Future burners?

The next developments will be mostly in Serial-ATA burners and increased RW
speeds. A larger buffer is pretty useless, 2MB is plenty with current
under-run protections. The LiteOn 52246S produces equal or higher quality
burns than the Plextor, and does it on a wider range of media and at higher
speeds. Most of the "higher-quality" claims made by Plextor are due to lower
burn speeds and lower read speeds, except on a very narrow range of media.
The new LiteOn 52327S is producing blazing burn speeds on almost any media,
with very respectable quality. Any of the current crop of 52x burners are
ripping audio very fast.


"Richard Dower" wrote in message
...
What specs can one expect from burners in the next 6-12 months?

Do any burners come equiped with a 16MB buffer?, what about 56x read and
write?

What would be considered the "ultimate" burner on the market right now, in
terms of audio ripping and all round burn quality?

I was impressed by the specs of the Plextor Premium, the 8MB was a must
for
me....but i am just wondering if other products have better specs.

Money is not an object for me...quality is.

__________________________________________________ ________________ Richard
Dower ICQ#: 114343804 Current ICQ status: + More ways to contact me
__________________________________________________ ________________

"Dan G" wrote in message ...
The next developments will be mostly in Serial-ATA burners and increased
RW
speeds. A larger buffer is pretty useless, 2MB is plenty with current
under-run protections. The LiteOn 52246S produces equal or higher quality
burns than the Plextor, and does it on a wider range of media and at
higher
speeds. Most of the "higher-quality" claims made by Plextor are due to
lower
burn speeds and lower read speeds, except on a very narrow range of media.
The new LiteOn 52327S is producing blazing burn speeds on almost any
media,
with very respectable quality. Any of the current crop of 52x burners are
ripping audio very fast.

Indeed...then the question becomes, should one burn at such excessive
speeds?

I bought my first burner in 1999 and i have always used 4x, even now i have
limited my burner to no more then 8x, and i can burn alot faster.

For my taste i am not so concerned with how fast it can extract audio from a
CD, or how fast it can write. I am more concerned about getting an accurate
and exact copy of a CD, quality.

On that note...what do you guys burn at?

"Rick Pali" wrote in message
able.rogers.com...
"Richard Dower" wrote:

On that note...what do you guys burn at?

I usually burn at 8x or 16x. My burner will do 44x but I don't think I've
ever tried it. :-)

I'm sure modern drives could handle the higher speed, burn sucessfully...but
how would that translate into the quality of the recorded CDR though.

In message , Richard Dower
writes

"Rick Pali" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
"Richard Dower" wrote:

On that note...what do you guys burn at?

I usually burn at 8x or 16x. My burner will do 44x but I don't think I've
ever tried it. :-)

I'm sure modern drives could handle the higher speed, burn sucessfully...but
how would that translate into the quality of the recorded CDR though.

The current speed limit is dictated by the strength of the CDs; if you
increase their angular velocity much more, they shatter on a regular
basis.
--
William Leech May the Vortex be with you:
http://www.lasersailing.com/vortex/vortex.asp
CD-R resources: Moderated List: http://www.cdrcentral.co.uk
The Primer: http://www.mrichter.com The FAQ: http://www.cdrfaq.org

Indeed...then the question becomes, should one burn at such excessive
speeds?

No, I think the question is...why not? It's relatively easy to test the
quality of your burns with various error-rate scanners. The fact is that
with current high-speed media and high-speed drives, error rates are much
higher on discs that are burned below 24x. Use of the term "excessive" is
just silly given the state of the art of error scanning with many current
drives. sure, if you're going to use el-cheapo media from CMC, slower speeds
are advisable. but I can show you error scans on good quality media burned
at 48x that are lower than manufactured CD's.

If you use good media, you can get extremely good error rates even at the
highest speeds. With discs like the newer Taiyo Yuden DX-dye or Ritek JS-dye
discs on Lite-On 52X burners, you can get C1 error rates from a 52X burn
that reach no more than 10 at maximum (as measured by the Lite-On KProbe
utility), which is better than many pressed CDs.

--
Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/


"Richard Dower" wrote in message
...

"Dan G" wrote in message
...
The next developments will be mostly in Serial-ATA burners and increased
RW
speeds. A larger buffer is pretty useless, 2MB is plenty with current
under-run protections. The LiteOn 52246S produces equal or higher
quality
burns than the Plextor, and does it on a wider range of media and at
higher
speeds. Most of the "higher-quality" claims made by Plextor are due to
lower
burn speeds and lower read speeds, except on a very narrow range of
media.
The new LiteOn 52327S is producing blazing burn speeds on almost any
media,
with very respectable quality. Any of the current crop of 52x burners
are
ripping audio very fast.

Indeed...then the question becomes, should one burn at such excessive
speeds?

I bought my first burner in 1999 and i have always used 4x, even now i
have
limited my burner to no more then 8x, and i can burn alot faster.

For my taste i am not so concerned with how fast it can extract audio from
a
CD, or how fast it can write. I am more concerned about getting an
accurate
and exact copy of a CD, quality.

On that note...what do you guys burn at?

"Robert Hancock" wrote:
If you use good media, you can get extremely good error rates even at the
highest speeds. With discs like the newer Taiyo Yuden DX-dye or Ritek
JS-dye
discs on Lite-On 52X burners, you can get C1 error rates from a 52X burn
that reach no more than 10 at maximum (as measured by the Lite-On KProbe
utility), which is better than many pressed CDs.


Excuse the newbie question... Are those errors code-correctable, or
are they permanent errors in the data when it is read out? IOW, do
such errors render data archiving inadvisable?

=Roddy=