Testing the Benq 1650 and more

[geno888]

Does that mean my NEC may scan a disc quality of 95, when in fact there are suspect areas on that disc?

I use my NEC 3550 for all my CD SPEED scans and I trust the quality of the disc based on the results I get. I have noticed that good media produces much better results then poor media. But, I want my scans to be accurate.

NEC drives are really variable. Scans done with NEC drives are often unreliable if compared with liteon, benq or plextor scans.

If you want a reliable scanner you must buy a benq or a liteon. If you can afford it also a plextor drive is a good choice.

[Dan]

Thanks for your info geno!

I am very pleased with my NEC and LG, but I want quality scans, and the BenQ seems to be what I need.

[mill]

What would you pair the 1650 with a plex740 or a nec 3550

[geno888]

You're welcome

Benq is also a good burner... ask to Chewy

[geno888]

What would you pair the 1650 with a plex740 or a nec 3550

plextor 740 is a rebadged benq 1640. You can save money buying a benq directly. Some people at cdfreaks crossflashed their 740 to the original 1640 because benq firmwares are better than plextor ones.

Sorry, I have no info on NEC 3550

[Dan]

I would use a BenQ with my 3550

[Chewy]

nec 3550 for good burns even on iffy media and fast ripping of good quality disks, benq too slow for new dl disks
benq for scanning, good burns on good media and ripping problem disks

the nec 3550 can show good scans on good burns, it reorts bad areas differently, but that's not bad.
Find the best scan speed of your nec 3550-4551 by using the best result from a quality burn. If 12x or 4x or 8x is best, use it.

Not so sure about plextor being the best scanner tho.

[geno888]

For what I know plextor are the most accurate scanners. But I admit that I have no direct experience on this.

[Dan]

Thanks Chewy.
Good point about ripping problem disks with the BenQ.

I find I usually get a good scan using good media with the NEC 3550. I normally scan at 8x, but I do try different speeds just to compare. When using poor media to burn, the scan results are much different at any scan speed.

[Dan]

I have no reason to get a plextor personally.

[geno888]

I have no reason to get a plextor personally.

I am a cdfreakers , and I'm really curious to test a couple of plextor drives, but I can't afford them

[Dan]

LOL. That is one reason I wouldn't buy one $$$$$$.

[Chewy]

I have used 2, a 708 and a 712, a buddy bought them with a company expense account, one was 220 the other 200$ when they firsat came out,
they were both pain in the A$$'s with late firmware support for new media,
my 150$ pioneer 105 burned only -R media but never made a coaster.
When nec released the 3520 for less than 50$ I thought I had died and gone to heaven.

[geno888]

From my readings on cdfreaks, both 708 ans 712 was really good drives. starting from 716, plextor quality started to lowering.

Latest drives (755 and 760) are still to be evaluated in CDF.

I'm planning to buy a 1650, but I need also to buy some media

[Dan]

That is way too expensive when you can get so many great burners for $50 or so. I know when I got my NEC I felt the same chewy, so happy with it and such a good price!