detail information
| Posted by | Jan S. |
| Posted on | 21/05/05 21:49 |
Test Disc #1:
The first test disc is a Samsung DVD+R 4x media from Taiyo Yuden:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unique Disc Identifier : [DVD+R:YUDEN000-T01-000]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disc & Book Type : [DVD+R] - [DVD-ROM]
Manufacturer Name : [Taiyo Yuden Co. Ltd.]
Manufacturer ID : [YUDEN000]
Media Type ID : [T01]
Product Revision : [Not Specified]
Disc Application Code : [General Purpose]
Recording Speeds : [1x , 2.4x , 4x]
Blank Disc Capacity : [2,295,104 Sectors = 4,482.6MB = 4.38GB (4.70GB)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** INFO : Hex Dump Of 'Media Code'-Block Listed Below
** INFO : 4-Byte Header Preceding 'Media Code'-Block Discarded
** INFO : Format 11h (Method 1) - ADIP Information
0000 : a1 0f 02 00 00 03 00 00 00 26 05 3f 00 00 00 00 .........&.?....
0010 : 00 00 01 59 55 44 45 4e 30 30 30 54 30 31 00 38 ...YUDEN000T01.8
0020 : 23 54 37 10 02 4e 72 02 9c 63 16 16 0b 0b 0a 0a #T7..Nr..c......
0030 : 01 19 1b 0b 0b 0e 0f 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
0040 : 01 00 38 38 02 2c 63 20 08 30 22 10 00 20 20 01 ..88.,c .0".. .
0050 : 00 00 02 2c 63 20 08 30 22 10 00 20 20 01 00 00 ...,c .0".. ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ DVD Identifier - http://DVD.Identifier.CDfreaks.com ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
AudioDev CATS test results:
Disc id: DVD+R SAMSUNG
Disc Manufacturer ID: YUDEN000
Analysis of CATS results:
Most of the essential parameters are within the specification limit. The Reflectivity (R14H) is slightly lower than the minimum required value (45%) on the complete disc. The DC Jitter (time variations of Data versus the recovered Clock) and Bottom Jitter (Data to Clock Jitter tilt compensated in 3 points) show some peaks above the limit (9% for a DVD+R), but in average is still ok. Overall a good disc, which should not cause any problem.
Our home-made test results:
Scanned with KProbe and Lite-On SHOW-1633S
Scanned with CD-speed and Philips DVDR1640P
| Drive Info | ID:1 PLEXTOR DVDR PX-712A V1.05 (#101824) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Test Settings | Read Speed: | 2X CLV | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Test Interval Length: | High Accuracy | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Test Result | Disc Info: | CD_SPEED_DATA_TEST_B DVD-ROM, 4482 MB (CD_SPEED_DATA_TEST_B) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Test Duration | 0:28:19 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Drive Info | ID:1 PLEXTOR DVDR PX-712A V1.05 (#101824) | ||
| Test Settings | Read Speed: | 2X CLV | |
| Test Result | Disc Info: | CD_SPEED_DATA_TEST_B DVD-ROM, 4482 MB (CD_SPEED_DATA_TEST_B) | |
| Test Duration | 0:28:38 | ||
Summary:
| Comparison | Average | Max | Average | Max | POF |
| AudioDev | 2.1 | 30 | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| Lite-On | 0.19 | 6 | 0 | 1 | - |
| Philips | 0.94 | 7 | 0 | - | 0 |
| Plextor | 0.03 | 6 | - | - | 0 |
CATS vs. drives results:
The results obtained by the drives and the CATS are remarkably consistent, as seen in the summary table. The only difference is that the CATS showed a few spikes at the beginning of the disc (bump of PI errors which follows a peak of DC jitter), while the PI errors plots from the drives are all flat. Note also that although the jitter plots from the CATS and the Plextor drive match, the one from the Philips drive is remarkably flat (and slightly higher than the two others). This suggests that the CATS could be more sensitive to jitter variations (which can be caused by a bad precision of pits or lands) than the Philips drive, but we will need to get a confirmation from other discs. Apart from this, PI/PO plots are low, which confirms that this is a very good disc.
Head over to the next page where we will have a look at test disc #2…
Introduction
There´s a reason for standards and specifications. It doesn´t matter, that there are many drives which outperforme a 1996 standard DVD ROM drive, if the one you have to use somewhere else doesn´t.
It´s great, if my new burner handles even discs, which reflecting to the standard, are completly f* ->aehm<- messed up, but if my lame notebook drive or the SA DVD Player or the 5 year old installation DVD ROM in my server can´t, it doesn´t really help me.
The specifications and standards are well known and I´m pretty upset, that the manufacturers don´t give a sh*t. If future players can´t play today´s discs, the customer has to worry.
Feel that manufacturers are not doing the R&D, but rather foisting incompetent and unreliable technology onto the buying public - I have decided against going hard drive or Disc for my camcorder. Can only afford one in my lifetime, so am going backwards to DV tape.
I also know many people who are so confused and have heard negative things about new technology such as unrelaibility, incompatability, and lack of longevity- no to mention that with so many avenues to go down, sales people do not know a lot anymore and conflicting sales views confuse the public even more.
It is time that the retailers told the manufacturers - NO - give me products to sell that will please my constomers and I know of at least one major large shop that specialises in Entertainment systems that refuse to sell anybodies DVD recorders due to the problems aforementioned.
This technology has been released too early and the manufacturers do not even know enough so their help lines are often of little help or incorrect advice.
Furthermore to have your pics put onto disc at great cost (commerciallly) and then find that a few years after, some of those pics are lost with more degrading quickly over time- I htink that perhaps the old ghastly VHS tape may be better for longetivity especially with consumer copied material.
add a tag
