CDRLabs.com

Still have a choice problem.
This is what I understood from this forum and many other reviews:
Lite-On looks very good, but has many error in audio ripping (Is it true for low speed extracting?) and noisly.
ASUS also gvery good, but has many errors in writing.

Can I burn 800Mb or 900Mb CD's (I got 100 of them at my birthday ) ?
What does the last letter in the product mean (CRW-5224A, LTR-52246S)?

Thanks in advance.

Errors in audio ripping? Says who?

Hey can you send me some of that 900mb media to test?

I don't know what to tell you about the DAE [ripping]. I'm experimenting with Feurio, Exact Audio Copy and Nero for DAE. I let Feurio extract audio at 21x [?] b/c that's what it states gives no errors.

I still need to run some more tests b/c Feurio didn't test DAE at other speeds on my 52x LiteON. It's very quiet at low speed extraction.

Anyone know how I can shorten the testing in Feurio? It takes a long time and I only need to run specific tests, not all of them.

I'm very happy with the Lite On 52x.
See this thead: http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=7271

if the picture links are broken, they will be repaired shortly.

Audio extraction is slow with EAC because of my settings. EAC samples each section several times to get the 100% quality. I want quality, not speed when dealing with audio.

I also have a spindle of 99 minute discs for testing...

My 99 minute (870mb) disc results will be ready in about 2 weeks time.

Go with the Lite-On. You won't be disappointed. It's on sale this week at Compusa for $49.99. It's under the BUSlink brand, but its OEM Lite-On and uses Lite-On firmware too and is a Lite-On drive right out of the box.
Check it out here:
http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=7516

I'm in the same situation.
The drives cost almost the same here.

My main reason for choosing is Asus cdrw writing in P-cav unlike the lite-on (CAV).

It saves a minute or more..

Spazmogen, how slow is the AUDIO ripping when using AEC?

I'm thinking it was in the 3.4x area. But I'm running secure mode in EAC.
Slow, but very accurate. Read more about secure mode extraction:

http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/eac3.html

Here's my typical settings in EAC:

EAC extraction logfile from 9. November 2002, 17:26 for CD
Jimmy Buffett / Far Side of the World

Used drive : LITE-ON LTR-52246S Adapter: 0 ID: 1
Read mode : Secure with NO C2, accurate stream, NO disable cache
Combined read/write offset correction : 0
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out : No

Used output format : C:\LAME mp3\LAME.EXE (LAME MP3 Encoder)
320 kBit/s

Other options :
Fill up missing offset samples with silence : Yes
Delete leading and trailing silent blocks : No
Normalize to 99
Installed external ASPI interface


Track 1
Filename C:\My Documents\Jimmy Buffett\ Far Side of the World\(01) Blue Guitar.wav

Peak level 98.8 %
Track quality 100.0 %
Copy CRC 12717508
Copy OK



The worst quality I've had was 99.8%.

So there are NO real errors with the Lite On 52x.

When I get back from Vacation, I'll have to try encoding with Music Match Juke Box just for the hell of it.

Harrier wrote:I'm in the same situation.
The drives cost almost the same here.

My main reason for choosing is Asus cdrw writing in P-cav unlike the lite-on (CAV).

It saves a minute or more..

The Asus uses P-CAV at 52x Cd-R??? or does it use P-CAV for 24x RW??
I would go with Lite-On. Audio ripping seems to be slow but still I don't think Asus will be able to beat the price of the BusLink.

Here, these should answer some of your questions.

Looks like it didn't burn either one using P-CAV. Then what is Harrier saying about Asus having the advantage???
By the way Ian, it looks like you've been working hard to get the 52x reviews in. (screenshots of Asus here, and Memorex 52x preview ). Just wondering, when can we expect a full review of the faster burners?

coolestnitish wrote:Looks like it didn't burn either one using P-CAV. Then what is Harrier saying about Asus having the advantage???

This may be pushing things, but I see just a little bit of a linear ramp-up at the beginning of the rewriting curve before it flattens out, making it P-CAV. Okay, if that stretches your credulity beyond its breaking point, then just call it CLV. That's even better. 24x CLV is better than 24x P-CAV is better than 24x CAV. Compare the average speed of the ASUS shown above to the average speed of the 24x CAV TDK veloCd 48x24x48 (LiteOn) drive as shown in Ian's review:



cfitz

coolestnitish wrote:Looks like it didn't burn either one using P-CAV. Then what is Harrier saying about Asus having the advantage???
By the way Ian, it looks like you've been working hard to get the 52x reviews in. (screenshots of Asus here, and Memorex 52x preview ). Just wondering, when can we expect a full review of the faster burners?

They're coming. I had to finish up some of the 48x writer reviews first.

cfitz, thanks for clearing that up. Now its clear to me that the Asus has the advantage there.
Ian, take your time on the reviews (I wasn't suggesting you should hurry up), because when they do come out, they are the most detailed and organized reviews.

Coolestnitish, I didn't say that Asus have the advantage.
Just said that they top Lite-on rewriting time. That's all.


Especially for Coolestnitish: http://www.asus.com/optical/crw-5224a/specification.htm

BTW, i don't think Asus is better in the total view of it.. And who said that they are slow in Audio extraction?

What turns me off about Asus is their writing quality. I hope they have fix the problem with their 52x. Their 48X is really not that great when it comes to writing quality. Take a look at Ian's review on the Asus 48x16x48....
It looks like Ian have the drive in test right now, so, any comment on its writing quality?

Min

Not yet.