Burn Failure


finty

what is this
Joined
Feb 17, 2004
Messages
4,984
Location
Ireland
Website
Visit site
i tried to burn a data cd in nero 6, but it keeps on failing, the log is below. can some one tell me whats wrong?

LOG:


Windows 98 4.90 (ME)
IA32
WinAspi: File 'Wnaspi32.dll': Ver=4.60 (1021), size=45056 bytes, created 10/09/1999 12:06:00
ahead WinASPI: File 'C:\PROGRAM FILES\AHEAD\NERO\Wnaspi32.dll': Ver=2.0.1.59, size=160016 bytes, created 11/11/2003 14:49:52
Nero version: 6.3.0.0
Recorder: <LG CD-RW CED-8083B> Version: 1.10 - HA 0 TA 1 - 6.3.0.0
Adapter driver: <ESDI_506> HA 0
Drive buffer : 2048kB
Bus Type : default (0) -> ATAPI, detected: ATAPI
CD-ROM: <COMPAQ DVD-ROM DRD8120B>Version: 1.09 - HA 0 TA 0 - 6.3.0.0
Adapter driver: <ESDI_506> HA 0
COMPAQ DVD-ROM DRD8120B (Target 0, E:): Autoinsert On, DMA On, Disconnect ?, SyncDataXfer ?
LG CD-RW CED-8083B (Target 1, F:): Autoinsert On, DMA On, Disconnect ?, SyncDataXfer ?
Excluded drive IDs:
CmdQueuing : 1
CmdNotification: 2
WriteBufferSize: 49283072 (0) Byte
ShowDrvBufStat : 0
EraseSpeed : 0
BUFE : 0
Physical memory : 319MB (327160kB)
Free physical memory: 53MB (54352kB)
Memory in use : 61 %
Uncached PFiles: 0x0
Use Static Write Speed Table: 0
Use Inquiry : 1
Global Bus Type: default (0)
Check supported media : Disabled (0)

11.5.2004
CD-ROM (ISO)
21:17:56 #1 Text 0 File Isodoc.cpp, Line 6029
Iso document burn settings
------------------------------------------
Determine maximum speed : FALSE
Simulate : FALSE
Write : TRUE
Finalize CD : FALSE
Multisession : TRUE
Multisession type: : Start multisession
Burning mode : TAO
Mode : 1
ISO Level : 1 (Max. of 11 = 8 + 3 char)
Character set : ISO 9660
Joliet : TRUE
Allow pathdepth more than 8 directories : TRUE
Allow more than 255 characters in path : TRUE
Write ISO9660 ;1 file extensions : TRUE

21:17:56 #2 Text 0 File Reader.cpp, Line 118
Reader running

21:17:56 #3 Text 0 File Writer.cpp, Line 124
Writer LG CD-RW CED-8083B running

21:17:56 #4 ISO9660GEN -11 File geniso.cpp, Line 3882
First writeable address = 0 (0x00000000)

21:17:56 #5 Text 0 File Burncd.cpp, Line 3094
Turn on Track-at-once, using CD-R/RW media

21:17:57 #6 Text 0 File DlgWaitCD.cpp, Line 239
Last possible write address on media: 359848 (79:59.73)
Last address to be written: 326336 (72:33.11)

21:17:57 #7 Text 0 File DlgWaitCD.cpp, Line 244
Write in overburning mode: FALSE

21:17:57 #8 Text 0 File DlgWaitCD.cpp, Line 2068
Recorder: LG CD-RW CED-8083B;
CDR code: 00 97 24 16; OSJ entry from: SONY Corporation
ATIP Data:
Special Info [hex] 1: D0 00 A0, 2: 61 18 10 (LI 97:24.16), 3: 4F 3B 4A (LO 79:59.74)
Additional Info [hex] 1: 00 00 80 (invalid), 2: 00 00 00 (invalid), 3: 00 00 00 (invalid)

21:17:57 #9 Text 0 File DlgWaitCD.cpp, Line 405
>>> Protocol of DlgWaitCD activities: <<<
=========================================

21:17:57 #10 Text 0 File ThreadedTransferInterface.cpp, Line 779
Setup items (after recorder preparation)
0: TRM_DATA_MODE1 (CTransferItem)
2 indices, index0 (150) not provided
original disc pos #0 + 326337 (326337) = #326337/72:31.12
relocatable, disc pos for caching/writing not required/required, no patch infos
-> TRM_DATA_MODE1, 2048, config 0, wanted index0 0 blocks, length 326335 blocks [LG CD-RW CED-8083B ]
--------------------------------------------------------------

21:17:57 #11 Text 0 File ThreadedTransferInterface.cpp, Line 948
Prepare recorder [LG CD-RW CED-8083B ] for write in TAO
DAO infos:
==========
MCN: ""
TOCType: 0x00; Session Closed, disc not fixated
Tracks 1 to 1:
1: TRM_DATA_MODE1, 2048/0x00, FilePos 0 307200 668645376, ISRC ""
DAO layout:
===========
__Start_|____Track_|_Idx_|_RecDep_|_CtrlAdr_
-150 | lead-in | 0 | 0x00 | 0x41
-150 | 1 | 0 | 0x00 | 0x41
0 | 1 | 1 | 0x00 | 0x41
326337 | lead-out | 1 | 0x00 | 0x41

21:17:57 #12 Text 0 File ThreadedTransferInterface.cpp, Line 994
Removed 2 run-out blocks from end of track 1. Length: 326337 -> 326335.

21:17:57 #13 Phase 24 File dlgbrnst.cpp, Line 1800
Caching of files started

21:17:58 #14 Text 0 File Burncd.cpp, Line 4061
Cache writing successful.

21:17:58 #15 Phase 25 File dlgbrnst.cpp, Line 1800
Caching of files completed

21:17:58 #16 Phase 36 File dlgbrnst.cpp, Line 1800
Burn process started at 4x (600 KB/s)

21:17:58 #17 Text 0 File ThreadedTransferInterface.cpp, Line 2264
Verifying disc position of item 0 (relocatable, disc pos, no patch infos, orig at #0): write at #0

21:18:14 #18 SCSI -1119 File Cdrdrv.cpp, Line 1430
SCSI Exec, HA 0, TA 1, LUN 0, buffer 0x02260000
Status: 0x04 (0x01, SCSI_ERR)
HA-Status 0x00 (0x00, OK)
TA-Status 0x02 (0x01, SCSI_TASTATUS_CHKCOND)
Sense Key: 0x04 (KEY_HARDWARE_ERROR)
Sense Code: 0x09
Sense Qual: 0x00
CDB Data: 0x2A 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x20 0x00 0x00 0x00
Sense Data: 0x70 0x00 0x04 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x0A
0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x09 0x00

21:18:14 #19 CDR -1119 File Writer.cpp, Line 301
Track following error

21:18:14 #20 Text 0 File ThreadedTransfer.cpp, Line 229
all writers idle, stopping conversion

21:18:14 #21 Text 0 File ThreadedTransfer.cpp, Line 223
conversion idle, stopping reader

21:18:14 #22 CDR -201 File WriterStatus.cpp, Line 196
Invalid write state
LG CD-RW CED-8083B\H0 T1

21:18:14 #23 TRANSFER -18 File WriterStatus.cpp, Line 196
Could not perform EndTrack

21:18:14 #24 Text 0 File Mmc.cpp, Line 14243
<LG CD-RW CED-8083B > start Close Session

21:18:14 #25 SCSI -1026 File Cdrdrv.cpp, Line 1170
SCSI Exec, HA 0, TA 1, LUN 0
Status: 0x04 (0x01, SCSI_ERR)
HA-Status 0x00 (0x00, OK)
TA-Status 0x02 (0x01, SCSI_TASTATUS_CHKCOND)
Sense Key: 0x05 (KEY_ILLEGAL_REQUEST)
Sense Code: 0x2C
Sense Qual: 0x04
CDB Data: 0x5B 0x01 0x02 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00
Sense Data: 0x70 0x00 0x05 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x0A
0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x2C 0x04

21:18:14 #26 CDR -1026 File WriterStatus.cpp, Line 245
Current program area empty

21:18:14 #27 TRANSFER -19 File WriterStatus.cpp, Line 245
Could not perform Fixation

21:18:14 #28 Text 0 File WriterStatus.cpp, Line 254
falling back to disc fixation

21:18:14 #29 Text 0 File dlgbrnst.cpp, Line 1658
Set remaining time: 0:00,000 (0ms) -> OK

21:18:14 #30 Phase 38 File dlgbrnst.cpp, Line 1800
Burn process failed at 4x (600 KB/s)


Existing drivers:
File 'IoSubSys\SCSI1HLP.VXD': Ver=4.90.3000, size=19278 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File 'IoSubsys\NEROCD95.VXD': Ver=4.5.0.14, size=39882 bytes, created 11/03/2002 10:55:38
File 'IoSubsys\CDR4VSD.VXD': Ver=5.3.2.31, size=101616 bytes, created 22/02/2004 12:44:50
File 'IoSubsys\CDRALVSD.VXD': Ver=5.3.2.31, size=20043 bytes, created 22/02/2004 12:44:50
File 'IoSubsys\ACBHLPR.VXD': Ver=1.01, size=40508 bytes, created 22/02/2004 12:44:52
File 'IoSubsys\CDFS.VXD': Ver=4.90.3000, size=59141 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File 'IoSubsys\ESDI_506.PDR': Ver=4.90.3000, size=25365 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File 'IoSubsys\USBMPHLP.PDR': Ver=4.90.3000, size=4861 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File '..\System32\Drivers\1394bus.sys': Ver=4.90.3000.1, size=44240 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File '..\System32\Drivers\Ohci1394.sys': Ver=4.90.3000.1, size=49488 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File '..\System32\Drivers\Sbp2port.sys': Ver=4.90.3000.1, size=36336 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File 'IoSubsys\Disktsd.vxd': Ver=4.90.3000, size=18663 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00
File 'IoSubsys\ESDI_506.PDR': Ver=4.90.3000, size=25365 bytes, created 08/06/2000 17:00:00 (Adapter driver for rec)

Registry Keys:

END LOG.

sorry for it being so long!
 
i thought that might be the problem, looks like its time for a dvd burner! unless anyone knows away to fix it?
 
Try switching the IDE cables about and see if that works, it might have come loose since its cacheing on your hard disk but the error is at the write stage. :)
 
Has it been working fine until now?
Have you switched cd-r's?
Has it worked with nero 6 b4?
were you copying much data?

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to try and decifer that log-file.
 
pubjoe posted on May 12 2004 at 10:51 AM said:
Has it been working fine until now?
Have you switched cd-r's?
Has it worked with nero 6 b4?
were you copying much data?

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to try and decifer that log-file.
it was working ok until recently, i tried to burn music cds, it failed alot but after some trying it worked.
i am using no-name media cdrs, but i have used them before.
i have been using nero 6 successfully for months.
i was copying a bit, but no where near alot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LMAO.

i know but ive not the patience to upgrade, is this my problem with burning? is Nero 6 not compatible with ME?
 
finty101 posted on May 12 2004 at 01:09 PM said:
LMAO.

i know but ive not the patience to upgrade, is this my problem with burning? is Nero 6 not compatible with ME?
Your best bet for great compatiblity is upgrade (yeah its considered upgrading!) to Win98se. WinME is even more incompatible than XP is. I think WinME was kinda like an inside joke or something that no one besides M$ understood....

I dont know if Nero6 is incompatible with WinME, but I do know that Nero6 itself has some severe bugs, and 5.5.X is your best bet for Nero, especially on 9x.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
can i upgrade to win98se without losing every thing on my pc? and is it much differant to ME as my family mightent be able to get there head around it!
 
1) yeah, you should be able to upgrade you OS without losing any data, BUT you might lose your installed proggys (I'm not sure though)

2) I think ME and 98se are quite similar, though you might think about upgrading further to XP as it is far superior to 98se (once yuo downloaded all the updates and stuff)
 
Try Branded discs.. sounds like you laser is dieing... You might have got a dodgy batch of UnBranded (I got a bad batch of Unbranded DVD-R's and almost all failed). IF Branded discs dont work get a new CDRW (About £20) or just put an extra £25 towards it and get a DVD Burner ;)

Or try updating your CDRW's Firmware
 
c0ncept posted on May 14 2004 at 08:22 AM said:
1) yeah, you should be able to upgrade you OS without losing any data, BUT you might lose your installed proggys (I'm not sure though)

2) I think ME and 98se are quite similar, though you might think about upgrading further to XP as it is far superior to 98se (once yuo downloaded all the updates and stuff)
1. You will lose all your installed apps, just back up the settings files and reinstall them, not a big deal.

2. ME and 98 are very similar, except ME is that inbreed offspring. And XP is NOT far superior that 98se in any way shape or form. Period. Its bigger, slower, and less compatible than 98se. I have games that run better in WINE in linux than they do in XP (some dont even run in XP). XP is the OS that finially made me switch to linux permanently. (but thats another argument for another time and another place) I highly suggest 98se. The differences between 98se and ME (visually) are so tiny that your parents probably wont even know that they are on a different version (except the bootup screen is a dead giveaway lol). And 98se is 100% compatible with all software that you can run in ME, XP on the other hand, isnt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've managed to get XP to a nice manageable form using a buncha tweaks and cutting out the BS that runs in the background you don't even need, I don't see why everyone says it's incompaitable with everything, I can run DOS apps like one must fall and liero just fine, along with the original halflife (The main game people seem to have issues with under XP)

98SE was great, but not the godlike invincible OS people parade it around to be, I've had my fair share of blue screens and errors on it (Only 1 so far on XP, and that was while I was trimming out the bullshit in the registry)

My CPU usage at all time after I reverted XP to the classic look, trimmed down the registry, and stopped unnecessary processes from booting at the startup? 0-1 percent while idleing on desktop, 3-4 percent if browseing 4 or more IE windows.

So don't just dismiss XP entirely already.
 
98se isnt godlike at all, but if you have to choose evil, choose the lesser, faster, more compatible, cleaner, smaller, evil.

I was making a game, I was using XP, I would get a decent framerate (80 FPS), this is with all of the XP eye candy turned off, no skins, no large runaway proccesses that suck up cpu cycles and resources, I take care of my PC. I installed 98se to test it on that because a tester reported an issue with collision detection (a windows api that returns differenent results in xp then in every other windows os), I fixed the issue, but while in 98se, I noticed that I got a good 160+ FPS, no shitting you, my FPS doubled in 98se. This is with newest directx, newest video drivers in both OS's. I checked and double checked, to see if maybe my FPS counter was going awry and reporting bad data, it wasnt, I did enough tests to veryify that yes, it was indeed going twice the speed.

Didnt take me very long to kill the XP partition after that.
 
Akuma no Houkon posted on May 14 2004 at 07:02 PM said:
98se isnt godlike at all, but if you have to choose evil, choose the lesser, faster, more compatible, cleaner, smaller, evil.

I was making a game, I was using XP, I would get a decent framerate (80 FPS), this is with all of the XP eye candy turned off, no skins, no large runaway proccesses that suck up cpu cycles and resources, I take care of my PC. I installed 98se to test it on that because a tester reported an issue with collision detection (a windows api that returns differenent results in xp then in every other windows os), I fixed the issue, but while in 98se, I noticed that I got a good 160+ FPS, no shitting you, my FPS doubled in 98se. This is with newest directx, newest video drivers in both OS's. I checked and double checked, to see if maybe my FPS counter was going awry and reporting bad data, it wasnt, I did enough tests to veryify that yes, it was indeed going twice the speed.

Didnt take me very long to kill the XP partition after that.
Isn't necessarily XP causing the problem though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Akuma no Houkon posted on May 14 2004 at 07:02 PM said:
98se isnt godlike at all, but if you have to choose evil, choose the lesser, faster, more compatible, cleaner, smaller, evil.

I was making a game, I was using XP, I would get a decent framerate (80 FPS), this is with all of the XP eye candy turned off, no skins, no large runaway proccesses that suck up cpu cycles and resources, I take care of my PC. I installed 98se to test it on that because a tester reported an issue with collision detection (a windows api that returns differenent results in xp then in every other windows os), I fixed the issue, but while in 98se, I noticed that I got a good 160+ FPS, no shitting you, my FPS doubled in 98se. This is with newest directx, newest video drivers in both OS's. I checked and double checked, to see if maybe my FPS counter was going awry and reporting bad data, it wasnt, I did enough tests to veryify that yes, it was indeed going twice the speed.

Didnt take me very long to kill the XP partition after that.
Isn't necessarily XP causing the problem though.

(hehe - no I dont work for Microsoft :p)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
what the hell happened with your replys axeman?

is windows 2000 professional any good? i have heard good things about it.
 
Back
Top