First of all thanks for discussing with me this question of the TA test ...


I try not to take things personaly (english is not my native language and I need perhaps to say things  more diplomaticly)
I am not defending this TA test and I just try to find out  ...


I think there are 2 different questions about the TA test :

1°) The test is very quick and it seems that with each run it only chooses randomly some samples (not twice the same ones) of pits ans lands to put out the figures
So we might have slightly different results from one run to a other on the same burned DVD.
The test has only a sort of "statistical convergence" (like Gauss law in statistics)
But I don’t think that this means that the test is of no significance at all


2°) What we need is some statistical records about:
- burned DVD’s showing very good or bad in the TA test
- and the playability of the videos in various standalone players.
I just wonder why YSS publishes always these TA tests.
He is not an occasional tester like we are and owns more than 100 burners !
If  I would speak japanese I would ask YSS about such statistics

The question is only:
Do "several in a row" good results with the TA test
at least give an indication that the geometry of pit and lands on a recorded disc is compliant with the DVD video standard
and so has a good chance to play smoothly in most standalone DVD players ?
or is the anwer ?
No this TA test gives no reliable indication about their playability.

I think that it is not:
- because the TA test does not give every time the same mathematical number
- that it does not give a realiable indication at all about compliance with the DVD video format and the playability of the videos ...

(in reply to Antonio)

English is not my native language too... So if I misunderstood something, I apologize... Even if you defending this test, this is not bad at all. I just express my personal opinion, this doesn't mean that I am correct, I just cannot understand how such a quick test can be 100% reliable.

The truth is that if the geometry is too bad, too many gap between the pits/lands, then there will be reading errors since at the specific point the data will be half or not there, in simple words.

I think the more information you have about a disc the easier is to judge its condition. What I want to say is that if you know the PI/PO and such errors, the geometry and the jitter then you can safely say that the disc condition is good or not. The hard thing is when half results reporting good quality and half bad. There, what can we tell? 

In my opinion the safest way to judge the playability of a disc is to read it at the highest possible speed, 16X if possible for SL. If the reading is smooth then there are no problems. But if it is not then something is going on. I think this test is the most simple while it the most strict judge. Many times in cdrinfo's reviews we have seen low error in Plextools but the reading is not smooth. There something is going on for sure. But I don't remember a case where the reading is 100% smooth and errors in PLextool extremely high.

(in reply to franz99)

Yes my opinion is also that the Data transfer rate is the easy and simple way to test a burned disc
It is simple, quick and gives twice the same curve if you run it again.
For doing this I use now a Lite-on SOHD-16P9S with the firmware patched by "Code guys"
instead ot the 167T still used in CDRinfo's reviews.

With this method I get at least the same curve again in CD-DVD Speed if I run the test twice
and there is no endless talking about how a given drive reports PIE/PIF errors,
at which accuracy and which speed to scan,
which software reports better with one or an other drive, ...

What I always find funny is:
as soon as a new drive comes out and does not report the same PIE/PIF errors as their former model even of the same brand 
they call it a "bad reader" or "bad scanner"
and the endless discussion goes on ....

(in reply to Antonio)

A higher root mean square error for TA test result data means higher jitter.

Pretty good result:


Crappy result:


Unfortunately, PlexTools don't calculate this...

(in reply to Antonio)

Thanks a lot alexnoe !

I will now post these results when people will talk about what the TA test shows
Unfortunaly these results
will not be possible anymore with the new PX-755 (conspiracy from Plextor ...)
and we will have to use the PX-716 to get this


BTW, what is your opinion about:
- a good TA test result and
- the hope for a "smooth playability" of a DVD-video in most standalone players ?

(in reply to alexnoe)

quote:

- a good TA test result and

A good TA result is one where the peaks do not (or barely) touch each other

quote:


- the hope for a "smooth playability" of a DVD-video in most standalone players ?

Good results in all tests and a bit of hope. There are properties of recorded DVDs which you can't check with home equipment, but which can still annoy a DVD player

(in reply to franz99)

The Plextor PX-755
needs some more tests with the new 1.02 firmware (published on February the 9th)
because the DVD burning quality with firmware 1.00 used in CDRinfo's review
is far from excellent

(in reply to Deleted User)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to franz99)

Where is the discussion about the full review of big brother PX-760 ?

Anyway I tell you here that in the 26 pages of your PX-760's review

I miss:
1°)  Tests about the practical effect of the new AustoStrategy and with firmware 1.01 on selected MID codes. You just used Auto Selection Mode for every MID code without doing any "Forced Mode" burn
YSS published such tests but in japanese ...

2°) Again no extensive TA tests with comments (like for PX-716A & Px-755A]

3°) No word about the use of PxScan with the PX-760. Is it still impossible like for the PX-755 ?


I understand that sites are trying to be first to publish a review for a new burner
but in this case it would be of greater interest to revisit the drive with the new 1.01 firmware wich fixed a bug in the AS  mode.
For me the interest of this new burner is not this stupid 18x P-CAV writing speed
but the real effect of the new AS on the "good" and "less good" MID codes

(in reply to Deleted User)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to franz99)

I noticed a "strange wiring" glued on top of the board in the PX-755,
as you can see on the photo you published in your review:
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=15879


Both 755A and 760A share the same Sanyo chipset but that wiring disappeared from the board of the PX-760:
http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=16587

Do yo have any explanation about the use of that wiring ? Is it there to avoid crossflashing 755 --> 760 or for some other reason ?


Detail of the PX-755A:

(in reply to Deleted User)

It seems that the review about the 760 has been updated.

(in reply to franz99)

[Deleted by Admins]

(in reply to Antonio)