ImgBurn detects 4 tracks in an old burned data CD

[Chris123]

Hi,

 

I've tried to create an image of a CD that was burned more than 18 years ago, and ImgBurn detected four tracks on the CD for some reason, even though there doesn't seem to be a reason for this CD to have more than one data track. 

Although ImgBurn didn't report any read errors when creating the image, the process took a long time (about half an hour), and DAEMON Tools failed to mount it.

 

Is it possible that ImgBurn detected four tracks on a single-track data CD? Is there a way to see what's in each track?

 

 

Thanks

[LIGHTNING UK!]

It's down the the drive really. ImgBurn can only go by what it reports.

 

Put the disc in the drive again and copy + paste everything from the disc info box on the right when you're in Read mode.

[Chris123]

It's down the the drive really. ImgBurn can only go by what it reports.

 

Have you ever encountered a situation where a drive reports several tracks for a single-track data CD? The CD was burned long ago but the data is readable, I was able to manually copy the data that I needed from the CD, which was about 2/3 of all data. It did take about 30 minutes though.

 

 

Put the disc in the drive again and copy + paste everything from the disc info box on the right when you're in Read mode.

 

Here it is:

 

HL-DT-ST BD-RE  WH14NS40 1.00 (SATA)

Current Profile: CD-ROM

 

Disc Information:

Status: Complete

State of Last Session: Complete

Erasable: No

Sessions: 1

Sectors: 298,133

Size: 610,576,384 bytes

Time: 66:17:08 (MM:SS:FF)

Supported Read Speeds: 4x, 8x, 10x, 16x, 24x, 32x, 40x, 48x

 

TOC Information:

Session 1... (LBA: 0 / 00:02:00)

-> Track 01  (Mode 2, Form 1, LBA: 0 / 00:02:00)

-> Track 02  (Mode 2, Form 1, LBA: 512 / 00:08:62)

-> Track 03  (Mode 2, Form 1, LBA: 297216 / 66:04:66)

-> Track 04  (Mode 2, Form 1, LBA: 297826 / 66:13:01)

-> LeadOut  (LBA: 298135 / 66:17:10)

 

Track Information:

Session 1...

-> Track 01 (LTSA: 0, LTS: 360, LRA: 0)

-> Track 02 (LTSA: 512, LTS: 296552, LRA: 0)

-> Track 03 (LTSA: 297216, LTS: 458, LRA: 0)

-> Track 04 (LTSA: 297826, LTS: 307, LRA: 0)

 

ATIP Information:

Disc ID: 97m32s00f

Manufacturer: TDK Corp.

Start Time of LeadIn: 97m32s00f

Last Possible Start Time of LeadOut: 74m15s00f

[dbminter]

There may be a firmware update for that drive.  It seems you have 1.00 firmware and there is a 1.03 for that drive.  Check to see if that helps improve read/detection, if there is one. 

 

 

The drive string indicates it's an LG drive and I think I've had that model before.  LG's aren't really very good readers.  But, as you say, the disc is decades old and may have just reached the end of its life cycle.

[LIGHTNING UK!]

Maybe the disc really does have 4 tracks on it ?

[Chris123]

There may be a firmware update for that drive.  It seems you have 1.00 firmware and there is a 1.03 for that drive.  Check to see if that helps improve read/detection, if there is one. 

 

 

The drive string indicates it's an LG drive and I think I've had that model before.  LG's aren't really very good readers.  But, as you say, the disc is decades old and may have just reached the end of its life cycle.

LG actually recently released a firmware update for a 6 year old drive, wow...

And yes, the disc is 18 years old, but I don't understand how that would cause a drive to falsely detect four tracks...

 

 

 

Maybe the disc really does have 4 tracks on it ?

 

When I burned this CD, I don't think that I knew how to burn a multi-track CD, but perhaps I somehow did it by mistake... how can I verify whether it has 4 tracks or not? And if it does have 4 tracks, how can I check what's on each track?

 

But the most important part is, if the CD does contain 4 tracks, why would DAEMON Tools fail to load the image that ImgBurn creates?

[dbminter]

Yes, but I believe the 1.03 firmware update is only to appease Hollywood.  It seemed that drive may be able to decrypt UltraHD Blu-Rays.  So, a firmware update was rushed out to patch that hole.  It's the only update in it.  But, there were also 1.01 and 1.02 released in the 6 years since 1.00 came out.

 

 

You'd be surprised at what can happen.  The contents could be corrupted but only just corrupted enough as to still be "readable" just incorrect.

 

 

Does Daemon Tools have its own tool for creating disc images?  If it does, try creating a disc image in Daemon Tools and see if it can mount its own image.  If it can't, then the disc is definitely the problem.

 

 

You said it was a data CD, right?  What exactly are the contents of this CD?  Do you remember what you burned to it?

[Chris123]

You'd be surprised at what can happen.  The contents could be corrupted but only just corrupted enough as to still be "readable" just incorrect.

 

Corruptions I understand, but causing a detection of non-existing tracks is new to me

 

Does Daemon Tools have its own tool for creating disc images?  If it does, try creating a disc image in Daemon Tools and see if it can mount its own image.  If it can't, then the disc is definitely the problem.

 

 

You said it was a data CD, right?  What exactly are the contents of this CD?  Do you remember what you burned to it?

 

I remember, but I don't have to, since the data on the CD is still readable and I copied most of it to my harddrive and opened some files, which worked fine. It's just some files that I burned on a CD to clear some HD space back then.

AFAIK, a single-session data CD with more than one track means that the first track contains data, and the other tracks are redbook audio, and I don't think that's the case here.

 

 

Daemon Tools can indeed create disc images, in several formats. I've tried using the ISO format, but it failed, and the error message said it's because it's a multisession disc, even though Daemon Tools itself detected only a single session! So, I tried creating MDX and MDF+MDS images and they both worked, and I was able to mount them with Daemon Tools just fine. And this is despite the fact that Daemon Tools also detected four tracks.

I then tried to create an image from the mounted image using ImgBurn, but it never got past the analyzing tracks process so I closed it... 

[Chris123]

What I'd really like to know is, assuming there are 4 tracks on the CD, how can I check what's on each track?

[LIGHTNING UK!]

Isobuster maybe?

[dbminter]

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing.  If ISOBuster might do the trick.

[Chris123]

Indeed IsoBuster lets me view the tracks, and it appears that there are 3 empty data track in addition to the "real" one.  When using IsoBuster to search for missing files and folders in the redundant tracks, it just finds more instances of the same files as on track 1.

 

So the answer is most likely disc deterioration, which brings me back to what I was wondering about to begin with - how can disc deterioration trigger the appearance of 3 additional tracks, instead of just the usual read errors? I guess it'll remain a mystery

[dbminter]

You could spend the rest of your life trying to explain inexplicable computer errors and get nowhere.  Let me tell you a story from almost 25 years ago.  I was called in by the guy who sold me my first x86 PC.  He knew I was more knowledgeable than he was and asked for my advice on a computer he had brought in that wouldn't boot.  He couldn't determine anything so called me in.  I took a precursory look and found the problem, but, as I told him, it was impossible.  Yet, there it was, staring us in the face.  The computer wouldn't start because, somehow, the system thought 115% of the available hard drive partition space was in use!    In FDISK, 115% of the available HDD partition space was listed as being used by C:.  As I said, impossible, but there it was.  How that could even happen, I couldn't have even begun to explain, but that was obviously the cause.  The solution was simple, but radical: delete the C: partition, recreate it with the proper amount of space, and reinstall MS-DOS and Windows.  Luckily, the guy who brought in the PC said there was nothing on the hard drive he could do without so we had permission to nuke the HD if necessary, which it was.  Doing what I said fixed the problem.  However, as I said, to this day, I cannot explain HOW it happened.

[Chris123]

You could spend the rest of your life trying to explain inexplicable computer errors and get nowhere. 

Nah, I'm done with it. Nice story though!

[Chris123]

The drive string indicates it's an LG drive and I think I've had that model before.  LG's aren't really very good readers.  

 

 

Yes, but I believe the 1.03 firmware update is only to appease Hollywood.  It seemed that drive may be able to decrypt UltraHD Blu-Rays.  So, a firmware update was rushed out to patch that hole.  It's the only update in it.  But, there were also 1.01 and 1.02 released in the 6 years since 1.00 came out.

 

I've updated the firmware to the older 1.03 from 2014 (it turns out there are two 1.03 updates on the LG website - the newer one you've mention above from 2018 (N1.03), and an older one from 2014 (1.03-A0) which I didn't notice before), and it didn't solve the problem. You wrote above that LG drives aren't good readers, so what drives ARE recommended as good readers? I'm considering creating images of a lot of my old CDs, but there's no point in such a project if my drive isn't a good reader (I'm already scared that a lot of those old CDs will anyway be problematic reading-wise, so a good reader is crucial).

 

Side-note - UltraHD Blu-Ray is a new format from 2015, which is not compatible with older Blu-Ray drives, so I don't think it's possible for my drive to read it at all. The closest model that can read these discs is WH16NS40, but my drive is WH14NS40.

[dbminter]

The only drives I recommend for reading and writing are Pioneer BDR-2209.  LG's also have had problems with some writing, such as the most current, pre-Ultra HD model from LG.  It doesn't properly write BD-RE DL media from Verbatim.  Writes are 9 times out of 10 bad on the 2nd layer.  Even when the discs are formatted as giant floppies.

 

 

I'm no expert, but as far as I am aware of, UltraHD discs are just triple and quad layer discs.  They have to have larger capacities because the BD files are larger because the video quality is higher.  As long as a drive supports TL/QL media, it should support UltraHD discs, as long as the software player supports playback of UltraHD media.

[Ch3vr0n]

I've never had any issues whatsoever with my current and past LG drives. Combined with verbatim that's a killer combo for me. In fact I've had other brands like pioneer and Asus and they've all failed me while an LG drive purchased at the same time just kept going.

 

For reading AND burning the same.

 

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 6P met Tapatalk

[dbminter]

Granted, I haven't put LG's latest Ultra-HD BD model through all of its paces.  I haven't tested it as a reader except for automatic Verifies yet and I haven't tested its BD-RE DL writing capabilities.  The drive that LG released before their Ultra-HD BD was terrible at writing BD-RE DL's, both in ImgBurn and as giant floppies.  Someone else even discovered that when they wrote images with other software, they didn't fail Verify.  I tried that myself and while I initially had success with on the fly burning, it wasn't consistent enough to recommend the drive for that purpose. 

 

 

The LG I had terrible reads on was one from like 5 years ago, so it may have improved on that front.  On that LG, I was getting failures to read discs to images that my Pioneer would read fine.

[Ch3vr0n]

I don't own they one either. My most recent one is the bh16ns55. Still have my bh10 and my bh16ns40 has been stored as a backup. Before that I've had the bh08 and bh12. All worked perfectly and did so on all accounts until I personally decided to retire them for a more recent and faster model.

 

I have had indeed had some trouble with bd-re dl but that was the blanks problem. Not the drive.

 

As you know verbatim outsourced their bd-re's, well after YEARS of searching (after they stopped producing them), I had an opportunity over at the redfox forum thanks to a member to snap some of the REAL GOOD ONES (MID: VERBAT-IM1-00!!!) up. Had to import them from the USA to Belgium, and adding item cost, shipping and import taxes I think it was about 150€/10. But damn worth every damn penny.

 

I currently only have 1 in active use, and I sure as hell am not going to open another one until that first one starts to fail. The other 9 are stored in a dark dry place inside the plastic wrapper and cardboard box they came in to keep them in pristine condition.

 

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 6P met Tapatalk

Edited July 3, 2018 by Ch3vr0n

[dbminter]

The LG I had such iffy performance on Verbatim BD-RE DL's was the WH16NS40.  I believe the LG I had such iffy read results was the WH14NS40.

 

 

I believe the BD-RE DL I have are the DID you mentioned.  They work fine in my Pioneer BDR-2209 and my ASUS USB.  (NOT the most current ASUS model which destroys rewritable media.)  Thankfully, Verbatim didn't outsource these to CMC like they did their BD-RE SL.  My guess: CMC doesn't make BD DL media.  Otherwise, I'm sure Verbatim would outsource them to CMC, too.  Since there's apparently no DataLife Plus format of BD from Verbatim, just one brand they put their name on, there's no real way to know if you're getting quality until you buy them and check the DID yourself.  Which is why I generally put reviews on Amazon.com listing the DID of products so people know what they're getting.

[dbminter]

 

The drive string indicates it's an LG drive and I think I've had that model before.  LG's aren't really very good readers.  

 

 

Yes, but I believe the 1.03 firmware update is only to appease Hollywood.  It seemed that drive may be able to decrypt UltraHD Blu-Rays.  So, a firmware update was rushed out to patch that hole.  It's the only update in it.  But, there were also 1.01 and 1.02 released in the 6 years since 1.00 came out.

 

I've updated the firmware to the older 1.03 from 2014 (it turns out there are two 1.03 updates on the LG website - the newer one you've mention above from 2018 (N1.03), and an older one from 2014 (1.03-A0) which I didn't notice before), and it didn't solve the problem. You wrote above that LG drives aren't good readers, so what drives ARE recommended as good readers? I'm considering creating images of a lot of my old CDs, but there's no point in such a project if my drive isn't a good reader (I'm already scared that a lot of those old CDs will anyway be problematic reading-wise, so a good reader is crucial).

 

Side-note - UltraHD Blu-Ray is a new format from 2015, which is not compatible with older Blu-Ray drives, so I don't think it's possible for my drive to read it at all. The closest model that can read these discs is WH16NS40, but my drive is WH14NS40.

 

 

 

Yeah, I was not aware of the N1.03 firmware.  I don't know what that does.  The 1.03 I knew of was from December 2017.  This N1.03 on LG's web site is dated February 28th, 2018.  Funny thing is, that N1.03 firmware is not listed on the firmwarehq page that ImgBurn checks for firmware updates.

 

 

So, there may, in fact, be 3 1.03 firmwares, if there's one from 2014, which I only recall the 1.02 from 2014.  I think the one you're thinking of from 2014 is 1.02, which is the date for 1.02 on firmwarehq.  Firmwarehq then lists a 1.03 from December 2017.  And LG's web site for the drive lists an N1.03 firmware from 2018-02-28.

[Ch3vr0n]

They do outsource them. If you try to pick them up nowv(at least in every retail, web and Amazon shop I could find) they're red/silver with MID: CMCMAG-CN2-00

 

The VERBAT-IM1-00 is no longer being produced. They'll tell you that if you ask them :-)

 

Took me 5+ years if not more to see them again, so I didn't hesitate even for a split second when I had the chance to snap some up.

 

I never had the bh/wh14. I went from 8 to 10, 12 and 16.

 

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 6P met Tapatalk

[dbminter]

Last time I ordered Verbatim BD-RE SL, it was a ten pack from Amazon.com and they were the CMC red and silver ones.  So, I put Verbatim BD-RE SL on my list.

 

 

I recently ordered a Verbatim BD-RE DL from Amazon.com and they were still the good VERBAT-IM kind with the blue and white labels like Verbatim's BD-R.  You can only order singles, though.  That order was placed about 2 or 3 weeks ago, so maybe it was just leftover stock.

[Ch3vr0n]

Mine were in red/silver but they were the good ones. Probably there was a crossover period to the cheap crap we know today. I'm just glad that after 5y+ I finally have the good stuff again.

 

Every Amazon UK/FR/DE i tried was the cheap stuff.

 

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 6P met Tapatalk

Edited July 4, 2018 by Ch3vr0n

[dbminter]

If I were ever to have to get more BD-RE SL, I'd probably see if I could get more of the Panasonic kind I got like 5 years ago.  The DID indicated they were Panasonic brand, which is generally good.  At least, they made good DVD-R back in like 2002 when I first started recording DVD's for converting my VHS collection with their standalone DVD recorder.  Back when DVD-R was $12 a pop!