There was already a thread on this topic (http://forum.phathack.com/index.php/topic,837.0.html (http://forum.phathack.com/index.php/topic,837.0.html)), but there was no conclusion.
I've stuck with Music Manager 2.30 for a long time, but it is beginning to show its age. Media Manager 3.92 has some features I would like to try. However, when using a hacked DMS (I have tried 80GB and 120GB) I get the error message "Error retrieving DMS drive ID" and it will not recognize the DMS.
The message suggests that this will happen if any files are being accessed by any other program, anti-virus, etc. This is not the case. The previous thread suggests that the program may be looking for the drive signature. The drive sig should have been copied over to the new DMS by the hack process. I have tried getting this to work by "re-seeding" the new DMS using both the hack CD and the Windows hack method, no luck.
Is anyone successfully using 3.92 on a hacked DMS? Does anyone have any suggestions how to get this to work with mine???
Quote from: markbowen on March 27, 2007, 12:39:54 PMIs anyone successfully using 3.92 on a hacked DMS? Does anyone have any suggestions how to get this to work with mine???
Hi Mark,
Answer - Yes. But I can't say that I did anything special. My DMS was hacked a long time ago (Dec 2005). I'm not sure if it will help, but at that time I copied the signature block using the "Genesis method" with the dangerous but versatile
dd command. It seemed the most reliable method back then. I have used Media Manager in various versions since, but using 3.92 for quite a few months now with no issues.
Good luck!
Les.
The hack scripts are NOT copying the drive signature from the old DMS. it isn't needed for the phatbox to work anymore so we don't copy it. There are commented out commands that allow it to be copied but I felt that people could screw things up if they didn't follow the directions correctly and it was easier to comment it out.
3.92 works on my DMS without the signature but it doesn't seem to work for everyone.
All right, just for kicks I did the Genesis method on my 120GB drive, but 3.92 is still giving me an error message. It does work on my original 10GB DMS, so there is nothing else accessing the drive that should cause it not to see the the 120GB.
Anyone else have any idea??
Just a thought... (Probably way off the mark, but lacking any other ideas)
We know (I think we do anyway) that the original Phatnoise verification process involves reading the hard drive serial number (not the formatted volume serial number) using some special IDE command and then doing some number crunching with that number and the magic key read from the sectors before the first partition in order to validate that the drive is from Phatnoise. Could is be that PMM 3.92 is trying to read that serial number but is unable simply because your drive tyoe happens not to support it in the same way as some others? It could also be that the Phatbox tries and fails, but it doesn't matter on a hacked box since the test is disabled (or the test result is ignored).
If this is the reason, then either you won't be able to use PMM 3.92 with that drive, or some code patching is needed. Could this be an attempt by Phatnoise to further limit the use of unauthorised drives?
As a matter of interest, what type of drive is it? If my theory is correct, then others with similar drives may also have issues with PMM 3.92.
I'm trying this with two drives, the 120GB is a Hitachi, and the 80GB is a WD.
Strange: I had the 120GB in the cradle, and the 80GB connected in a USB enclosure. With both drives connected, 3.92 loads the 80GB. If I disconnect the 120GB and restart PMM, I get the error again. I did not try to copy any music. Anyway, that is an observation but not a solution.
Now I'm trying PMM 3.76. At first, there is no error message, but when it loads up the DMS I do not get the little eject icon in the explorer screen. It will copy music to the DMS but it will not copy anything to the playlists. When I try to eject, I get the drive ID error again.
I'm stumped. I'm really fed up with Music Manager, but at least it works. I guess I'm going back to it with my tail between my legs.
Interesting - my drive is also a WD 80GB.
Maybe it's something to do with the cradle... does the 80GB work if it's not in an enclosure but rather on the cradle?
Either the 80GB or 120GB will get recognized in the enclosure, but only if they are both connected (one in the cradle and one in the enclosure), but the program crashes if I try to do a save/eject. Neither gets recognized in the cradle, whether both are connected or only one. However, the original 10GB drive works just fine in the cradle (as well as the enclosure), so I don't think it's a cradle issue.
I would have thought it might be a HDD-specific issue, but Les is using the same 80GB HDD as I am, apparently without problem. It would be logical to suspect some other system issue, but if that were the case I should also have problems with the original 10GB drive. So, I remain stumped.
Stupid question [as I'm still learning about how the PhatBox works], but do both of these drives have the correct partition names?
PhtSys and PhtData.
I'm just wondering if PMM is doing the same as I am with PhatHack Media Manager and checking the volume names to determine a valid DMS cartridge.
Quote from: VorTechS on March 29, 2007, 08:01:36 AM
Stupid question [as I'm still learning about how the PhatBox works], but do both of these drives have the correct partition names? PhtSys and PhtData.
Yes, of course. They have been properly formatted and partitioned a few times now, using variously the hack CD or the Windows hack, also dd'd using the Genesis method. The drives work fine with Music Manager and in my Keg.
The only thing left I can think of is that maybe 3.92 is looking for the Windows device ID. The device IDs of the newly created DMS drives always show up as the brand of hard drive and some other tech info, whereas the ID of the original DMS clearly shows "Phatnoise" along with the other info. I'm wondering if it would be useful, or dangerous, to try to change the IDs of the new drives in the registry.
Quote from: markbowen on March 29, 2007, 09:13:06 AM
The only thing left I can think of is that maybe 3.92 is looking for the Windows device ID. The device IDs of the newly created DMS drives always show up as the brand of hard drive and some other tech info, whereas the ID of the original DMS clearly shows "Phatnoise" along with the other info. I'm wondering if it would be useful, or dangerous, to try to change the IDs of the new drives in the registry.
If the drives are correctly recognised by Windows, then changing the Device IDs in the registry won't achieve anything, but if you use regmon you might be able to find out what PMM is looking at in terms of registry entries. It might give you a pointer to what's wrong if PMM searches for keys that are missing.
You can get regmon here: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/utilities/regmon.mspx
If it is using registry keys, you can just put the value it wants in whatever key it reads and deny write to it to "Everyone" -- then when you put in the drive windows won't be able to change it to match what's really there.... but that may not work if system ignores those permissions.
Thanks for all the suggestions. I'm going out of town, so it will be a week before I can try anything else.
Sam, as I recall, when you first got the 160GB drives working with the Phatbox, you also had trouble with Media Manager. (I think you wrote that it sucks.) It would not work with the 160GB drive in your case, but some other people have gotten it to work. So, there is an issue there somewhere, we just don't know what it is yet.
I started the original thread way back. The disk I have that doesn't work with 3.92 is a 40 gig Samsung from Newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822152501 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822152501)
With 3.76 everything works fine, although Sade is pronounced, "sad". :'(
It didn't work... then it worked... I don't know what changed and haven't spent the time to track down the problem.
Perhaps I'll be bored enough to figure it out sometime...
I can't get 3.76 to work for me, either. after I click away about 10 instances of the error message 'invalid drive ID...' then it will copy songs, but they are not visible on the DMS, and neither are playlists.
I've backed up all my media files, so maybe I will try to wipe the drive and use the dd command.
Quote from: Anton on April 11, 2007, 03:15:33 PMI've backed up all my media files, so maybe I will try to wipe the drive and use the dd command.
You can try that if you want, but take note that I dd'd my drive and had pretty much the same experience as you did with 3.76. It copied the songs to the DMS but I could not populate any playlist. On eject I got the invalid drive ID message. Still will not work at all with 3.92.
Anyone have a working link to download 3.51 or 3.42? I know I was able to use one of those with a hacked drive without any drive ID messages.
I have a copy of the installer for PMM 3.51 saved, and I have the registration activation saved, but I don't think it will work according to some recent posts about Phatnoise being offline.
Mark, Did 3.51 work for you?
I am having trouble with 3.76 and the hack DMS. I was thinking of switching to 3.92 or 3.51.
Maybe I'll just use Media manager with the good DMS, and Music manager with the Hack one.
I'm looking at getting rid of my car and buying a new old one ;) --- at that point I'll probably be able to use my phatbox with a kenwood head unit again and I'll try to figure this crap out... of course it'll probably be irrelevant once vortec's software is production ready...
Anybody selling a Camaro Z28? Prefereably SS?
Quote from: Anton on April 30, 2007, 01:28:36 AM
Mark, Did 3.51 work for you?
I am having trouble with 3.76 and the hack DMS. I was thinking of switching to 3.92 or 3.51.
Maybe I'll just use Media manager with the good DMS, and Music manager with the Hack one.
Yes, Anton, 3.51 does seem to work, at least as far as not getting the invalid drive ID message. The program crashed when trying to convert the DMS database to the new format. So, I think to really test it I will have to wipe the DMS and reload my music, which I have not had time to do yet. I'm awaiting delivery of a new 160GB drive, and I will use that to test with all versions of PMM that I have (3.51, 3.76, 3.92). I will post the results.
If anyone is still following this thread:
New Samsung 160GB drive, created as a DMS using the dd method. I used a different original DMS than I had used on the 120GB drive. It works with 3.51 and 3.76 (the 120GB would not), but still will not work with 3.92 -- which is strange, because I thought 3.76 and 3.92 were looking for the same thing (whatever it is). Oh well, I can live with 3.76 for now.
Ok, mark, thanks. I have my drive wiped clean right now, and I will install 3.51. Or maybe I will upgrade to a bigger drive. 60 Gig isn't cutting it anyore.
I was having issues with PMM 3.95 and my new 160 gig drive today so I installed 1.87 and copied my music using it. Now 3.95 will see the DMS. I am going to try and copy some more music to it in 3.95 and see if that works.
Hi, I am having problems too, Toshiba 160, it recognizes the drive, copies everything but on writing the voiceprompts it 'hangs' and shuts down. Anyone seen this before?
In case anyone is interested, I have gotten around to trying 3.92 and the same hacked Samsung DMS on three different systems, and can report:
1. My main system is an AMD X2 system (nVidia chipset), and this is where I first had all the "error retrieving drive ID" problems.
2. My laptop is an Intel Dual Core system, and the symptoms are identical.
3. My other system is an Intel P4 single core system, and 3.92 works for the most part -- though I did get a drive ID error when I tried to open the firmware properties. All other operations normal, albeit a bit slowly.
Each system is running XP Pro, in identical configurations -- same antivirus, same firewall, etc. So, it seems reasonable to deduce that the drive ID issue is related either to systems running multiple processors, or possibly to certain USB chipsets. If anyone is using 3.92 with a hacked drive running on a multi-core system without issue, I would be interested to know.
I have an XP SP2 system running on a Core 2 Duo setup using an EVGA 680i motherboard (nvidia chipset). I don't have probelms with the drive ID issue with PMM.. but I seeded the DMS from 1.82 I believe it is and then ran 3.92 and no issues at all.
OK, judb just killed part of my theory.
Just for kicks, on my AMD machine, I changed the properties of pmm.exe to compatibility mode for Windows 98/Me, and the DMS finally loaded. I transferred three songs, and tried to save. It took forever to generate the SQL database, then about two hours to save my 570 discs/playlists, and finally just hung on the voice prompts. I even waited another hour to see if it would respond, then finally had to kill it. The result is nothing saved, and my voice prompts are completely wiped!
The problem now is because I did use 3.92 to save the DMS on my other machine (which is at different location), PMM will not let me roll back to 3.76. It keeps telling me my version is outdated and I have to upgrade (I suppose due to something different about the db generated by 3.92).
yeah delete the phatman.ini i think its called on phtsys and you'll have to delete the .db files in the root of phtdta..
then you should be able to open it in an older version of PMM. it wont show the music thats loaded, but you wont have to wait for files to recopy.
I'm getting this error with a new Samsung 120G drive I just put in my DMS - I can use PMM 2.20 (which I still have installed) to add playlists, but PMM 3.92 keeps giving me this error and won't recognize the DMS.
I just read through this whole thread, and it doesn't look like there's really a solution, other than to use 3.51 or 3.76.
Note that when I run the standalone "DMS doctor" (from 2.20 or 3.92), it fails the 'Checking for system files' test.
I do have a 1.87 setup, so I will try to install that and reinitialize the playlists.
Any other suggestions?
Quote from: markbowen on September 24, 2007, 09:41:27 AMEach system is running XP Pro, in identical configurations -- same antivirus, same firewall, etc. So, it seems reasonable to deduce that the drive ID issue is related either to systems running multiple processors, or possibly to certain USB chipsets. If anyone is using 3.92 with a hacked drive running on a multi-core system without issue, I would be interested to know.
Hi Mark,
Well, I just upgraded my AMD box to dual core (without a new OS install - using XP Pro). I was running 3.92 and a 160G DMS before and I still am. DMS insertion launches PMM as before, or inserting after PMM is started adds the DMS to the devices seen in PMM. No issues.
As upgrades go it was pretty painless. I wanted to give dual core a go but don't have the budget for a new system right now, and I picked up an Athlon 64 X2 3800+ for £35 from Ebuyer. Motherboard is 3 years old Abit AV8.
Happy New Year!
Les.
Quote from: S80_UK on January 01, 2008, 11:39:21 AMI was running 3.92 and a 160G DMS before and I still am. DMS insertion launches PMM as before, or inserting after PMM is started adds the DMS to the devices seen in PMM. No issues.
Hi Les. In an earlier post in this thread, you were using a WD 80GB drive, also without issue. Can you tell me what brand/model of 160GB drive you are using now? I'm still trying to figure out where the issue lies, and starting to think it might be brand or model-specific.
Hi Mark - It's a Seagate Momentus 5400.3 160GB, UDMA 100 with 8MB cache. Around £80 from dabs.com
Les.
Thanks Les. I just succeeded in dd'ing (Genesis method) my WD 80GB drive, and now it will work with 3.92. I thought I had tried that before, but either I didn't or I used a different original DMS as the seed than the one I used this time (which is an original Kenwood 10GB DMS).
The same action did NOT seem to work for either a Hitachi 120GB or a Samsung 160GB. Unfortunate, of course, as I use the larger drive for my music.
So, unless someone suggests otherwise, based on your info, posts from other users experiencing problems and my own experience, I conclude:
PMM 3.92 works with hacked Seagate and Western Digitial drives, though it may be necessary to copy the signature from an original DMS.
PMM 3.92 does NOT work with hacked Hitachi or Samsung drives, whether or not an original DMS signature has been copied to the new DMS.
Therefore, my next step, which I was considering anyway, is to get a WD 250GB drive, and cross my fingers. (I don't know what I'm going to do with all these extra 2.5 inch drives.)
I always dd the signature block, just in case.
Let me know how you get on with the 250GB. My 160GB is almost full (mostly FLAC apart from audio books)
Off-topic, but I have used a similar trick to recover trashed USB sticks by cloning sectors from an identical good stick.
Les
Quote from: markbowen on January 09, 2008, 12:37:46 PM
So, unless someone suggests otherwise, based on your info, posts from other users experiencing problems and my own experience, I conclude:
PMM 3.92 works with hacked Seagate and Western Digitial drives, though it may be necessary to copy the signature from an original DMS.
PMM 3.92 does NOT work with hacked Hitachi or Samsung drives, whether or not an original DMS signature has been copied to the new DMS.
I just made a DMS with a Western Digital drive and I get an error from PMM 3.92 about it not being able to access CurrentSetup.xml. It works fine with PMM 1.87 though.