Quoting tlr

Quoting Zibri

The fastest example (11 kilobit/sec) has the same (or better) error rlsilience as "turbo250" but it is 3 times faster.

The slowest one (8 kilobit/sec) has the same error resilience as the standard commodore slow "save", but it is 100 times faster and twice as fast as turbo250.

Quoting Zibri

Note:
Speeds 0 to 2 are highly reliable.
Speeds 3 and 4 are more reliable than any other turbo
Speeds 5 to 8 are less reliable and dependent
on a good alignment and fitness of the datassette.

speed 9 worked on a particularly good datassette but it is meant for masters only.

I find these comparisons the most interesting, how are you measuring error resilience/reliablility?

It would be very interesting to see a plot of the results on different turbos against each other, both on speed and error resilience.

To be unpolluted by bad hardware or any other variable, tests are conducted on more fronts:
1) accuracy of the signal generation taken directly from the source with an oscilloscope or using dedicated hardware (cute32 and htap format are more than redundant for this)
2) modification of the signal by a standard datassette and a test datassette at "worse" settings but stil able to read a "commodore standard save".
3) a very good aligned and serviced datassette able to read even the fastest turbo (Evil Dead master).

PAL Turbo Data length in seconds: 67.55324953717236
NTSC Turbo Data length in seconds: 65.07768348738226

Yes, but how do you quantify it to compare turbos against each other?

Are you messing with signal levels or speed to see when loading fails, or something else?

Quoting Zibri

PAL Turbo Data length in seconds: 67.55324953717236
NTSC Turbo Data length in seconds: 65.07768348738226

That's an awful lot of precision. Where does it come from? :)

the frequency separation is "strange" and the equivalent separation in my code is SPEED "3".
I can so say that my speed "3" is as error resilent as commodore's but since is higher in frequency will be more dependent on a good AZIMUTH setting.
But you can always use a lower speed and get even better error resilence.

Quoting Zibri

the frequency separation is "strange" and the equivalent separation in my code is SPEED "3".
I can so say that my speed "3" is as error resilent as commodore's but since is higher in frequency will be more dependent on a good AZIMUTH setting.
But you can always use a lower speed and get even better error resilence.

I'd consider the azimuth setting in the resilience. In my view it cannot be assumed that every tape unit is perfectly adjusted.

But, from what I hear the resilience of any of the turbos is yet to be measured, no?
Currently it's just an assumption based on pulse lengths.