    Delta   (LBA Hex)
00:03:74       149                95
07:05:60     31785    31636     7C29
14:52:26     66776    34991    104D8
22:44:31    102181    35405    18F25
30:41:59    137984    35803    21B00
38:47:08    174383    36399    2A92F
46:54:10    210910    36527    337DE
55:09:15    248040    37130    3C8E8
63:25:19    285244    37204    45A3C
72:14:41    324941    39697    4F54D
79:25:22    357247    32306    5737F
                             
                             
C2 m:s:f       LBA    Delta   (LBA Hex)
00:03:74       149                95
06:50:66     30666    30517     77CA
14:19:27     64302    33636     FB2E
21:54:38     98438    34136    18086
29:33:42    132867    34429    20703
37:20:41    167891    35024    28FD3
45:07:60    202935    35044    318B7
53:05:03    238728    35793    3A488
61:01:10    274435    35707    43003
69:11:02    311177    36742    4BF89
79:25:22    357247    46070    5737F

Again, the Delta-times for the marks on the time axis are not constant.

So , the last time label on chart is almost not the real end addess,the same as the first time label.

I added the hex values and the last time (disc size) just to make sure that my conversion from msf to LBA was OK (in the previous example, I forgot to subtract 150=2 sec, but that doesn't affect the deltas).

I hope this clears up possible misunderstandings.

G

[aviationwiz]

Does this program work with non-Lite-On drives?

[CDHero]

I understand !!
I will check my program again , thanks for your comment !!
I hope it doesn't create any problem for you ! Sorry~

[MediumRare]

I understand !!
I will check my program again , thanks for your comment !!
I hope it doesn't create any problem for you ! Sorry~

No problem!! Thank you for wonderful tool.

G

[aviationwiz]

052000 Invalid Command Operation Code

What does that mean? I keep getting that error when trying to scan for C1/C2 errors.

[Harrier]

Excellently done Mr Wang! I will begin testing with your new version immediatly and let you know how it compares. I've now tested 167 CD-Rs with your software by the way!

on a side note, this new software makes a wonderful birthday present for me LOL!

*hey guys, check out the un-released LiteON 52x32x52x drive he's using for the testing!*

Should we ponder about that one?

[rdgrimes]

I wonder if a certain un-named employee of LiteOn could be coerced into leaking some firmware for the rumored 52326S drive......hmmm.

[MediumRare]

052000 Invalid Command Operation Code

What does that mean? I keep getting that error when trying to scan for C1/C2 errors.

Did you choose the right drive? I think it defaults to the secondary master. I tried to run the program on my old rig, Acer burner (Windows 95A), but it wouldn't even start.

G

[aviationwiz]

It won't work with of the drives they have out now so it doesn't matter if he gives you the firmware or not. Different chipsets and such.

[MediumRare]

Is it shitty enough ?? If not , please post your disc image here for my reference.Thanks !

I just had a closer look. That should do the trick!!

The CBAD CSV file (18:09 version) has extra commas in some values towards the end of the scan. This is the first time that has happened.

This problem is an artifact that arises when importing the CSV-file into Excel (sorry I didn't check that earlier). Excel is being "too smart". When the C2-count has 3 digits, the whole entry is converted into a single number and formatted with commas every 3 digits: e.g. 356797,2270,230 becomes "3567972270230" and is displayed as "3,567,972,270,230" (the "extra commas").

Does the program work with Windows-95 (A)? This is not urgent: I tried running it on my old rig (to check AviationWiz' problem) and got a message about a missing function "GetComboBoxInfo" in user32.dll. (It really isn't present- I checked. It is there in NT4 and Win98SE).

G

[rdgrimes]

Different chipsets and such

I said 52326S

[dolphinius_rex]

Different chipsets and such

I said 52326S

I haven't heard anything about that drive...I doubt it will exist

[musicmusic]

get prog karr

check the graph of the cd-rw disc that came with my drive:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/cdrw.png

Not nice... But anyway, couldn't k-probe come up with a more accurate average? It seems to count read errors as 0 leading to the C1 average in my graph which is more like the minimum. Not a big issue, but cd-doctor gives a much more accurate C1 average.

CSV file: http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/cdrw.csv

[dolphinius_rex]

Interesting, how come the read errors only appear on the C2 graph?? shouldn't they also appear on the C1 graph??

Mr. Wang, did you reduce the amount of read re-tries between version 1.1.4 and version 1.1.5 (or 1.1.6)??? I think it is giving up a little easy on the reading/testing before moving on. Perhaps it is just me ??