Kaotiko Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 This is the error that appears: I/O Error! Device: [2:0:0] PHILIPS SPD6002T P1.3 (E:) (ATA) ScsiStatus: 0x02 Interpretation: Check Condition CDB: 28 00 00 38 71 B2 00 00 01 00 Interpretation: Read (10) - Sector: 3699122 Sense Area: 70 00 04 00 00 00 00 0A 00 00 00 00 3E 02 00 00 00 00 Interpretation: Timeout on Logical Unit Someone knows what it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 22, 2008 Share Posted September 22, 2008 It means your drive can't read (verify perhaps?) the disc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaotiko Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 Yes the error is verifying at the 96%, but what could create that problem. It happened to me other times and I tried to burn that disc 3 times and those three times appeared that error at the 96% in all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Perhaps low quality on the media that you are using. Burning to fast/slow might be another problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaotiko Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 No, no I use Verbatim discs, which are the ones that I use everytime I burn and I burn those discs at 2,4x speed, which is the one I use everytime so that can't be the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 You should post the full log so we have all the info to go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmalves Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Slower doesn't mean a better burn, especially on newer drives like yours. Try burning at 8x or 12x and you might get better burns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 (edited) I'm not at home to copy and paste the specifics, but suffice it to say that this is exactly what is happening to me as well, with a Sony drive (model number not available at the moment). The media is of the highest quality, imported from Japan specifically because of its reliability. Each time, fails at the same sector, which is certainly not going to be a coincidence. Tried burning at 4X, 6X, and MAX, same result each time. Different burning program... no errors. I do software QA for a living, so I've run through a few different scenarios to trouble-shoot before blaming the software. I have one more test to perform (using different media) but I had no media on-hand to test. I'll do that later tonight along with providing the information I couldn't provide as of this posting. The other option I've heard vague rumblings about as I researched today is that DVD drives will "learn" certain media... which strikes me as weird but plausible. I had a look at QSuite, but that seems to be for BenQ hardware while mine is a Sony. Will have to research some more. Greg Edited September 23, 2008 by GregP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontasciime Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Different burning program... no errors. I do software QA for a living, so I've run through a few different scenarios to trouble-shoot before blaming the software oh oh spaghetti oohs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Whatever your time doing QA has taught you, software cannot introduce errors during the burn - well, not with the type of burning going on here anyway. If the drive makes a crappy burn, it's the drive/media/firmware at fault - end of story. It would (and do) say exactly the same thing if my program was the one that worked and something else didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 (edited) Very interesting... I said that I wasn't blaming the software yet, and yet 2 defensive responses and not one helpful one. Nice one. I came back here not with the intention of finding a gift-wrapped answer to my problem (because I had admitted that I still had options left to exhaust on my side) but with the intention of providing additional information and asking for more pointers in the trouble-shooting process. Instead, this is what I'm met with. Guess I won't bother. Thanks for nothing. As for my time doing software QA, obviously I never claimed to be a media-write expert, I was simply stating that I have done some trouble-shooting and that I'm willing to do more before blaming the software. But it's ridiculous to claim that software can't introduce errors. I don't know what the program is coded in, but if you're using standard I/O classes then you're not really bringing anything special to the plate. And if you ARE using custom classes then it's natural to assume that the read/write methods/functions can introduce errors. I'm not saying in this case that they ARE (to reiterate my original position), but I don't know how you can make a blanket statement that software has no impact on the burning process, and yet also claim that your software does something inherently different than other burning software. A little logic here, or at least clarification with the intention of education. I don't mind being educated, but I take exception to people who automatically think their s*** can't possibly stink. Edited September 23, 2008 by GregP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 Sorry but I've seen it before where people have already come to their conclusions. Being blunt about it just saves us both time. ImgBurn defaults to using the SAO write type, Nero may be using Incremental. Your drive should write perfectly well using either one but sometimes they just don't. That's nothing to do with the software, it's a hardware thing. Select the other write type and continue on your merry way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 @Lightning UK I have a similiar I/O to the OP. Don't remember the error code but the interpretation was the same-check condition. Verbatim DL discs-made in Singapore, Plextor 760a, P4 3.4ghz, 1 gb ram. Recording at 2.4X However, I only get that error when trying to burn the video files to a DL disc. If I create an image first and then burn the image to disc, it works fine. Is there something in the all in one process that makes it more susceprible to I/O errors? BTW, I never get this error in SL discs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volvofl10 Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 @shadowcaster same for you as GregP, can you post a log file for us to work with please @GregP you was asked to provide a log file , which you said you was unable todo so at the time. However, we didnt have anything to go on as you didnt post the info afterwards either, how can anyone help you if you wont help them to help you ? You say your media is "of the highest quality imported from japan because of its reliability, but fails at the same sector each time". This sounds like media being at fault, or maybe the drive has a fault, again without the log file we can only guess. Im curious as to what the media is that you use though ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 'Check Condition' is pretty much a constant error code in all I/O errors - i.e. it's the LEAST important. Without the full error (the sense area stuff) we can really tell what's going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 'Check Condition' is pretty much a constant error code in all I/O errors - i.e. it's the LEAST important. Without the full error (the sense area stuff) we can really tell what's going on. Again , using Verbatim dl/singapore @ 2.4X Ok, re my post above #13, here is the log file : I 12:42:07 ImgBurn Version 2.4.2.0 started! I 12:42:07 Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional (5.0, Build 2195 : Service Pack 4) I 12:42:07 Total Physical Memory: 1,048,000 KB - Available: 298,904 KB I 12:42:07 Initialising SPTI... I 12:42:07 Searching for SCSI / ATAPI devices... I 12:42:07 Found 2 DVD-ROMs, 1 DVD-ROM/CD-RW and 1 DVD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 That's interesting, your Plextor is reading that disc as a DVD-ROM. I'm sure it should still think it's a DVD+R DL, even if the booktype is DVD-ROM. Do you have PlexTools installed? Try scanning the disc and seeing how good a job the drive did at burning the media. If you've got an L-EC error like that I'm guessing it wasn't a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 (edited) That's interesting, your Plextor is reading that disc as a DVD-ROM. I'm sure it should still think it's a DVD+R DL, even if the booktype is DVD-ROM. Do you have PlexTools installed? Try scanning the disc and seeing how good a job the drive did at burning the media. If you've got an L-EC error like that I'm guessing it wasn't a good one. Nice catch, I missed that . However the disc had already been burned , ejected and reinserted to run the "verify". So, a new log was created on a new read, so the DVD-ROM is probably correct because the book type was set, no ? If I put a blank dl disc in the drive it's recognized as "current profile DVD+R DL" and "media type DVD+R DL", under the device tab . Yes, I have Plextools and ran the PI/PO test before I posted here . There was an error when it ceased reading the disc at ~40% point. I'm running it again now and will post the graph when completed. BTW, I'm still curious if burns made on the fly, from files to disc, are as reliable as ones made from creating an image file on the HD first, and then burning ?. Edit : Here's the graph Edited September 27, 2008 by shadowcaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 'Current Profile' normally stays on the true disc format regardless of the booktype setting. So long as the buffers remain full (i.e. all things must be equal), it makes no difference if they're burnt on-the-fly or via an image file. It's the same burning code within ImgBurn doing all the work. You could probably do with changing the scale on the graph a bit so you can see how high up the errors actually go. You could try the jitter and ta tests too. In any case, it's still pointing to a bad burn. I'm sure there's a test somewhere to check the potential burn quality on blank media, I can't remember where exactly though. It might be under where the media learning stuff is (autostrategy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 (edited) 'Current Profile' normally stays on the true disc format regardless of the booktype setting. So long as the buffers remain full (i.e. all things must be equal), it makes no difference if they're burnt on-the-fly or via an image file. It's the same burning code within ImgBurn doing all the work. You could probably do with changing the scale on the graph a bit so you can see how high up the errors actually go. You could try the jitter and ta tests too. Thanks for the reponses Lighting ! I guess it's a mystery why that burn went bad. Guess it was just a coincidence that it was the first time I burned files "on the fly". BTW I still use your "other" program all the time. The pi/po scale adjusts automatically to the highest level so no adjustment is necessary. I've had some discs on my old 716sl go through the roof, at the start of a disc. BTW, here's what DVDINFO Pro shows for that disc , with the media as DL. So, current profile under imgburn is wrong for some reason. Could that have been the cause of the bad burn ? Edit: I just checked a previously burned disc and it shows profile as dvd-rom as well, under both imgburn and plextools, just like the bad disc. However, it too, shows media as DL under DVDINFO Pro. Go figure. Media Information Disc Regions are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 Media code/Manufacturer ID MKM 001 Media Product Revision Number 00h UDF Format Type V1.02 UDF Volume Name PLANET_EARTH_D1 UDF Application id ImgBurnv2.4.2.0 UDF Implementation id ImgBurn UDF Recording Date/Time (mm/dd/yyyy) 9/24/2008 17:04:36 Format Capacity 7.69GB(8.25GB) Book Type DVD-ROM Media Type DVD+R DL Data area starting sector 30000h Data area end sector 3D7E9Fh Layer 0 end sector 21BF4Fh Linear Density 0.293um/bit Track Density 0.74um/track Number of Layers 2 Layer Track Path direction (OTP) Opposite track path Edited September 27, 2008 by shadowcaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIGHTNING UK! Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 The 'Current Profile' thing is what the drive reports via a certain command. You can look at the 'physical format information (atip)' and that'll probably say dvd+r dl. My guess is that's what DIP is using / displaying. It doesn't really matter, it just looked weird As for the pi/po thing, the scale just looked wrong because there are so many points that are dead on 25/26... if they really are 25/26 then fair enough! I was expecting to see more errors if there was a proper read error - maybe there's just a defect in the dye on that disc. You'd better hope it doesn't run throughout the spindle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 The 'Current Profile' thing is what the drive reports via a certain command. You can look at the 'physical format information (atip)' and that'll probably say dvd+r dl. My guess is that's what DIP is using / displaying. It doesn't really matter, it just looked weird As for the pi/po thing, the scale just looked wrong because there are so many points that are dead on 25/26... if they really are 25/26 then fair enough! I was expecting to see more errors if there was a proper read error - maybe there's just a defect in the dye on that disc. You'd better hope it doesn't run throughout the spindle I've burned other discs in the spindle before that bad one and they're fine. Now....I'll continue and burn more and see what happens from that one on down. [fingers crossed] I'll update what happens.[/fingers crossed] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 (edited) Lightning...I stand correccetd ! The scale was too low. I reset it to 500 and what a difference. Plus, now it shows 20 pof errors and the pi jumped from 362k to over 1.4 million ! Comments please. Edited September 27, 2008 by shadowcaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blutach Posted September 27, 2008 Share Posted September 27, 2008 It's a really bad burn - well out of ECMA specs (as a comparison, my Samsung burner with MCC003 media rarely has PI errors greater than 10, or PO errors greater than 2). Do it again and forget about OTF burning (as, in fact, it wasted time, not saved it). Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowcaster Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 It's a really bad burn - well out of ECMA specs (as a comparison, my Samsung burner with MCC003 media rarely has PI errors greater than 10, or PO errors greater than 2). Do it again and forget about OTF burning (as, in fact, it wasted time, not saved it). Regards Thanks Blutach. I'll do that. Here's a scan of a disc I burned from an image file , just prior to the above bad one. All things were equal EXCEPT the OTF burn of the bad disc. Also, interesting on this scan how much lower the error level is on the 2nd layer (and, of course, no pof's) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts