Home News Reviews Forums Shop


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

Burn baby burn!

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

Postby weaponx21 on Tue Sep 09, 2003 1:31 am

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
weaponx21
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 1:18 am

Postby CDRecorder on Tue Sep 09, 2003 11:31 am

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.
CDRecorder
CD-RW Recorder
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 9:28 pm

Postby TidusTheCoolest on Tue Sep 09, 2003 3:29 pm

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 .
AMD Athlon XP 3200+ , 512 PC2700 DDRAM , ATI Radeon 9600 Pro , 160 GB 7200 rpm 8 mb cache HDD
User avatar
TidusTheCoolest
CD-RW Thug
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 11:51 pm
Location: Japan

Postby weaponx21 on Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:32 am

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
weaponx21
Buffer Underrun
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 1:18 am

Postby CDRecorder on Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:37 am

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. :wink:
CDRecorder
CD-RW Recorder
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 9:28 pm

Postby rdgrimes on Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:53 am

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.
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby Halc on Fri Sep 12, 2003 3:57 am

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.
User avatar
Halc
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2002 9:13 am

Postby aviationwiz on Fri Sep 12, 2003 7:41 am

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.
User avatar
aviationwiz
Plextor Fan(atic)
 
Posts: 4069
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2002 2:55 am
Location: Home of the Red Tail

Postby rdgrimes on Fri Sep 12, 2003 9:12 am

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

:lol: All known evidence is to the contrary, so this statement should be illustrated with some test results.
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby Ian on Fri Sep 12, 2003 11:02 am

Yeah, what rdgrimes said.
"Blu-ray is just a bag of hurt." - Steve Jobs
User avatar
Ian
Grand Poobah
 
Posts: 14882
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 2:34 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Postby Harrier on Fri Sep 12, 2003 11:37 am

Seconded

Image

Image
Harrier
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 11:25 am

Postby rdgrimes on Fri Sep 12, 2003 12:38 pm

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.

Image

Image
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby Harrier on Fri Sep 12, 2003 12:54 pm

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.
Harrier
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 11:25 am

Postby rdgrimes on Fri Sep 12, 2003 1:24 pm

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:

Image

Image

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.
Last edited by rdgrimes on Sat Sep 13, 2003 10:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby Harrier on Fri Sep 12, 2003 7:55 pm

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.
Harrier
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 11:25 am

Postby rdgrimes on Fri Sep 12, 2003 8:41 pm

They are the same discs, both burned on the 7S. The times in Kprobe are misleading. Both the same 700MB image file.
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby CDRecorder on Sat Sep 13, 2003 1:23 am

What brand was the TY disc, and how fast did you burn it, Rdgrimes? That's an incredibly good result! :o
CDRecorder
CD-RW Recorder
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 9:28 pm

Postby rdgrimes on Sat Sep 13, 2003 9:36 am

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
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby CDRecorder on Sat Sep 13, 2003 4:06 pm

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.
CDRecorder
CD-RW Recorder
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 9:28 pm

Postby rdgrimes on Sat Sep 13, 2003 4:10 pm

It's Fuji 48x.
rdgrimes
CD-RW Player
 
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:27 pm
Location: New Mexico, USA

Postby CDRecorder on Sat Sep 13, 2003 4:16 pm

Thanks! :D
CDRecorder
CD-RW Recorder
 
Posts: 2335
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 9:28 pm


Return to CD-R/CD-RW Drives

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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