Home News Reviews Forums Shop


In House Review - Lite-On LTR-52246S 52/24/52 CD-RW

Burn baby burn!

Postby eliminator on Wed Feb 26, 2003 6:52 pm

ditto !
I'm stickin to whatever the latest CD-RW will turn out to be ... dvd burners / formats are still being developed :wink:
Wake up ATI :-)
User avatar
eliminator
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1150
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 4:15 am
Location: TheLoneStarState

Re: Lite-On's Drive

Postby Spazmogen on Thu Feb 27, 2003 9:10 am

BuddhaTB wrote:... as 48x burns produce less C1 errors than 52x burns.


It seems to depend on media quality. TheWizards thread is even more valuable now.

For 52x writing:

The best I've tried is 48x Fuji (TY) there was very little difference in the C1 error rate between 48x & 52x.

Next I'd use Verbatim 48x (Made in Mexico). The C1 rate nearly doubled from 48x to 52x, but it was still acceptable. You will never get a C1 error free burn.


Great review Ian!
e6400 Core 2 Duo @ 2.13ghz
GeForce 7600GT 256mb PCI-e
2gb DDR2 667mhz Patriot ram 1.8v in d/c
Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 F10 BIOS
WD Caviar SE16 250GB SATA300 7200RPM 16MB Buffer
Samsung SATA2 80gb 7200rpm
Samsung SH-S182D 18x DVD burner
User avatar
Spazmogen
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Woodstock, Ontario

Postby jase on Thu Feb 27, 2003 9:56 am

lppnet wrote:If the writing quality is not acceptable then why choose for the faster drive. No point right. I think it gives you more trouble to find the suitable media.


I agree, I was just pointing out though that the LiteOn is beaten on speed. But yes, I'd still favour the LiteOn over the Artecs/Aopens etc of this world.
jase
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 8:00 pm

Re: Lite-On's Drive

Postby BuddhaTB on Thu Feb 27, 2003 12:43 pm

Spazmogen wrote:It seems to depend on media quality. TheWizards thread is even more valuable now.

For 52x writing:

The best I've tried is 48x Fuji (TY) there was very little difference in the C1 error rate between 48x & 52x.

Next I'd use Verbatim 48x (Made in Mexico). The C1 rate nearly doubled from 48x to 52x, but it was still acceptable. You will never get a C1 error free burn.

For my TDK drive and 48x Fuji Media, the difference of the C1 errors between 48x and 52 burns is very, very small. I think it was between 2-4, so there's really not too much of a difference, but I'm happy to leave it at 48x.
User avatar
BuddhaTB
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:50 pm
Location: Southern California (LA & Orange County)

Postby Spazmogen on Fri Feb 28, 2003 1:11 am

I agree. LTR-52246S 6S0C firmware.

Here's 48x Fuji burned @ 48x:
Image
C1 error 5

now the 48x disc burned @ 52x:
Image
C1 error 7

hardly a difference at all.
e6400 Core 2 Duo @ 2.13ghz
GeForce 7600GT 256mb PCI-e
2gb DDR2 667mhz Patriot ram 1.8v in d/c
Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 F10 BIOS
WD Caviar SE16 250GB SATA300 7200RPM 16MB Buffer
Samsung SATA2 80gb 7200rpm
Samsung SH-S182D 18x DVD burner
User avatar
Spazmogen
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1472
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Woodstock, Ontario

Postby eliminator on Fri Feb 28, 2003 1:23 am

Very nice - thanks ! 8)
Wake up ATI :-)
User avatar
eliminator
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1150
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 4:15 am
Location: TheLoneStarState

Postby vinnie97 on Fri Feb 28, 2003 7:44 am

Jase, I meant in the realm of what cdrlabs.com has reviewed thus far. I have not seen (or at least don't remember seeing) a review of the Artec.
vinnie97
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby eliminator on Fri Feb 28, 2003 3:02 pm

Wake up ATI :-)
User avatar
eliminator
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 1150
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 4:15 am
Location: TheLoneStarState

Postby vinnie97 on Sat Mar 01, 2003 12:34 am

Sorry, I should've specified a 52X recorder.

Damn my inspecificity! :oops:
vinnie97
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 8:00 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Previous

Return to CD-R/CD-RW Drives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

All Content is Copyright (c) 2001-2017 CDRLabs Inc.