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

[musicmusic]

also on my ltd-165h, with the same cd-rw disc, its stopping after a few minutes into the disc. (at 8x)

Sometimes it gives an error like: "Servo Error 030900 after LBA 1E50h - 1"

Once it skipped 30 mins (it wasn't that there was a big gap in the graph, the x-axis changed) graph: http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd.png

Now I managed to get a full read from the 165h but look at the graph.

http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd2.png

The axis gone crazy but the graph is blank!

looking at the csv :

http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd2.csv

There are a lot of zero's and one's which doesn't seem right.

it seems the 165h can't return read errors or something?

if it's my 165h at fault then its ok (i just read cfitz post on the second page so it would seem most likely), i still have my 32123s, but otherwise it would be nice if this could be improved, if not forget it

[Inertia]

Different chipsets and such

I said 52326S

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

The as yet unreleased Liteon LTR-52326S is already supported by NTI Supported Drives, so it must be more than a rumor. When drives are supported before they are even released, this has to be the best record yet of any burning software.

Also, check out the Liteon DVD writers.

[KCK]

LTR-52326S and LTR-52326K were already listed in Ahead's database for InCD 3.52.20. Just google for LTR-52327K and LTR-52327S to see more!

[CDHero]

also on my ltd-165h, with the same cd-rw disc, its stopping after a few minutes into the disc. (at 8x)

Sometimes it gives an error like: "Servo Error 030900 after LBA 1E50h - 1"

Once it skipped 30 mins (it wasn't that there was a big gap in the graph, the x-axis changed) graph: http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd.png

"Servo Error" means your drive is unable to seek address , maybe your F/W is too old or your drive is not good.

Now I managed to get a full read from the 165h but look at the graph.

http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd2.png

The axis gone crazy but the graph is blank!

I see your average C1 is only 4 , but your Y-axis maximum is so large ,
You must set Y-axis to auto-maximum , thus , you can see the graph

looking at the csv :

http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/dvd2.csv

There are a lot of zero's and one's which doesn't seem right.

it seems the 165h can't return read errors or something?

if it's my 165h at fault then its ok (i just read cfitz post on the second page so it would seem most likely), i still have my 32123s, but otherwise it would be nice if this could be improved, if not forget it

A lot of zero is normal , because your C1 average is only 4.

[CDHero]

Hi , folks
KProbe 1.1.7 released.
I fixed a major bug for audio disk.
I think this version should work fine for most discs.

Thank you very much!

http://home.pchome.com.tw/cool/cdtools

[klaymen]

Hi all,

Karr, it seems you're programmer of this great tool? Maybe I could ask you a few internal things that I'm wondering for some time... I must note that I'm only using KProbe for DVD-R/-RW testing so far.

My main question is the exact meaning of PI... is it the PI-detected errors that occur in just one sector, or is it the summed up PI errors of 8 subsequent sectors (otherwise called "PI sum 8")? I'm asking because the standard requests "PI sum 8" to be below 280. Also I'm wondering if PO is the same number otherwise called PIF (PI failures), the number of PI-detected errors that PI could not correct and will undergo PO correction.

Also I noticed, by saving the output as a csv file, that not all sectors seem to be sampled. I interpret the first number of each line as LBA, the second as PI and the third as PO. At the beginning of a media, about one out of 75 LBAs are measured (the LBA differences are around 75), towards the end of the disc the differences climb up to about 150, probably due to faster linear speed in the outer regions. Am I right in the assumption that due to the DVD speed KProbe can only measure the error rates of certain discrete sectors? If so, this would mean the error rate indeed relates to only one particular sector, and not "PI sum 8"? I didn't have the impression I get more samples at a lower speed, but didn't throughly check that...

If my assumptions are right, is there any way to measure every single sector (I know this would take a long time)? I wrote a Perl script that calculates a "pseudo PIsum8" by summing up the error rates of 8 subsequent sampled sectors (which of course are not subsequent on the disc, but spread over about 800 sectors) - but I have no idea if such a plot has any significance.

Last but not least I'm wondering if the LiteOn drives actually deliver the raw data of a sector (including checksums) to the PC, so KProbe itself verifies the checksums, or if the LiteOn drives just deliver the number of PI/PO errors it detected directly to the software. I know this is not really relevant for us users, but I do still wonder.

Thanks a lot, and sorry if I might have messed up some points (I'm no expert in the area of DVD error checking...)

Klaymen

[musicmusic]

[didnt even notice i double posted, sorry i pressed quote instead of edit ]

[musicmusic]

"Servo Error" means your drive is unable to seek address , maybe your F/W is too old or your drive is not good.

Ok so the 165h isnt very good then.

I see your average C1 is only 4 , but your Y-axis maximum is so large ,
You must set Y-axis to auto-maximum , thus , you can see the graph

I didn't change it so I assume it was.. Look in the csv file, the first couple values are 5000/7000

A lot of zero is normal , because your C1 average is only 4.

It shouldn't have been though because it was the same disk I posted on the previous page. Ill just assume my 165h is at fault it doesn't seem to like that disc.

KProbe 1.1.7 released.
I fixed a major bug for audio disk.

Hey thanks! It was an audio disc I was testing. I now notice its not giving me read errors anymore with that disc on my 32123s, and also my 165h is giving a better reading too.

[CDHero]

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

Are you sure cd-doctor gives a much more accurate C1 average ?
Please post the image generated by cd-doctor! thanks
you can calculate the average by yourself.
C1 Tatal = 2855001
Tatal records from CSV file = 3740
2855001 / 3740 = 763.369

There are many read errors , so the average was pull down.

BTW, please turn off the "realtime chart" if you want accuracy.
Thanks

[musicmusic]

Are you sure cd-doctor gives a much more accurate C1 average ?
Please post the image generated by cd-doctor! thanks
you can calculate the average by yourself.
C1 Tatal = 2855001
Tatal records from CSV file = 3740
2855001 / 3740 = 763.369

There are many read errors , so the average was pull down.

BTW, please turn off the "realtime chart" if you want accuracy.
Thanks

Sure, but I dont get those read errors with 1.1.7 so the average is ok.

Comparison:

1.1.6

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

1.1.7

csv: http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/cdrw4.csv

cd-doctor 1.0.4

csv: http://members.lycos.co.uk/musicf/doctor.csv


Instead of counting read errors as 0, couln't it estimate a value from the surrounding values? Or just not use them in the average, it would make more sense to me.. As far as I can tell, despite the big gap in the cddoctor graph the c1 avg is not brought down.

slightly off topic, but Im guessing the 165h is a useless reader because Im getting large c1/c2 values at the begining and end off every cd, seems kinda random. It is also giving me a loud lawnmower sound when I test at full speed with a good disc, its never made that sound before..

[MediumRare]

Hi , folks
KProbe 1.1.7 released.
I fixed a major bug for audio disk.
I think this version should work fine for most discs.

Thank you very much!

http://home.pchome.com.tw/cool/cdtools

Hi Karr Wang,
Thanks for the new version. I just got home and started testing it. The audio-disc improvements are evident. I like that the audio tracks are listed in the Disk-Info panel. The scan of my "crappy bleached audio disk" did not change much, but the read errors disappeared!!

I also have a 40-rated Verbatim (CMC) disk that I burned @48x with massive errors at high speed reading- CD Doctor gave up reading at maximum and KProbe 1.1.6 couldn't read it even @24x. Version 1.1.7 finishes at all speeds, including maximum!!!
The results are somewhat perplexing, though- there are more errors reading @40x than at maximum, and the distribution is different:
Read @ max:

Read @40x:


My first try reading @max had nothing but errors after the spike at ~62 min. I couldn't reproduce the results, though. This affects the C1,C2 averages considerably, as musicmusic mentioned. Could you note the total time in all skipped samples and subtract that from the total time prior to calculating the average? I don't think it is realistic to ignore the skipped samples when averaging.

G

[MediumRare]

slightly off topic, but Im guessing the 165h is a useless reader because Im getting large c1/c2 values at the begining and end off every cd, seems kinda random. It is also giving me a loud lawnmower sound when I test at full speed with a good disc, its never made that sound before..

Welcome to the club- we've all pretty well come to the conclusion that the scans with a DVD-drive are not useful. Look back a bit in the thread, e.g. cfitz' comment http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=60181#60181.

G

[dolphinius_rex]

Hey Mr. Wang, Would it be possible for you to increase the space in the in the table between the C1/C2 "CUR" "TOTAL" and "AVG" readings on K-Probe??

Everytime I scan a CD with more then 1,000,000 errors (assuming an average of 1,000 or more per sector) it becomes VERY difficult to tell where one number ends and the other begins.

I realise that MOST people do not (and don't want to) run into discs with this many errors on them very often, however, many of my low quality discs that are 5 years old or more have error amounts similar to this.

It's not a big deal really, but it would be nice to see. Thanks for all your hard work! You're latest version 1.1.7 is EXCELLENT!!

EDIT: Would it also be possible to set the "unreadable error" value on the graph to 25% of the current Y-Axis setting? That would solve the problem of it always needing to be adjusted in order to appear on new graphs.

[cfitz]

EDIT: Would it also be possible to set the "unreadable error" value on the graph to 25% of the current Y-Axis setting? That would solve the problem of it always needing to be adjusted in order to appear on new graphs.

Not to be a spoil sport, but I would prefer it to be left like it is, where the user can adjust to it be whatever value he or she prefers.

Poor Karr, he has been sucked into the GUI wars - where everyone has an opinion, and they are all different.

cfitz

[cfitz]

if it's my 165h at fault then its ok (i just read cfitz post on the second page so it would seem most likely), i still have my 32123s, but otherwise it would be nice if this could be improved, if not forget it

There have been a lot of questions about this, so let me quote Karr from the club.cdfreaks.com forums:

DVD ROM is not a better reader than burner.
But why it reports far fewer c1 and c2? It is because
DVD ROM report C1C2 by cooked mode , and the burner by raw mode.

(from http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php ... adid=67646)

cfitz

[dolphinius_rex]

cfitz: How about if we have the option for it to be automatically a certain percentage, personally, I'd like the automation, but I can see how others might like to set it independantly.

[cfitz]

cfitz: How about if we have the option for it to be automatically a certain percentage, personally, I'd like the automation, but I can see how others might like to set it independantly.

I was going to suggest that as a possibility, much like the Y-axes can now be either auto-scaled or manually set, but I don't want to overburden Karr. If he has no problem with adding another option, I certainly don't have an problem with using another option.

Maybe the best way to handle it would be to auto-scale the unreadable error value if you have the Y-axis set to auto-scale, (25% of the screen pixels as you suggest sounds fine), but if you set the Y-axis extent manually, then you get to set the unreadable error value manually as well. That way only one check box enables/disables auto-scaling for both. I guess if you do this then it makes more sense to move the "Error Value" text box down next to the "Auto Y-Axis Max." text box.

cfitz

[cfitz]

Has anyone else noticed that, starting with 1.1.6 (or was it earlier?) K's Probe no longer welcomes you to LiteOn IT? Instead it now welcomes you to KProbe. I think that is only fair, since Karr is doing this on his own for our benefit. Thank's again, Karr! By the way, where was the pretty picture on the "About" tab taken?

cfitz

[dolphinius_rex]

It's LiteON's loss if they don't want to offer their support for this software! This is hands down the best testing software I've used!! and it gets better every 2 days (on average)

I wonder how difficult it would be to incorperate the ATIP Lead-In and ATIP Lead-Out to the testing display in the save file?

[cfitz]

Karr, do CD-MRW discs require special treatment? Several people have noted somewhat odd behavior when testing CD-MRW discs in another thread:

http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic. ... 1434#61434

The pictured scan is from CD Doctor, but further down the thread KCK reports the same for K's Probe, so I imagine this is common to the drive/media and not specific to CD Doctor.

cfitz

[dolphinius_rex]

I've had a similar experience with unclosed multisession CD-R/Ws. They always have C2 errors right at the end (but ont in the middle). I think it has to do with the format itself, and doesn't mean that the disc is bad. However, perhaps Mr.Wang can come up with a way of testing these formats more accuratly??

[OC-Freak]

"Servo Error"

I also get that error, but I noticed that it only appears on very low quality discs with a high amount of c2 errors and sectors that is nearly unreadable.

Btw, I only get that with my LTD-163D drive, not with my LTR-48125W.

Also another thing I noticed with my LTR-48125W: it reports way higher c1 number than the LTD-163D drive, on 90% of the discs it also reports some c2 errors at about 75-80% near the end of the disc.

I think my LTR-48125W drive is not 100% good. Let's see if I could get my hands on a newer drive any time soon.

To bad I can't post screenies right now as I'm on a 28k modem connection

[cfitz]

I've had a similar experience with unclosed multisession CD-R/Ws.

I believe that is just the unfinished link blocks in the last sector and not an actual error. The should go away when you finalize the disc. That isn't what Pilgrim was showing in the thread I linked, although the underlying cause might be similar.

cfitz

[Burn2death]

Thanks Mr. Karr (Abacus??? ) for this great program, I finally have a good C1/C2 error chech program that works in Windows.



OC-Freak are you back for good or just on Vacation?

I don't know how to use the private message yet so thanks Spazmogen for the message about the delivery.

[musicmusic]

"Servo Error"

I also get that error, but I noticed that it only appears on very low quality discs with a high amount of c2 errors and sectors that is nearly unreadable.

Btw, I only get that with my LTD-163D drive, not with my LTR-48125W.

Same as me.. I was getting it with my 165h and that bad cdrw audio disc, but not with 1.1.7. I may make a bad data disc using my cdr pen and see what happens.

Also another thing I noticed with my LTR-48125W: it reports way higher c1 number than the LTD-163D drive, on 90% of the discs it also reports some c2 errors at about 75-80% near the end of the disc.

I think my LTR-48125W drive is not 100% good. Let's see if I could get my hands on a newer drive any time soon.

I think the problem may be with the 163d.

Look at the 165h's graph for the same disc i posted above:


It really doesn't match what the 32123s reports, there's no way that there is nothing/little wrong with the disc after 30mins or so. Other drives have trouble just reading the disc, and it has loads of surface scratches.

To bad I can't post screenies right now as I'm on a 28k modem connection

Im on 56k The .png's are only 10KB each.