CDRLabs.com

Like I said befor It was a nice fairtytale of NEC that there chipset/drives could not do it and some people actually fell for it.

I'm glad that there will support and I hope it does things better as the Pioneer drives which seem to give questionable results.

RJW wrote:I'm glad that there will support and I hope it does things better as the Pioneer drives which seem to give questionable results.

Me too. The Pioneer tests have been pretty worthless so far IMO.

The BenQ 1620 does great testing also and includes jitter too for those out there that have been under a rock for a while

I know the BENQ 1620 (PRO) and it's philips brother/sister are nice drives.
+ Good quality burns and fast.
+ Support that seems to care (or at least they keep up the appearnce )
+ Good techniques - WOPC /support of more data in ADIP.
+ TOOLS

However some people want something different for some reason.
NEC is a bit better on -R still. However the latest firmware of Benq did improve quality but did sacrifice speed which I don't find a problem but some folks do. Let's see how the cards are reshuffled when the new firmwares are released.

Starting to salivate now:
http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p ... tcount=641

still waiting for more info... I'm still not impressed, but we'll see how it turns out.

New version is available. Not that it does us much good without the new firmwares.

http://cdspeed2000.com/files/NeroCDSpeed_375.zip

I think NEC support is indeed good news.

I have missed the Pioneer "lousy results" discussion.

What models have people tested and why are the test results not good?

regards,
halcyon

PS I just bought DVR-109 on my trip to Tokyo, just because it was so cheap (compared to where I live).

I personally tested my Pioneer 106D. I think the 107D was also tested.
What I experienced was that 10 measurements of the same disc can give you a great variance in results. Because of the total lack in consistancy I decided to spend that I probally can spend my time better.