Lite-On LTR-52327S or Plextor PX-W4824TA

[weaponx21]

My older TDK for some reason stopped buring audio discs, so Im in the market for a new drive. I've read the reviews for both of these drives, and even though they are different speed drives, the main thing im concerned with the write quality. I know plextor is known for theirs, but I wanted to see some data backing that up, and I heard that Lite on was putting out some quality drives, so in comparing the two and reading posts about them for several hours, Im finding alot of conflicting information. Now it seems that both drives have their ups and downs, and I was really considering the Lite-on until i came across several posts about problems resulting in lots of c2 errors when tested. Also, someone mentioned the Lite-on having trouble reading either the lead-in or lead out data. I like the lite on cus its a bit faster and cheaper, but if its gonna be spitting out more discs with errors on them than the Plextor, id rather spend the money on the Plextor. Can anyone help me shed some light on this? thanks

-Mike

[CDRecorder]

There some data regarding the Plextor's write quality in the Plextor PlexWriter PX-W4824TA 48/24/48 CD-RW Review, and you can find info regarding the Lite-On's writing quality in the Lite-On LTR-52327S 52/32/52 CD-RW Review and in my post here.

Also, the Lite-On drive may have some trouble reading from lead-in and lead-out, but I really don't know as I've never needed or tested this capability.

I would recommend the Lite-On, because it's fast, inexpensive, and good quality.

[TidusTheCoolest]

I have owned a Lite-On LTR-52327S for about 2-3 months now and I have no problem with it . Rock solid burning result even when I'm burning at the highest speed .

[weaponx21]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the help. Anyone else want to weight in on this one? After reading the two reviews on here, it seems like the drives are neck and neck, although one problem i had was that since the plextor was reviewed last year, and the lite-on recently this year, the testing software was quite different. Again, im concerned with overall quality and absolute minimal errors on burns. My friends and co-workers suggest the Plextor, but I kinda like the lite-on. Decisions, decisions! Thanks again


-MK

[CDRecorder]

I think that the main question now is whether or not you want the extra features offered by the Plextor. If you want those features, buy the Plextor; otherwise, buy the Lite-On.

My personal choice was the Lite-On, as you can see in my signature.

[rdgrimes]

The Plex will write at lower speeds on many common CDR's, in general will produce slightly lower quality discs at very high speeds. (higher error rates based on comparisons of Plextools scans vs Kprobe scans).
For the highest available burn quality on the widest range of media, and highest actual burn speeds, the LiteOn is a clear winner. Plex, on the other hand has a lot of included tools and gizmos that some people seem to want, but most people will not use. If you're into low speed burning of audio, the Plex is a better choice. There are a lot of free tools available for the LiteOn that no other drive offers, like Kprobe, LTNFlash, and SmartBurn media checker. These functions are also available in Plextools, but are not "free" if you factor the difference in price between the drives.

[Halc]

I totally agree with rdgrimes comments, I have both Plextor (Premium) and LiteOn LTR-52327S (and 48236S).

Unless you want to copy a lot of copy protected audio CDs or need specific Plextools features, then I think the LiteOn is hard to beat for the price.

regards,
Halcyon

PS SmartBurn media checker works on my Plextor Premium for CD+r/CDRW discs, at least to the extent that I've tried it.

[aviationwiz]

The slightly lower burn speed on the Premium can hardly be noticed, because it only clocks down at the end of the disk. The quality on the Premium is by far better than that of the LTR-52327S.

[rdgrimes]

The quality on the Premium is by far better than that of the LTR-52327S.

All known evidence is to the contrary, so this statement should be illustrated with some test results.

[Ian]

Yeah, what rdgrimes said.

[Harrier]

Seconded

[rdgrimes]

In fairness, we all know that nothing beats the 52246S for read/write quality, and the OP did ask about the 52327S. Here's 2 recent scans, TY 48x and Verbatim DLP 48x, both were burned at 52x, 700MB, with no slow-downs, completed in about 2:35 in Nero. Both are scanned at 52x.

[Harrier]

Actually, no one can be sure that the LTR52246S is in fact better than the LTR52327S. Only thing is that the LTR52327S inputs higher counts of C1 errors which prods everyone to deduct that the LTR52327S is of lesser to the LTR52246S when it comes down to writing qualities.

But think about it this way: we don't really know that that the LTR52246S is better just because it gives lower C1 counts. It might as well be it's inferiority in comparison to the LTR52327S. It doesn't subject to the true status of the disc writing quality (because we don't know what it is precisely).

Bottom line is that we can't judge both drives to the better nor the worse wings when it comes down to writing qualities.

[rdgrimes]

Having played with both the 6S and 7S, I feel pretty comfortable that both are reporting errors more or less the same way. What is true is that every drive has it's preferences for what media (and burn speed) it "likes" to read. Here's an illustration, the same 2 discs that were burned in the 7S, now scanned in the 6S:





As you can see, the 6S reads the Verbatim disc in much the same way as the 7S, but the TY is very different. thus, the 6S prefers reading TY media. But the 7S treats them the same way. If the error reporting was different in the 2 drives, both discs would vary by the same amount when scanned in the different drives.

[Harrier]

Were both cdrs burned by the LTR52327S?

These are not the same cdrs, are they?
I see that the first TY scanned by the LTR52327S doesn't match the length of the one scanned by the LTR52246S.
Same with the Verbatims.
Though it is noticable that both cds scanned by the LTR52246S have the same image burned on them.

[rdgrimes]

They are the same discs, both burned on the 7S. The times in Kprobe are misleading. Both the same 700MB image file.

[CDRecorder]

What brand was the TY disc, and how fast did you burn it, Rdgrimes? That's an incredibly good result!

[rdgrimes]

Here's 2 recent scans, TY 48x and Verbatim DLP 48x, both were burned at 52x, 700MB, with no slow-downs, completed in about 2:35 in Nero. Both are scanned at 52x

[CDRecorder]

Oops, I didn't see how fast you burned it before. My mistake.

I was wondering if the TY disc was Fuji or some other brand, when I asked what brand it was, though.

[rdgrimes]

It's Fuji 48x.

[CDRecorder]

Thanks!