New Liteon LTR-52327S fware...
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:45 amhttp://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic. ... light=qs0c
Or are you just giving it a one month anniversary?
CDRLabs.com
Your source for storage related news and reviews.
http://www.cdrlabs.com/forums/
New Liteon LTR-52327S fware...
http://www.cdrlabs.com/forums/new-liteon-ltr-52327s-fware-t13678.html
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:45 amPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:29 amCome on now elim, where have you been?
http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic. ... light=qs0c
Or are you just giving it a one month anniversary?
http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic. ... light=qs0c
Or are you just giving it a one month anniversary?
Posted: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:40 pmlol - guess I'm not quite on top of things, eh 
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:19 amWell, we finally get a description of the changes:
"Solve Sub-Channel data reading error problem"
Anyone know if this fixes the sub-channel problems people were seeting with CD Speed?
"Solve Sub-Channel data reading error problem"
Anyone know if this fixes the sub-channel problems people were seeting with CD Speed?
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:32 amI'm not sure about sub-channel data, but it hasn't done anything to change my drives preference towards CDRWs. Still they randomly fail and some media on which the 411 can write at 10x, 52327S can only write at 4x. 
But surely it looks nice in black bezel with 411 in my black case.
But surely it looks nice in black bezel with 411 in my black case.
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:56 amIan wrote:Well, we finally get a description of the changes:
"Solve Sub-Channel data reading error problem"
Anyone know if this fixes the sub-channel problems people were seeting with CD Speed?
Yup.
---------------------------------------------
Subchannel Data
---------------------------------------------
Test 1
Track (01): 01
Relative position (01:05.00): 01:05.00
Absolute position (01:07.00): 01:07.00
Index (5): 5
Test 2
Track (17): 17
Relative position (01:33.00): 01:33.00
Absolute position (33:35.00): 33:35.00
Index (1): 1
Test 3
Track (36): 36
Relative position (00:00.00): 00:00.00
Absolute position (70:02.00): 70:02.00
Index (1): 1
---------------------------------------------
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:01 pm
Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:46 pmBut CD-R burning/writing quality i worst than QS0B 
Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2003 12:33 pmI've noticed that, too; for now, I'm keeping QS0B.
Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:09 amCDRecorder wrote:I've noticed that, too; for now, I'm keeping QS0B.
Ditto.
Posted: Fri Nov 28, 2003 8:00 pmWell, I just blindly upgraded to QS0C...and it's got just about the worst write quality I've ever seen...worse even than my old 48125W (you'd think I'd have learned my lesson by now: don't buy Lite-On!).
Anyone got a link to QS0B?
Anyone got a link to QS0B?