Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which CD or DVD ROM drive is best for high-quality audio r..

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
November 28, 2004 9:52:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I produce radio programs on my PC. This involves ripping tracks from
many, many CD's during a session.

In order to save wear and tear on my CD burner (a PlexWriter if you
must know), I want to get a CD or DVD-ROM drive to rip the discs and
leave the burner for burning. I understand however, that many CD/DVD
ROM drives which are perfect for data are inadequadate for ripping
CDDA (my extraction software says "resync required", which slows
ripping down considerably).

Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?

Thanks in advance.
Anonymous
November 29, 2004 10:18:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com
> I produce radio programs on my PC. This involves ripping tracks from
> many, many CD's during a session.
>
> In order to save wear and tear on my CD burner (a PlexWriter if you
> must know), I want to get a CD or DVD-ROM drive to rip the discs and
> leave the burner for burning. I understand however, that many CD/DVD
> ROM drives which are perfect for data are inadequadate for ripping
> CDDA (my extraction software says "resync required", which slows
> ripping down considerably).

Ripping tends to be a slower process. The most important thing is that your
rips are error-free. Of course they need to happen in a reasonbly timely
fashion. But that will vary, even with the finest drives, depending on the
condition of the discs you are using.

What kind of accuracy and speeds are you observing?

> Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
> successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?

I've found that a wide variety of modern drives from quality providers such
as LiteOn, Asus, Pioneer, and others do error-free ripping at speeds in the
7X to 15X and higher speeds, which I deem adequate for my purposes.
November 29, 2004 11:07:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Plextor and Teac are 2 of the best CD ROMs



Paul <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com...
> I produce radio programs on my PC. This involves ripping tracks from
> many, many CD's during a session.
>
> In order to save wear and tear on my CD burner (a PlexWriter if you
> must know), I want to get a CD or DVD-ROM drive to rip the discs and
> leave the burner for burning. I understand however, that many CD/DVD
> ROM drives which are perfect for data are inadequadate for ripping
> CDDA (my extraction software says "resync required", which slows
> ripping down considerably).
>
> Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
> successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?
>
> Thanks in advance.
Related resources
November 29, 2004 10:44:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message news:<QeSdncE-X-sNjjbcRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com

>
> Ripping tends to be a slower process. (snip)
>
> What kind of accuracy and speeds are you observing?

Usually from 3X to 15X depending upon the media. Commercial CD's tend
to zip along faster than CDR's. Unless a disc is really screwed up,
I've not seen noticeable errors.

>
> > Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
> > successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?
>
> I've found that a wide variety of modern drives from quality providers such
> as LiteOn, Asus, Pioneer, and others do error-free ripping at speeds in the
> 7X to 15X and higher speeds, which I deem adequate for my purposes.

So IOW, you believe that any modern CD ROM drive will do? I had
"resync" problems with a 3-month-old Samsung CD-ROM drive (or is that
the problem right there)?
Anonymous
November 30, 2004 11:50:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 6a862c7.0411291944.6216ef62@posting.google.com
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:<QeSdncE-X-sNjjbcRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
>> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com

>> Ripping tends to be a slower process. (snip)

>> What kind of accuracy and speeds are you observing?

> Usually from 3X to 15X depending upon the media. Commercial CD's tend
> to zip along faster than CDR's.

That's pretty much typical performance.

> Unless a disc is really screwed up, I've not seen noticeable errors.

A good combination of ripping software and drive should provide zero errors
unless a warning or error message is provided.

>>> Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
>>> successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?
>>
>> I've found that a wide variety of modern drives from quality
>> providers such as LiteOn, Asus, Pioneer, and others do error-free
>> ripping at speeds in the 7X to 15X and higher speeds, which I deem
>> adequate for my purposes.

> So IOW, you believe that any modern CD ROM drive will do?

I wouldn't go quite that far, as I still find some cheapies that aren't very
good. Last example was a off-branded drive from a office supply store.

> I had "resync" problems with a 3-month-old Samsung CD-ROM drive (or is
> that the problem right there)?

What ripping software were you using? The standard tools are CDEX and EAC,
both of which are freebies.
Anonymous
December 1, 2004 11:31:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Just to add to the discussion. If you're interested acheiving the best
quality, perhaps what might be considered audiophile quality, then the brand
and model of drive can make a difference; the speed of recording too. My
resources and experience are limited, but I've compared a number of drives
that I've owned in the past and present ( Lite On, Sony, Yamaha, Teac,
Philips, Asus and Plextor).
When I've burned at the slowest speed, usually 3x with Samplitude or
EZCDCreator software, it always sounded better than faster speeds if
comparing the results with headphones and a good headphone amp. The drives
are more or less transparent too. So far the two most transparent and best
sounding drives I have are the Plextor and the Yamaha I used to have, but
was destroyed by a bad switching supply a couple of months ago. The Philips,
the Sony & the Lite On result in a lesser quality, the differences being
clearly audible with good headphones. As to whether a given person can hear
that difference with their particular loudspeaker & audio chain, or that
they even care about such sonic minutia as that existing among the different
CDRWs available, that's another matter. I'd say that unless you're doing
audiophile stuff, then pretty much any drive is fine, though if quality is a
factor, try experimenting with different recording speeds & see what you can
get away with. I don't know about the underlying mechanisms, how to account
for the differences, but I know they exist because I've heard them. There
are probably web sites or others lurking on this newsgroup who could offer
some possible explanastions.

Good luck!

Skler
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 7:11:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 20:31:16 -0600, "Skler" <antcopter@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Just to add to the discussion. If you're interested acheiving the best
>quality, perhaps what might be considered audiophile quality, then the brand
>and model of drive can make a difference; the speed of recording too. My
>resources and experience are limited, but I've compared a number of drives
>that I've owned in the past and present ( Lite On, Sony, Yamaha, Teac,
>Philips, Asus and Plextor).
>When I've burned at the slowest speed, usually 3x with Samplitude or
>EZCDCreator software, it always sounded better than faster speeds if
>comparing the results with headphones and a good headphone amp. The drives
>are more or less transparent too. So far the two most transparent and best
>sounding drives I have are the Plextor and the Yamaha I used to have, but
>was destroyed by a bad switching supply a couple of months ago. The Philips,
>the Sony & the Lite On result in a lesser quality, the differences being
>clearly audible with good headphones. As to whether a given person can hear
>that difference with their particular loudspeaker & audio chain, or that
>they even care about such sonic minutia as that existing among the different
>CDRWs available, that's another matter. I'd say that unless you're doing
>audiophile stuff, then pretty much any drive is fine, though if quality is a
>factor, try experimenting with different recording speeds & see what you can
>get away with. I don't know about the underlying mechanisms, how to account
>for the differences, but I know they exist because I've heard them. There
>are probably web sites or others lurking on this newsgroup who could offer
>some possible explanastions.

I think I agree with you, but I'm not absolutely sure I know what you
said...

The original question was about drives for ripping CDs. I haven't
directly compared drives in that situation, but I have definitely
compared their S/PDIF digital outputs and found them amazingly
different in sound, going into the exact same DAC. My all-time
favorite so far is a cheap Memorex IDE CD play-only drive. Its digital
out sounds way better than several supposedly fancier brands that cost
a _lot_ more. I have no idea if that has any influence on the data
available at the IDE connector, though. Does anyone know if S/PDIF out
is created from the raw data you get on the IDE port, or are both
created from some more primitive form?

Comparing analog audio outputs, the Yamaha (4X?) burner I used to have
was outstanding compared to any other drive before or since. It put my
stereo component CD players to shame! (But even it sounded nowhere
near as good as the Memorex S/PDIF run through my ART DI/O.)

So are you saying that, using one single known high quality playback
drive, you find repeatable differences in sound resulting from the
drive used to burn different CDs? Which of course introduces questions
of incompatibility between the two particular drives as well as the
quality of the burner...

Or are you listening to each burn on the same drive that recorded the
audio, adding differences in playback quality to the possible
differences in recording quality? When you say different recording
speeds make a difference, were you listening to the different CDs on
the same drive that burned them?

So many possible effects!

Loren
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:29:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Skler" <antcopter@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:colupq$d92$1@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu
> Just to add to the discussion. If you're interested acheiving the best
> quality, perhaps what might be considered audiophile quality, then
> the brand and model of drive can make a difference; the speed of
> recording too. My resources and experience are limited, but I've
> compared a number of drives that I've owned in the past and present (
> Lite On, Sony, Yamaha, Teac, Philips, Asus and Plextor).
> When I've burned at the slowest speed, usually 3x with Samplitude or
> EZCDCreator software, it always sounded better than faster speeds if
> comparing the results with headphones and a good headphone amp. The
> drives are more or less transparent too. So far the two most
> transparent and best sounding drives I have are the Plextor and the
> Yamaha I used to have, but was destroyed by a bad switching supply a
> couple of months ago. The Philips, the Sony & the Lite On result in a
> lesser quality, the differences being clearly audible with good
> headphones. As to whether a given person can hear that difference
> with their particular loudspeaker & audio chain, or that they even
> care about such sonic minutia as that existing among the different
> CDRWs available, that's another matter. I'd say that unless you're
> doing audiophile stuff, then pretty much any drive is fine, though if
> quality is a factor, try experimenting with different recording
> speeds & see what you can get away with. I don't know about the
> underlying mechanisms, how to account for the differences, but I know
> they exist because I've heard them. There are probably web sites or
> others lurking on this newsgroup who could offer some possible
> explanastions.

The explanation is pretty straight-forward.

There are some audio CD players that lack the broad media parameter
acceptance characteristics of a good modern optical disc player, and are
very sensitive to what should be trivial differences among CDs. Burned CDs
tend to have far more optical parameter variations (reflectivity, contrast,
and reflective surface smoothness, for example) than regular pressed CDs.
December 3, 2004 9:42:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message news:<N4CdnbKKpuM05zHcRVn-2g@comcast.com>...
> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:D 6a862c7.0411291944.6216ef62@posting.google.com
> > "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> > news:<QeSdncE-X-sNjjbcRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
> >> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com

> >>> Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
> >>> successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?
> >>
> >> I've found that a wide variety of modern drives from quality
> >> providers such as LiteOn, Asus, Pioneer, and others do error-free
> >> ripping at speeds in the 7X to 15X and higher speeds, which I deem
> >> adequate for my purposes.
>
> > So IOW, you believe that any modern CD ROM drive will do?
>
> I wouldn't go quite that far, as I still find some cheapies that aren't very
> good. Last example was a off-branded drive from a office supply store.

Yeah, I avoid those office store generics myself.

>
> > I had "resync" problems with a 3-month-old Samsung CD-ROM drive (or is
> > that the problem right there)?
>
> What ripping software were you using? The standard tools are CDEX and EAC,
> both of which are freebies.

Hmm, I'll hafta check those software packages out. Where do you get
them? I've been using Easy CD Creator 5 on an older machine and Adobe
Audition on my newer one.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 1:53:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:D 6a862c7.0412030642.42c8ebd2@posting.google.com
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:<N4CdnbKKpuM05zHcRVn-2g@comcast.com>...
>> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:D 6a862c7.0411291944.6216ef62@posting.google.com
>>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
>>> news:<QeSdncE-X-sNjjbcRVn-3Q@comcast.com>...
>>>> "Paul" <tungarbulb@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:D 6a862c7.0411281852.a3d14f6@posting.google.com
>
>>>>> Which brands and models of drives have people in this forum used
>>>>> successfully for ripping CDDA? Where can you get them?
>>>>
>>>> I've found that a wide variety of modern drives from quality
>>>> providers such as LiteOn, Asus, Pioneer, and others do error-free
>>>> ripping at speeds in the 7X to 15X and higher speeds, which I deem
>>>> adequate for my purposes.
>>
>>> So IOW, you believe that any modern CD ROM drive will do?
>>
>> I wouldn't go quite that far, as I still find some cheapies that
>> aren't very good. Last example was a off-branded drive from a
>> office supply store.
>
> Yeah, I avoid those office store generics myself.
>
>>
>>> I had "resync" problems with a 3-month-old Samsung CD-ROM drive
>>> (or is that the problem right there)?
>>
>> What ripping software were you using? The standard tools are CDEX
>> and EAC, both of which are freebies.
>
> Hmm, I'll hafta check those software packages out. Where do you get
> them?

Search google - the author's web sites are typically at the top of the list.

>I've been using Easy CD Creator 5 on an older machine

Best thing I can say is that EZ 5 was an improvement over EZ 4.

>and Adobe Audition on my newer one.

I use that ripper a fair amount with newer Liteon DVD-R drives.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 9:10:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:A_adnYyraLVjFi3cRVn-qQ@comcast.com...

I can unhesitatantly recommend Hewlett-Packard optical disk drives. ;) 

Glenn D.
Anonymous
December 5, 2004 4:38:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 03/12/2004 00:29:05, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

>The explanation is pretty straight-forward.
>
>There are some audio CD players that lack the broad media parameter
>acceptance characteristics of a good modern optical disc player,

A digit is a digit, no?

So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to perform
100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?

--
m.
Anonymous
December 5, 2004 4:38:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Martin Tillman <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to perform
>100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?

No CD players can perform 100% error correction. In part, this is because
the CD player is a streaming device... if there is a transient media
error, it can't go back and reread.

If you are ripping with a CD-ROM drive, you can go back and reread a block
over again if it's not good. But CD players can't do that because they have
to work in realtime with minimal buffering.

So, there is a lot of interpolation that goes on. If you have a couple hundred
uncorrectable errors on a CD, you won't notice the interpolation. But if you
have a couple thousand, you may notice some degradation. And that isn't
unusual for a CD-R.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 7:25:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Martin Tillman" <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:9bEsd.6229150$6p.989508@news.easynews.com
> On 03/12/2004 00:29:05, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
>
>> The explanation is pretty straight-forward.
>>
>> There are some audio CD players that lack the broad media parameter
>> acceptance characteristics of a good modern optical disc player,
>
> A digit is a digit, no?


Once it is properly read...



> So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to
> perform 100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?

That would clearly be the case.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 9:13:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 05/12/2004 14:34:39, wrote:
>Martin Tillman <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to perform
>>100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?
>
>No CD players can perform 100% error correction. In part, this is because
>the CD player is a streaming device... if there is a transient media
>error, it can't go back and reread.

That would surely depend on the severity of the error.


>So, there is a lot of interpolation that goes on.

Again, that surely 'depends'.


A while ago I ripped a commercial CD using CoolEdit (not EAC, or CDex in
paranoia mode) and 'recorded' the same CD into CoolEdit via TOSlink using a
mid price CD player of about 15 years vintage. I was extremely surprised
(possibly due to ignorance) to find the two files were identical.

--
m.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 9:13:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 06/12/2004 09:25:03, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
>"Martin Tillman" <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message

>> So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to
>> perform 100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?
>
>That would clearly be the case.

Excellent. Glad to get confirmation neither of us are losing our marbles
yet.



--
m.
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 11:23:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Martin Tillman" <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:VuHtd.4325873$yk.651108@news.easynews.com
> On 06/12/2004 09:25:03, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
>> "Martin Tillman" <m_tillman@NOSPAMdsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
>
>>> So, are you merely saying that some audio CD players are unable to
>>> perform 100% error correction on some 'modern' CD-R/RWs?
>>
>> That would clearly be the case.
>
> Excellent. Glad to get confirmation neither of us are losing our
> marbles yet.

At least not *those* marbles! ;-)
!