CATS vs. Home-made scans

detail information

Posted by	Jan S.
Posted on	21/05/05 21:49

Conclusion

Text Size Text Size

Test Disc #4

Test Disc #4:

The fourth test disc is a XEED DVD-R 4x media:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unique Disc Identifier : [DVD-R:MCI4XG01]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disc & Book Type :       [DVD-R] - [DVD-R]
Manufacturer Name :      [Mitsui Toatsu Chemicals Inc.]
Manufacturer ID :        [MCI4XG01]
Disc Application Code : [Unrestricted Use : Consumer Purpose]
Recording Speeds :       [1x , 2x , 4x]
                         [6x And Higher Might Not Always Be Detectable]
Blank Disc Capacity :    [2,298,496 Sectors = 4,489.3MB = 4.38GB (4.71GB)]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
** INFO : Hex Dump Of 'Media Code'-Block Listed Below
** INFO : 4-Byte Header Preceding 'Media Code'-Block Discarded
** INFO : Format 0Eh - Pre-Recorded Information In Lead-In
0000 : 01 40 c1 fd 9e d8 52 00 02 85 06 0b 98 88 70 00   .@....R.......p.
0010 : 03 4d 43 49 34 58 47 00 04 30 31 00 00 00 00 00   .MCI4XG..01.....
0020 : 05 88 80 00 00 00 03 00 06 09 0b 11 b8 88 80 00   ................
0030 : 07 88 80 00 00 00 00 00 08 03 14 09 09 01 01 00   ................
0040 : 09 9a 04 0c 0b 40 88 00 0a a4 00 24 00 24 10 00   .....@.....$.$..
0050 : 0b 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0c 00 00 00 00 00 00 00   ................
0060 : 0d 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00   ................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ DVD Identifier - http://DVD.Identifier.CDfreaks.com ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

AudioDev CATS test results:

Disc id: DVD-R XEED

Disc Manufacturer ID: MCI4XG01

Analysis of CATS results:

The test was aborted before the end by the CATS, thus we got no plot. The disc shows some awful values: the Bottom Jitter is consistently almost twice as high as the maximum defined by the DVD-ROM standard. Also the Differential Phase Detectors Amplitude (DPD Amp) is slightly too high, which means that the Pulstec drive could get troubles following the track on the disc. The test failed, probably either because the too high jitter caused the Pulstec's PLL to lose lock or due to a tracking error. What we know for sure is that this disc is so terrible disc from the quality point of view that the CATS have been unable to read it completely, and we will now see how our PC drives handle it.

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-R, 4489 MB (CD_SPEED_DATA_TEST_B) MCI4XG01

	Avg	Max	Total
PIE	192.88	1641	27707760
POF	-	-	4874

Test Duration

1:01:24

Comparison Results	Average PIE sum 8	Max PIE sum 8	Average PIF sum 1	Max PIF sum 1	POF
AudioDev CATS	FAIL	FAIL	FAIL	FAIL	FAIL
Lite-On K-Probe	948.9	1410	35.43	103	-
Philips CD-Speed	798.32	2360*	1.06	-	44
Plextor Plextools	192.88	1641	-	-	4874

CATS vs. drives results:

Both the Lite-ON and the Philips drives were able to read this disc from start to end, despite a huge 17.1% jitter peak measured by the latter drive: these two drives definitely have a very robust PLL. The Plextor drive was on the edge, succeeding to read the disc during the PI/PO test but failing during the Jitter test. In the first case, the Plextor drive also showed more problems to read the disc with a large POF value. So although the CATS can't extract PI/PO plots from this difficult disc, our drives (especially Lite-ON and Philips) can still handle it.

*: this value of 2360 PIE SUM8 is of course impossible, as there are only 1664 columns in 8 ECC blocks. It corresponds to one of the spikes on the blue PIE graph, which are not due to actual errors but to sampling problems in CDSpeed. This problem is specific to Philips drive and has been fixed in the latest CDSpeed version, but it illustrates the kind of problem which can occur with a consumer drive, which is not specifically designed to measure and report errors.

Head over to the next page where we will have a look at test disc #5…

Test Disc #3

Test Disc #5

Want to submit your own review? Click here

Reactions on this item

Posted by G@M3FR3@K on Monday 23 May 2005 09:02

Thanks for the article guys, interesting read. What I find especially interesting is that when a disc is good (or bad), CATS and the consumer drives all agree. That's a good thing because now we know that tools like CD-DVD Speed, kProbe and PlexTools are not useless.

Posted by fanjeri on Wednesday 25 May 2005 15:52

Well, interesting test, but youÂ´re missing one point.
ThereÂ´s a reason for standards and specifications. It doesnÂ´t matter, that there are many drives which outperforme a 1996 standard DVD ROM drive, if the one you have to use somewhere else doesnÂ´t.
ItÂ´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 canÂ´t, it doesnÂ´t really help me.

The specifications and standards are well known and IÂ´m pretty upset, that the manufacturers donÂ´t give a sh*t. If future players canÂ´t play todayÂ´s discs, the customer has to worry.

Posted by jlbooth on Monday 02 January 2006 06:17

Am on low fixed income - after spending heaps of money on different brand blank media,and now have bought a Pioneer 2nd drive as Liteon is often blamed for poor media burning and 18 months of researching this subject on the Net, have no faith in DVD technology at all.
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.

Post your reaction

Related tags

A tag is a relevant keyword or term associated with or assigned to a piece of information (like picture, product, or video clip), thus describing the item and enabling keyword-based classification of information it is applied to. We use it to make searching our database easier and enable all our users to contribute to our database.

add a tag |

Add related tags

Related reviews/articles

123 Copy DVD- movie backups made easy

Plextor PX-708A (DVD±RW)

Handy Backup 4.0: Backups Made Easy

Lite-On SOHW-1653S DVDR/RW review

Get the latest reviews via RSS