detail information
| Posted by | Dennis |
| Posted on | 25/08/02 13:44 |
| Number of views | 6447 |
It happens to all of us sooner or later: a disc is scratched and cannot be read properly anymore... In this test we took a CD-Recordable and (heavily) scratched it with some fine sandpaper. We then did a surface scan with Nero CD Speed and you can see the results below. First off let's start with the ATIP information from the used CD-Recordable:
- ATIP: 97m 15s 11f
- Disc Manufacturer: Ritek Co.
- Reflective layer: Dye (Long strategy; e.g. Cyanine, Azo etc.)
- Media type: CD-Recordable
- Recording Speeds: min. unknown - max. unknown
- Nominal Capacity: 702.83MB (79m 59s 74f / LBA: 359849)
Now for the achieved results. We read the disc with the Yamaha CRW-F1 drive and then read the same disc with several other recorders for comparison. You can see the result of the Yamaha drive in the screenshot below. Please note that damaged sectors can still be read. The important percentage is the one of the unreadable sectors. Of course the less, the better:
Yamaha CRW-F1 reading scratched disc
In the table below we've summed up our test results comparing them to other drives we've previously reviewed. Again, keep in mind that the important percentage is the one of the unreadable sectors. Of course the less, the better:
| Scratched Disc | Good | Damaged | Unreadable | ||||
| PleXCombo | 55.80% | 28.53% | 15.67% | ||||
| VisionTek | 36.89% | 44.41% | 18.70% | ||||
| Toshiba | 35.84% | 38.56% | 25.60% | ||||
| PleXCombo | 64.58% | - | 35.42% | ||||
| Mitsumi | 59.87% | - | 40.13% | ||||
| TEAC | 32.08% | 27.38% | 40.54% | ||||
| Yamaha | 48.59% | - | 51.41% | ||||
| Plextor | 35.95% | 8.78% | 55.28% | ||||
| Yamaha | 37.72% | - | 62.28% | ||||
| The grey area's indicate the least amount of unreadable sectors - : drive cannot report damaged sectors | |||||||
Low Quality Disc:
To add a little more to our scratched data reading tests we've added another test for you. We wrote a low quality 74 minute CD-Recordable using the VisionTek Xtasy 48X drive and Nero Burning Rom. We disabled its SMART-BURN feature so errors would probably be created. The ATIP information from the used CD-Recordable:
- ATIP: 97m 31s 01f
- Disc Manufacturer: unknown
- Reflective layer: Dye (Long strategy; e.g. Cyanine, Azo etc.)
- Media type: CD-Recordable
- Recording Speeds: min. unknown - max. unknown
- Nominal Capacity: 656.69MB (74m 45s 00f)
We then scanned the disc with Nero CD Speed using various drives we've previously reviewed. You can see a screenshot of the Yamaha CRW-F1 drive reading the low quality disc below:
Yamaha CRW-F1 reading low quality disc
In the table below we've summed up our test results again, comparing them to other drives we've previously reviewed. Again, keep in mind that the important percentage is the one of the unreadable sectors. Of course the less, the better:
| Scratched Disc | Good | Damaged | Unreadable | ||||
| Plextor | 99.44% | 0.56% | 0.0% | ||||
| PleXCombo | 89.60% | 10.40% | 0.0% | ||||
| Toshiba | 86.21% | 13.79% | 0.0% | ||||
| VisionTek | 59.44% | 40.56% | 0.0% | ||||
| PleXCombo | 89.49% | - | 10.51% | ||||
| TEAC | 66.21% | 11.75% | 22.03% | ||||
| Mitsumi | 60.34% | - | 39.66% | ||||
| Yamaha | 48.81% | - | 51.19% | ||||
| The grey area's indicate the least amount of unreadable sectors - : drive cannot report damaged sectors | |||||||
Conclusion:
When reading the heavily scratched disc and the low quality disc the Yamaha CRW-F1 gets the last place with both tests, Yamaha definitely needs to tweak the drive's performance when it comes to correcting errors a the disc via a future firmware upgrade for instance.
That concludes the reading part of our review. Now it's time to see how the Yamaha CRW-F1 performs when writing discs...
Audio Read Tests
:4Anyfinally more than a 2MB buffer on a fast drive.
How exactly does the TDK/Lite-on 48x24x48 drive compare to this Yamaha drive??? Most importantly, is the TDK/Lite-on drive able to copy all copy protections without the 'amplify week sectors" option of clone-cd??? I would love to se a review of the TDK drive with exactly the same benchmarks and comparisons… I am going to buy the TDK or this Yamaha… Pleas help me, and the rest of us make up our minds!
Thanks,
KGB_22
but nvm ... here we go again o'.'o
[url]http://www.reviewmakers.com/showdoc.php?review=51[/url]
I have made even a recording on single speed using the Yamaha, because i could not believe its dissappointment but with no better result.
I naturally first ripped the audio with plextool's 1.15 new DAE extraction, because it's better than EAC's and made recordings on Platinum's 700 MB CD-r's
on 50 piece spindle costing only 35 Euro cents a piece.
The Plextor's recording were very little bit lighter in sound-quality, but just as musical like the originals, but the Yamaha's were very much different in comparison with the original cd's and lacked musicality giving you that kind of specific digital sound.
Used Cd sources were, Badi Assad's "Rhythms" and Chessky's demonstration cd and Mariah Carey's "Butterfly".
So for the enthousiats among audiofreaks consider this comment as serious.
All the other qualities of cd-burning of the Yamaha is perfect according the tests on this site.
Great review site.
My compliments.
Highend_freak.
add a tag
