My new Burners

[dmanshead]

I recently bought 2 new burners a NEC ND 3550A and a BenQ DQ60. After some trials I have to say that The BenQ does a better job burning than the NEC. I was surprised at these results, not to take anything away from the NEC burner but the BenQ is AWESOME! It matters not on Media Quality, but on poorer quality media the difference is even greater.

[Chewy]

many have come to that same conclusion over at cdfreaks, but media inconsistency makes it hard to be conclusive, the dq60 chipset is just coming into it's own, first firmware was horrible

another factor, your liteon might just like that benq's burns

that's why transfer tests and scans with other drives are useful

[dmanshead]

Well I guess we'll have to use the nec to scan these as well to get a good sample, wish I had the other BenQ I want, but soon enough.
Here they are:
So is 1ecc or 8 ecc better to scan with?

[dmanshead]

next up the dual layers, these ought to be interesting.....

[dmanshead]

Now when it comes to doing dual layer burns I think I have to give the edge to the NEC, but this doesn't take into account that the media is never consistent, if only it was....

[Chewy]

but this doesn't take into account that the media is never consistent

that's why testing calibration wise needs to be done with as good a media as possible, you are starting to get a very good handle on it tho.

which scanner is the best reader?(this is a test)

[dmanshead]

Out of my two? Just by expirience I would say the NEC.

[Chewy]

The liteon, that's why it's scans look better, it's correcting errors in reading the burn, the nec is picky and shows or exaggerates the errors, depending upon your point of view. The benq's are less picky than the nec's, why they are my favorite scanners, better readers too. To test put a bad disk in and see which drive shows the best trt.

I want a scanner that shows a bad disk and a good one too.

When a disk looks really bad in your liteon, you know it's truly bad.

[dmanshead]

Cool learning more and more everyday. Now if I scan a disc and it fixes glitches, then scan in a different scanner will it read better? here's some more test burns:
Hard to say which has the edge with this one due to the spike at the end of disc burned in the DQ60

[dmanshead]

Here's a ritek test. I think both burners would rather not see this media, so I'll call that one even. I still think the BenQ did a better job

[dmanshead]

This is probably the last set of tests I run, not because there isn't enough info, just very time consuming. I give the benq an edge in burning but for overall versatility the nec has an advantage. IMHO i bought both of these burners and am pleased with them, I don't think I made a bad buy with either one.
There are too many variables to give conclusive results. I ordered 80 conductor 40 pin cables for both sets of optical drives, may improve performance there. The Benq is on a newer and faster system, and that may or may not give it an advantage. It was fun and i learned something along the way which was my main point.
Firmware is still relatively new on both burners and we may yet see improvements as they develop the firmware. I would reccommend both of these burners if anyone were to ask.
As for this Sony media I think 16 is just too fast to try to burn it.

[Chewy]

liteon likes the benq burns, the nec does not, the nec likes it's own burns

kind of interesting tho

[dmanshead]

Yes it is, and in wondering why the 16x burn went so haywire i did another test with the benq, need to do scans, but for the moment here's the results(may do a similar test with the nec)
No sense scanning with the NEC we know it won't like the burn.

[dmanshead]

here's another burn with the NEC at 16x