Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Fixing a scratched disk - an observation

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
September 13, 2005 12:43:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

I had a badly scratched disk which I tried to clean with no joy. When
cleaning does not work (and it usually does not), I use DVDdecrypter to
work through the errors. This time I tried ISO buster since it is highly
recommended for fixing disks. It took forever to go from 94% (where the
scratch started to 95% and then failed (locked up), so tried DVDdecrypter.

DVD D worked faster and recovered the disk with no hangups. Plus I was
able to work with it in the background. I had to leave ISO buster alone
and do nothing else while it did its thing.

The other nice thing is I could watch the progress with DVD D since it
shows just what it is doing and where it stands reading and writing in
the file. It took 1 1/2 hours to fix the disk. Turned out there were two
files that had problems.

I have no ax to grind here, but just an observation. (I set DVD D to
ignore all read errors.)

GA
--
My address is spoofed, so do not reply directly.
Anonymous
September 13, 2005 12:43:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Gordon Abbot" wrote ...
> The other nice thing is I could watch the progress with
> DVD D since it shows just what it is doing and where it
> stands reading and writing in the file. It took 1 1/2 hours
> to fix the disk. Turned out there were two files that had
> problems.

I never "rip" DVDs because I mostly produce original
stuff (using Adobe Premiere & Encore, etc.)

However, I prefer DVD D for burning the discs (from
the "img" file that Encore makes) for the same reason.
It gives me a lot more information like what kind of
disc it is (the real manufacturer, not the name brand
pasted on the cake box) and the burn progress, etc.

> I have no ax to grind here, but just an observation.

I really like DVD D as a disc burning utility.
Anonymous
September 13, 2005 8:16:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Richard Crowley wrote:
> "Gordon Abbot" wrote ...
>
>> The other nice thing is I could watch the progress with DVD D since it
>> shows just what it is doing and where it stands reading and writing in
>> the file. It took 1 1/2 hours to fix the disk. Turned out there were
>> two files that had problems.
>
>
> I never "rip" DVDs because I mostly produce original
> stuff (using Adobe Premiere & Encore, etc.)
>
> However, I prefer DVD D for burning the discs (from
> the "img" file that Encore makes) for the same reason.
> It gives me a lot more information like what kind of
> disc it is (the real manufacturer, not the name brand
> pasted on the cake box) and the burn progress, etc.
>
>> I have no ax to grind here, but just an observation.
>
>
> I really like DVD D as a disc burning utility.

Well, it does give justification for having it loaded on one's machine. :-)

-Bill
Related resources
Anonymous
September 14, 2005 2:35:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Thanks for the info. I will remember this.

Gordon Abbot <gabbot@mmo.net> wrote in
news:D vSdndRnybfHVLveRVn-oA@suscom-maine.net:

(snip.)
> DVD D worked faster and recovered the disk with no hangups. Plus I was
> able to work with it in the background. I had to leave ISO buster
> alone and do nothing else while it did its thing.
(snip.)
Anonymous
September 14, 2005 1:52:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing them
was becoming expensive so I invested in something called "Skip DR".

From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very outer
layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to be fair
I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with scratched
DVD's.

Just a thought for you all !

j'arrow


On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:35:32 -0500, Jucius Maximus
<juicy.anti@spam.graffiti.net> wrote:

>Thanks for the info. I will remember this.
>
>Gordon Abbot <gabbot@mmo.net> wrote in
>news:D vSdndRnybfHVLveRVn-oA@suscom-maine.net:
>
>(snip.)
>> DVD D worked faster and recovered the disk with no hangups. Plus I was
>> able to work with it in the background. I had to leave ISO buster
>> alone and do nothing else while it did its thing.
>(snip.)
September 15, 2005 2:56:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing them
> was becoming expensive so I invested in something called "Skip DR".
>
> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very outer
> layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to be fair
> I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with scratched
> DVD's.
>
> Just a thought for you all !
>
> j'arrow
>
>
>Hi,
I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you copy the
discs to new dvd's or cd's?
Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some more, and so
on, eventually there will be no more
layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data part, no?
Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe we should be allowed
to create working backups.
I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched just from him
using them once, I guess he
doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very careful, it
puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
be lending him anymore to watch.

AnthonyR.
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 2:56:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
news:xU1We.32547$%w.8301@twister.nyc.rr.com:

>
> <j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
> news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
>> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing
>> them was becoming expensive so I invested in something called
>> "Skip DR".
>>
>> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very
>> outer layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to
>> be fair I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with
>> scratched DVD's.
>>
>> Just a thought for you all !
>>
>> j'arrow
>>
>>
>>Hi,
> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you
> copy the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some
> more, and so on, eventually there will be no more
> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data
> part, no? Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe
> we should be allowed to create working backups.
> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched
> just from him using them once, I guess he
> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very
> careful, it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
> be lending him anymore to watch.
>
> AnthonyR.
>

Tell ya what - when he asks, blame it on me, tell him I said no :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 3:57:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:xU1We.32547$%w.8301@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>
> <j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
> news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
>> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing them
>> was becoming expensive so I invested in something called "Skip DR".
>>
>> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very outer
>> layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to be fair
>> I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with scratched
>> DVD's.
>>
>> Just a thought for you all !
>>
>> j'arrow
>>
>>
>>Hi,
> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you copy the
> discs to new dvd's or cd's?
> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some more, and so
> on, eventually there will be no more
> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data part, no?
> Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe we should be
> allowed to create working backups.
> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched just from
> him using them once, I guess he
> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very careful,
> it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
> be lending him anymore to watch.
>
> AnthonyR.

I saw a bit on a "tech" show a few days ago and they demonstrated how some
cheap cd cases could scratch the cds or dvds that were in them without the
person handling the disks doing anything wrong. It seems that with some
cases, the surface of the cd or dvd actually comes into contact with the
case and the slightest movement of the cd or dvd will scuff the media.
September 15, 2005 9:03:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Gene E. Bloch" <hamburger@NOT_SPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96D1B3CD57090Astrolabe@216.196.97.136...

>>>
>>>Hi,
>> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you
>> copy the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
>> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some
>> more, and so on, eventually there will be no more
>> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data
>> part, no? Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe
>> we should be allowed to create working backups.
>> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched
>> just from him using them once, I guess he
>> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very
>> careful, it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
>> be lending him anymore to watch.
>>
>> AnthonyR.
>>
>
> Tell ya what - when he asks, blame it on me, tell him I said no :-)
>
> --
> Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
> letters617blochg3251
> replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"

Hi Gene,
Thanks for the advice. :) 
I actually took care of it by telling him I sold my dvd collection on ebay.
lol
And hid them all in binders in my closet now, lol
Things we got to do to avoid needy neighbors who can't keep fingers of the
bottom of discs!
:) 
AnthonyR.
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 9:03:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
news:LPhWe.33346$%w.6012@twister.nyc.rr.com:

>
> "Gene E. Bloch" <hamburger@NOT_SPAM.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D1B3CD57090Astrolabe@216.196.97.136...
>
>>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do
>>> you copy the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
>>> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some
>>> more, and so on, eventually there will be no more
>>> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data
>>> part, no? Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe
>>> we should be allowed to create working backups.
>>> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched
>>> just from him using them once, I guess he
>>> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very
>>> careful, it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
>>> be lending him anymore to watch.
>>>
>>> AnthonyR.
>>>
>>
>> Tell ya what - when he asks, blame it on me, tell him I said no
>> :-)
>>
>> --
>> Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
>> letters617blochg3251
>> replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
>
> Hi Gene,
> Thanks for the advice. :) 
> I actually took care of it by telling him I sold my dvd collection
> on ebay. lol
> And hid them all in binders in my closet now, lol
> Things we got to do to avoid needy neighbors who can't keep
> fingers of the bottom of discs!
>:) 
> AnthonyR.
>

Got to admit - life is weird enough :-)

Gino

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
September 15, 2005 9:08:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Ron P" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
news:tRgWe.11571$p5.4346@nnrp.ca.mci.com!nnrp1.uunet.ca...
> "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:xU1We.32547$%w.8301@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>>
>> <j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
>>> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing them
>>> was becoming expensive so I invested in something called "Skip DR".
>>>
>>> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very outer
>>> layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to be fair
>>> I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with scratched
>>> DVD's.
>>>
>>> Just a thought for you all !
>>>
>>> j'arrow
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you copy
>> the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
>> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some more, and
>> so on, eventually there will be no more
>> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data part, no?
>> Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe we should be
>> allowed to create working backups.
>> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched just from
>> him using them once, I guess he
>> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very careful,
>> it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
>> be lending him anymore to watch.
>>
>> AnthonyR.
>
> I saw a bit on a "tech" show a few days ago and they demonstrated how some
> cheap cd cases could scratch the cds or dvds that were in them without the
> person handling the disks doing anything wrong. It seems that with some
> cases, the surface of the cd or dvd actually comes into contact with the
> case and the slightest movement of the cd or dvd will scuff the media.

Yes, I believe this, and also when people just lay them flat on a coffee
table or top of tv and them drag them to the edge to lift up, they scratch
the bottom.
What pisses me off, is that way back when CD technology was first invented,
they sold us on the idea becuae they were scratch proof and skip proof!
I remember a demo, where the guy scratched the bottom of a cd, pretty badly
on purpose then played it perfectly with no skips.
He explained that unlike records which had grooves for the needle, the cd
laser would easily read past and physical scrathes to the outer plastic and
still be able to read all the data underneath just fine. Never a skip again
was their slogan.
I suspect since then, they made the laser much less powerful and it can no
longer read past scrathes, not weven finger prints anymore.
But back then the machine weighed a ton and now they are as small as
walkmans, so it must be weaker laser power for sure.

I'd pay more and live with a heavier unit if they gave us a choice, I want
the original power that could read past scratches back!!!
Heck, now even a spec of dust or hair will cause an error in reading a
movie. Big difference from what we were originally promised.

AnthonyR
Anonymous
September 15, 2005 9:08:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
news:D UhWe.33347$%w.15452@twister.nyc.rr.com:

>
> "Ron P" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
> news:tRgWe.11571$p5.4346@nnrp.ca.mci.com!nnrp1.uunet.ca...
>> "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:xU1We.32547$%w.8301@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>>>
>>> <j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
>>>> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing
>>>> them was becoming expensive so I invested in something called
>>>> "Skip DR".
>>>>
>>>> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very
>>>> outer layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches -
>>>> to be fair I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50
>>>> with scratched DVD's.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought for you all !
>>>>
>>>> j'arrow
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do
>>> you copy the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
>>> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some
>>> more, and so on, eventually there will be no more
>>> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data
>>> part, no? Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe
>>> we should be allowed to create working backups.
>>> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched
>>> just from him using them once, I guess he
>>> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very
>>> careful, it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
>>> be lending him anymore to watch.
>>>
>>> AnthonyR.
>>
>> I saw a bit on a "tech" show a few days ago and they demonstrated
>> how some cheap cd cases could scratch the cds or dvds that were
>> in them without the person handling the disks doing anything
>> wrong. It seems that with some cases, the surface of the cd or
>> dvd actually comes into contact with the case and the slightest
>> movement of the cd or dvd will scuff the media.
>
> Yes, I believe this, and also when people just lay them flat on a
> coffee table or top of tv and them drag them to the edge to lift
> up, they scratch the bottom.
> What pisses me off, is that way back when CD technology was first
> invented, they sold us on the idea becuae they were scratch proof
> and skip proof! I remember a demo, where the guy scratched the
> bottom of a cd, pretty badly on purpose then played it perfectly
> with no skips. He explained that unlike records which had grooves
> for the needle, the cd laser would easily read past and physical
> scrathes to the outer plastic and still be able to read all the
> data underneath just fine. Never a skip again was their slogan.
> I suspect since then, they made the laser much less powerful and
> it can no longer read past scrathes, not weven finger prints
> anymore. But back then the machine weighed a ton and now they are
> as small as walkmans, so it must be weaker laser power for sure.
>
> I'd pay more and live with a heavier unit if they gave us a
> choice, I want the original power that could read past scratches
> back!!! Heck, now even a spec of dust or hair will cause an error
> in reading a movie. Big difference from what we were originally
> promised.
>
> AnthonyR
>

The main reason that scratched CDs and DVDs can be read OK is that
there is lots of error correction in the encoding, including an
extra 30% or so of redundant data, that can be used to reconstruct
any missing data (up to a point).

In fact there's another trick used in CDs (I assume in DVDs too).
The data that belongs to a given moment in time is in fact scattered
a little bit around the disc, intermixed with other nearby moments
in time, so that a scratch will not erase all of the data and
redundant bits. That relates to why it's better to scratch discs
radially than along a track. The circumferential scratch can destroy
all of the scattered data for a given moment - or several moments -
of time. The scattered stuff is rearranged, and if necessary
reconstructed, in memory during the playing process.

The reading lasers use only a few milliwatts of power, so I would
believe that today's lasers are just as powerful as yesterday's. I
have no proof of this, just faith :-)

HTH,
Gino


--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 11:55:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:08:51 GMT, "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com>
wrote:

>
>"Ron P" <spam@kwic.com> wrote in message
>news:tRgWe.11571$p5.4346@nnrp.ca.mci.com!nnrp1.uunet.ca...
>> "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:xU1We.32547$%w.8301@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>>>
>>> <j'arrow@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:3isfi1da03u87rk14tigv307g8ab9pi6k7@4ax.com...
>>>> My kids are forever scratching their PS2 discs - and replacing them
>>>> was becoming expensive so I invested in something called "Skip DR".
>>>>
>>>> From memory it was about £20 - and works by removing the very outer
>>>> layer off the disc and therefore removes the scratches - to be fair
>>>> I've had 100% sucess with PS2 games and about 50/50 with scratched
>>>> DVD's.
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought for you all !
>>>>
>>>> j'arrow
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>> I'm curious, once you remove the very outer layer and then do you copy
>>> the discs to new dvd's or cd's?
>>> Since if not, the next time you get a scratch and remove some more, and
>>> so on, eventually there will be no more
>>> layer left to remove and you'll just polish into to actual data part, no?
>>> Because these dvd's scratch so easily is why I believe we should be
>>> allowed to create working backups.
>>> I've lend movies to my neighbor and gotten then back scratched just from
>>> him using them once, I guess he
>>> doesn't treat them with kit gloves like I do. He says he's very careful,
>>> it puts me in a bad spot cause I don't want to
>>> be lending him anymore to watch.
>>>
>>> AnthonyR.
>>
>> I saw a bit on a "tech" show a few days ago and they demonstrated how some
>> cheap cd cases could scratch the cds or dvds that were in them without the
>> person handling the disks doing anything wrong. It seems that with some
>> cases, the surface of the cd or dvd actually comes into contact with the
>> case and the slightest movement of the cd or dvd will scuff the media.
>
>Yes, I believe this, and also when people just lay them flat on a coffee
>table or top of tv and them drag them to the edge to lift up, they scratch
>the bottom.
>What pisses me off, is that way back when CD technology was first invented,
>they sold us on the idea becuae they were scratch proof and skip proof!
>I remember a demo, where the guy scratched the bottom of a cd, pretty badly
>on purpose then played it perfectly with no skips.
>He explained that unlike records which had grooves for the needle, the cd
>laser would easily read past and physical scrathes to the outer plastic and
>still be able to read all the data underneath just fine. Never a skip again
>was their slogan.
>I suspect since then, they made the laser much less powerful and it can no
>longer read past scrathes, not weven finger prints anymore.
>But back then the machine weighed a ton and now they are as small as
>walkmans, so it must be weaker laser power for sure.
>
>I'd pay more and live with a heavier unit if they gave us a choice, I want
>the original power that could read past scratches back!!!
>Heck, now even a spec of dust or hair will cause an error in reading a
>movie. Big difference from what we were originally promised.
>
>AnthonyR
>

Weight is not an issue, nor is laser power. The ability to
read past scratches is a result of heavily redundant data on the disk.
Kinda like RAID recovery on hard drives.
September 20, 2005 10:26:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

<kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:3orsi191l81gm50ri9e14qhcebso1akoec@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:08:51 GMT, "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Weight is not an issue, nor is laser power. The ability to
> read past scratches is a result of heavily redundant data on the disk.
> Kinda like RAID recovery on hard drives.

Hey Kashe,
OK then I guess they are encoding CD music differently now then when they
invented cd's?

I mean back when a CD Player weighed 50 pounds and cost $500 I could have
scratched a CD-Audio disc
on a cement sidewalk, (that was the demo I had seen actually) until the back
was full of scratches and cuts.
Then it played just fine!
But nowadays in our new delicate light dvd/cd players, you put in a cd-audio
disc and sometimes with just a fingerprint
or smudge, you get a skip, like a record use to do. This wasn't part of the
demo i seen 15 years ago.

I was just trying to figure out what could have changed in the technology to
make them so fragile now as opposed
to when they were introduced and marketed as scratch proof technology?

AnthonyR.
Anonymous
September 22, 2005 5:43:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
news:4vYXe.36504$%w.1335@twister.nyc.rr.com:

>
> <kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:3orsi191l81gm50ri9e14qhcebso1akoec@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:08:51 GMT, "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Weight is not an issue, nor is laser power. The ability to
>> read past scratches is a result of heavily redundant data on the
>> disk. Kinda like RAID recovery on hard drives.
>
> Hey Kashe,
> OK then I guess they are encoding CD music differently now then
> when they invented cd's?
>
> I mean back when a CD Player weighed 50 pounds and cost $500 I
> could have scratched a CD-Audio disc
> on a cement sidewalk, (that was the demo I had seen actually)
> until the back was full of scratches and cuts.
> Then it played just fine!
> But nowadays in our new delicate light dvd/cd players, you put in
> a cd-audio disc and sometimes with just a fingerprint
> or smudge, you get a skip, like a record use to do. This wasn't
> part of the demo i seen 15 years ago.
>
> I was just trying to figure out what could have changed in the
> technology to make them so fragile now as opposed
> to when they were introduced and marketed as scratch proof
> technology?
>
> AnthonyR.

That old demo might be a question of "Which shell is the CD under?"

The hpec that I first saw when CDs were the latest thing (~1984?)
described in great detail how the various forms of redundancy worked
together to protect the data. (See the outline description in my
post of 9/15 in this thread). That hasn't changed.

For all of that, the firmware in some of the cheap (and for that
matter not so cheap) drives may not be up to the task.

Gino

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
September 23, 2005 1:44:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Gene E. Bloch" <hamburger@NOT_SPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns96D97756B24E6Astrolabe@216.196.97.136...
> "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
> news:4vYXe.36504$%w.1335@twister.nyc.rr.com:
>
>>
>
> That old demo might be a question of "Which shell is the CD under?"
>
> The hpec that I first saw when CDs were the latest thing (~1984?)
> described in great detail how the various forms of redundancy worked
> together to protect the data. (See the outline description in my
> post of 9/15 in this thread). That hasn't changed.
>
> For all of that, the firmware in some of the cheap (and for that
> matter not so cheap) drives may not be up to the task.
>
> Gino
>
> --

Hey Gino,
Thanks for the reply, that kind of makes sense, something isn't up to the
task in these CD/DVD players, cause I never
even heard a cd skip back in the late 80's early 90's.
Yet it appears to be a common thing nowadays, a cd will start skipping worse
than a record use to, you take it out,
wipe off the fingerprints and the skip is gone. :) 
AnthonyR.
Anonymous
September 23, 2005 1:44:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
news:bBFYe.150$Ik1.67@twister.nyc.rr.com:

>
> "Gene E. Bloch" <hamburger@NOT_SPAM.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns96D97756B24E6Astrolabe@216.196.97.136...
>> "AnthonyR" <nomail@nospam.com> wrote in
>> news:4vYXe.36504$%w.1335@twister.nyc.rr.com:
>>
>>>
>>
>> That old demo might be a question of "Which shell is the CD
>> under?"
>>
>> The hpec that I first saw when CDs were the latest thing (~1984?)
>> described in great detail how the various forms of redundancy
>> worked together to protect the data. (See the outline description
>> in my post of 9/15 in this thread). That hasn't changed.
>>
>> For all of that, the firmware in some of the cheap (and for that
>> matter not so cheap) drives may not be up to the task.
>>
>> Gino
>>
>> --
>
> Hey Gino,
> Thanks for the reply, that kind of makes sense, something isn't up
> to the task in these CD/DVD players, cause I never
> even heard a cd skip back in the late 80's early 90's.
> Yet it appears to be a common thing nowadays, a cd will start
> skipping worse than a record use to, you take it out,
> wipe off the fingerprints and the skip is gone. :) 
> AnthonyR.

What might be fun is to find one of the old test CDs that had
calibrated holes or some kind of flaws. Like the first one was 0.1mm
long, then 0.2mm, 0.4, whatever...Then you could tell how good your
player was by when it started to fail.

Two problems - finding such a disc today (I could Google if I was
really serious!) and remembering how the disc performed in 1985 or
1995 (fat chance, given my brain!).

One or two posters in the video NGs seem to feel that they don't
make CDs (the discs, not the players) the way they used to. Meaning
they don't make them as well as they used to, or they introduce
problems on pupose to prevent copying :-( I wonder if that is where
the impression comes from that the players are bad? Food for
thought...

Gino

--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino)
letters617blochg3251
replace the numbers by "at" and "dotcom"
!