CDRInfo Forum CDRInfo Forum

Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)?   Logged in as: Guest
Viewers: 1382 You can click here to see Today's Posts | Most Active Topics | Posts Since Last Visit
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Optical Storage] >> CD, DVD, BD Drives >> Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/13/2003 1:55:49 PM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
A couple of days ago, I've purchased (for my new upcoming today PC) the Sony CRX215E1 48x24x48, then upgraded it to CRX220E1 52x24x52. I am not only pleasantly surprised of its performance but even confused if it is doing better than the Yamaha F1ZE that I like much, too.
The main surprise is that it's quiet even at 52x: I'm even not positive if its noise is greater that the F1's at 44x; at least, my PC case's fan is noisier that both of the burners.
I've read somewhere in reviews that at 52x the Litie sounds like a plane's turbine. It's definitely not the case with my Sony CDRW. Well, maybe it depends on the firmware...
The front lid is armored and triple thicker than the Yama's one. Probably it's a good thing but a CDR blowing up has not happen to me yet.
The writing ability (and quality, as far as I can see for now) of the Sony CRX220E1 is the same as the Yama F1's one. The latter one, though, creates a bad sector at the very end of the CDR when writing from data stored on a hard disk (while not when copying from a CD or writing from an image). I've never noticed any actual error because of this but nonetheless... I believe this is associted with the Yama's inability to read Lead-Out (the Sony=Lite-On can do it).
Also, the offset of the Lead-In is much less (good!) for Sony than for the Yama.
I've read, while not tested myself, that the Sony uses 100% correct EMF encoding while the Yama F1ZE does not. Well, I'm not a guru in CD recording, nor a melloman, so do feel that the Disk Tattoo is more important (while not that vital itself). Nonetheless...
Finally, the CRX220E1 is able to always retrieve ATIP info from a finalised CDR while the F1ZE usually can't.
The only advantage of the Yamaha F1 that I've noticed is the better ability to read scratched CDs. However, my 8x/40x DVD/CD reader Hitachi GD-5000 reads them better than any of the burners, so that this feature is not that important to me. It also is capable of reporting the damaged sectors - like the Sony but not the Yama. I don't know yet about my upcoming with the new PC 16x/40x DVD/CD reader but even if it's doing worse that the Sony, I can swap the DVD readers.
In end of the ends, it looks to me that the only advantage of the F1-ZE is the DT@2. Well, I'd easily sacrifice this...
The writing software I've used are Nero 5.10.0 and B's Gold 5.20 - both are the latest versions (and support DT@2).
Does anyone know about comparison between the two burners, please?
Post #: 1
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/13/2003 10:22:57 PM   
Bagbug

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 1/13/2003
From:
Status: offline
"The writing ability (and quality, as far as I can see for now) of the Sony CRX220E1 is the same as the Yama F1's one"

I dont know how you can make 30% less jitter with your Sony !! ??

The Yamaha is not for everyone. If you dont need the Audio Master Quality Recording , you should stick with the Sony. But if you need the best audio recording drive on the market, stick with the F1 drive.


(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 2
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 2:12:48 AM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
Hi Bagbug,
here are my considerations on the Advanced Audio Recording by F1.
1. First off, I'm not a guru in CD recording at all and in the audio one in particular. Nor am I able to perform the thorough testings found on some dedicated WEB sites like CDR-Info. Thus, for more detailed and reliable info we should reference those.
2. Yet, I've never tried the Yamaha's AAR while is quite satisfied with its conventional writing the audio (and data as well) CDs. Same, am I happy with the audio writing quality, as my ears can hear it, of my Sony CRX220E1 drive.
3. As up to date, I do not have next to exhaustive info even on my F1 drive, that I have for a couple of months only, not to mention the new arrival of the Sony's one.
4. From what I've learned when reading articles about Advanced Audio Recording by Yamaha (it is not the F1 drive only), it does not actually performs that well as was intially aimed to. Even though tests' data do report significant jitter correction, it is hardly catchable by a human year, mine - in particular, I'm sure. More over, some sites reported better audio quality through Plextor CDRW drives than that of the F1's with AAR in forth.
5. I've not seen cheerful reports on Lite-On drives' audio writing abilities but never heard of something outrageous either. Meaning, it is quite satisfactory. And my experience of writing just a couple of audio CDRs with the Sony drive, as up to date, does confirm this.
6. Advanced Audio Recording creates extra long audio tracks. This means, you are not able to copy, with AAR, vast majority of available audio CDs. An alternative (splitting one given CD into two) is hardly what you'd want; at least - not me. In other words, the AAR is mostly suitable, if it is at all, for an Audio Studio rather than a home user.
7. Finally, I'm really not a meloman to get in a hurry for a perfect audio CD. A good one is good enough both for me and my wife. We're happy with what we can get from the Sony.
8. As the conclusion, I cannot take a reference to the AAR (30% jitter correction!) that easy. But maybe you mean something else?


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 3
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 4:19:22 AM   
Bagbug

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 1/13/2003
From:
Status: offline
"Advanced Audio Recording creates extra long audio tracks. This means, you are not able to copy, with AAR, vast majority of available audio CDs. "

I think your wrong, you only loose 12 min on a 80min CD with the AAMQR. I dont have many CD that have more than 68min (do I even have one??? I dont think. Even live CDs have 60 min usually).

The AAMQR does not only reduce jitter (which I personnaly think is great).
Go here for more informations http://www.yamahamultimedia.com/yec/tech/aam_01.asp
The AAMQR can:
Increase the lifespan of audio CDs
Increase the lifespan of important backups
Reduce skips and pops on mobile CD players (I tested it with my RioVolt SP250, IT WORKS !)
Increase compatibility with older CD players ( I dont really care about this one, but very good old CD players like DENON can only read CDR made with AAMQR)

Use the applet on the upper left of that page to listen some samples of music (jitter and 30% less jitter).

Like I said the F1 is not for everyone. And it looks to me that you are an "Everyone". So stick with the Sony then.

And btw I still have a 40125s (Lite On) under my F1, its a great burner, but for now its only a reader ...


(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 4
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 5:58:29 AM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
Hi Bagbug,
[V]Not intending to crossover your arguments altogether, I still keep my two cents in the place.
1. AAMQR may be a good or at least nice feature. But I've not tried it and is not going to, at least in the close future. Why? Because for me it's not worth it.
2. You reference a great jitter correction with the AAMQR but I've read that for a human year it is hardly noticable.
3. My concern No.1 is data backups, not audio CDRs. I do the latter mostly for my wife. But she has no complaints as of yet.
4. Verbatim gives 100 years warranty on their 48x CDRs. I can hardly understand what you mean by "Increase the lifespan of audio CDs" when so. Not only am I not going to live that long but even believe the current CDRW technology will not survive. As for restoring really old archives... Let's leave it for those who are well paid for or at least have the needed spare time.
5. "Reduce skips and pops on mobile CD players". Well, could be. Personally I when buying my new car choosed a tape system rather than a CD player one. When driving, I more listen to the car and roadway than to music or radio. But it depends on person, of course.
6. "very good old CD players like DENON can only read CDR made with AAMQR". Again, could be. But, you know, I live in the USA. Why would I care so much about the Stone Century's technology?!
7. "Like I said the F1 is not for everyone. And it looks to me that you are an "Everyone"". Oky, I take this. But, to be honest, I can't figure what essential I have missed with my F1 features. As for DT@2, for example, I've already made several such disks. The latest one has burned on it 8 photopictures and mixed bent plus straight text - all of this over 50Megs of JPEG files. You wonna check - I'll mail the saved project over (only 330Kb non-compressed). Probably you mainly mean just AAMQR. Well, I'm aware of.
-
But hey! Thanks for not letting me (and other forumers) die afool.


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 5
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 9:38:49 AM   
Boy_Wonder

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 1/2/2003
From: Norway
Status: offline
I don't think you have missed out any essentials on the F1 by the way you are argumenting. You rule out every feature of the F1 as not important to you. Fair enough, go for the sony. What made me choose the F1 instead is the better audio writing quality, bacuase writing data is something every burner can do pretty well. AAMQR gives better audio quality and prolonges the lifespan of a burned CD. I don't know how you treat your audio-disks, but I bet most of us have had CD's die on them. I certainly have.


(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 6
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 7:48:55 PM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
Hi Boy_Wonder,
First off, let me tell how I came to the F1 a couple of months ago.
When my previous burner (+ SCSI card) became not behaving, I started a search for a good modern one. Quickly enough, it narrowed down to the Yamaha F1, Plextor 48x24x48 and Lite-On 52x24x52. At that time, I could not find reliable reviews of the latter. As for the Litie 48x24x48, together with the Plextor's one, they did not sound good to me in comparison with the Yama even though it was the most expensive one. What attracted me to the Yamaha F1ZE?
It is quiet, low CPU usage, one of the best writing abilities in the industry, outperforms the competitors in reading bad CDs, very well compatible with disfferent medias. Disk Tattoo was a nice touch as well. Also, Yamaha's reputation is the highest for me.
In the past, I had a SCSI Yamaha burner 8x4x24 (it still works fine in my brother's computer) and carried out the best impression on the Yamaha as the manufacturer and vendor (Sony is no match!). At that time, a good support was important to me. Not any more.
Until testing my new Sony drive I was sure that the F1 is the best burner on the market. But after the tests I am in doubt. When intiating this thread, I wanted to hear from really knowledgable people about known side by side comparisons and personal impressions between the two drives. Well, I'll still wait for. But in the meanwhile...
The Sony is quiet even at 52x. Its CPU usage is definitely not that bad, especially with my new powerful PC. Data writing abilities are excellent. So, what is left for the comparison?
1. Advanced Audio Recording. Well, I'm certainly not a fun of it. Not because can I hardly expect essential benefits from it but because it prevents me from making a one-disk copy of most of the audio CDs that have gone through my hands. In addition, I've read the opinions that Plextor drives do a better sound job without such CD room expansion.
2. You asked about audio writing technique I deploy. Nothing especial! First off, I do not sqeeze out every "x" of the drive's capability. With the latest firmware 1.0f, Yamaha defaults to 24x audio reading and writing speeds. Makes sense to me! I follow this idea even with the Sony. More over, if you first run test on the CD reading quality, you may notice that the lowest speed (in bad areas) may be less than 8x. In this case, I read the CD into image at slow speed (8x). This improves chances. Secondly, upon burning, I test almost every CDR. With the time being, I accumulate an experience on my burner's capabilities and given bunch of CDR's abilities. Now, I already have a good idea of what I can and cannot do. Finally, if I'm uncertain about copying of some not that good CD, I burn an image first. This technique was essential at the time before burn-proof technology. As the result, sound quality of the burned audio CDRs is quite satisfactory, as for me, with both the F1ZE and CRX220E1 drives. No AAMQR is needed.
3. Disk Tattoo. I thought that my wife, relatives and friends will be amazed of this feature. Right, they are, but only for the first time they had seen it. Now, my wife does not want to hear from the DT@2 any more. What about myself? I can easily survive without it. I agree with numerous reviewers that the DT@2 speaks for Yamaha's technology rather than brings a real plus to the user.
4. In reading the scratched CDs (dirt on them is no big deal), the F1 is clearly stronger than the Sony. This may be important for those who have the only reader in the system. But I have a DVD reader as well. It does a really good job and outperforms both the burners.
5. Media compatibility. With all the CDRs I have both burners are doing well. Let's note: the laboratories do broad tests while a user needs something narrow for his everyday life.
6. Extra large (8meg) buffer. Well, as long as the buffer underrun protection works, it's Okay with me.
-
As the conclusion: for my everyday needs, the Sony CRX220E1 performs no worse than the Yamaha F1ZE. And this is despite the Yama is made in Japan while the Sony - in China. It lacks only two features in the comparison: AAMQR and DT@2. For me, they both are not that vital. Not only because I cannot actually benefit from them but also because they both require an extra time spent. I do not have it.
But here are the advantages of the Sony over the Yamaha.
1. It is capable of reporting on damaged sectors. Potentially, this may help in building a correct backup strategy and prevent a possible system hang over a damaged CD. Yamaha yet has to fix it.
2. It can read the lead-out. Even though I'm not sure about the connection but have noticed that the Yama creates the very last sector be bad when burning a CDR from hard disk data. This never happens to the Sony. Also a piece of work for the Yamaha.
3. The Sony's offset of reading the lead-in is much smaller than the Yamaha's.
4. The Sony does 100% correct EMF encoding. I've read that Yamaha sacrificed this for the sake of DT@2's well doing. Okay, maybe it's not that iportant for me but does bring peace of mind.
5. The speed gain (52x vs. 44x) maybe is not a big deal but is also count. Yamaha said that the F1's chip is very well capable of writing (and reading) at least at 48x. Again, they disabled this ability for the sake of DT@2.
- Too much sacrificing, isn't it?


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 7
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 8:41:21 PM   
Bagbug

 

Posts: 39
Joined: 1/13/2003
From:
Status: offline
anyone who prefer a tape than a cd (even if its in a car) shouldnt even have the right to give his opinion about sound quality.

Denon "Stone Century's technology?!" Your kidding right? The sound coming out an old Denon is probably 10 times better than what ever you have in your house.
So your living in the USA, what the hell does that mean ? Im sure a lot of people in the USA have Denons CD players btw.
"In end of the ends, it looks to me that the only advantage of the F1-ZE is the DT@2."
The Disct@2 is probably the only reason for NOT getting the F1 (totally worthless). Who the hell is looking under the CD ?? Just write what ever it is with a pen ON the cd...

Your saying a lot of false stupidities since you started that thread, I think its about time you stop.

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 8
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/14/2003 8:59:42 PM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
"Your saying a lot of false stupidities since you started that thread, I think its about time you stop."
I'm still awaiting for reasonable opinions. But nothing prevents you from stopping replying. Not me in the least.


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 9
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/15/2003 2:09:57 AM   
Boy_Wonder

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 1/2/2003
From: Norway
Status: offline
As I said earlier, I also pondered about the Sony v Yamaha, and ended up with the Yamaha. The thing that helped me decide was when I went to sony's website and couldn't find the drive anywhere. No support! Downloading Lite-on firmware? Sure, but hey, this is really not the way it should be. As for Yamaha, go and take a look. The support looks great. The other point was the price. I got it at the same price as I would have had to pay for a sony drive.
Further, the 44x write speed, belive it or not, is more to my liking than 52x and even 48x. The time difference is neglectible and noice is reduced. Throw on top of that the AAR and the 8 MB buffer, the deal was done. I don't want to go into AAR as I have to gain experience with it first, but the 8 MB buffer certainly makes a difference to me. I don't like it when the buffer underrun protection kicks inn, that prolonges the burning a lot! And with a burner going that fast, it is bound to happend if you multitask, as I do.

Now I've only had the F1 drive for a couple of days and no complaints yet. I agree with some of the negative points, like a bad last sector and reducing speed when ripping audio CD's (well particulary these two points). CDRlabs have tested the sony 48x12x48 here [url]www.cdrlabs.com/reviews/index.php?reviewid=158[/url] and it did reasonably well, except two major downsides. 1) Does not support the Mt. Rainier format and 2) Created a good number of errors when extracting audio from scratched and dirty CD's.

The Yamaha, on the other hand, had really only one neg. point. It was "Not as media friendly as some other drives" [url]www.cdrlabs.com/reviews/index.php?reviewid=135][/url]The other neg. points are either corrected in later firmware or not important to me.

That was why I find the Yamaha F1 a bether drive than Sony 48x12x48 and presumably the 48x24x48 as well. These arguments may not be valid for all potential buyers, but it is my two cents on the matter.

Cheers,



(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 10
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/15/2003 4:50:11 AM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
I have a problem, guys. All what I have found in replies was known to me long ago. What I'm asking about is a live comparison between the two drives.
I'd take easily if you say I'm trying to compare apples with oranges.
But I have to point out that you compare apples with nothing.
Let's wait.


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 11
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/15/2003 8:05:59 AM   
john

 

Posts: 4038
Joined: 12/24/2000
From: Greece
Status: offline
The two drives are aimed to different users in my opinion. YAMAHA F1E is clearly a better solution for AudioCD authoring (either with AAMR enabled/disabled) than CRX220E1 in almost all recording speeds. A small comparison between both drives would say that:

1) the CRX220E1 is faster than F1E either in reading pressed/cdr data/audiocds
2) the CRX220E1 can do SD2 without the need of special software (this is a partial advantage since with the latest protections of Securom, LaserLock and maybe with a future SafeDisk build, LiteOn and clone drives could also not be able to backup those titles).
3) The F1 has higher buffer (8MB) than SONY (2MB)
4) The DiscT@2 may be useful for some users with "artistic" needs
5) The F1 has 2 years warranty, while the SONY only one (at least here in Europe)
6) SONY releases rarely (or never?) firmware updates, while Yamaha continues to support their models
7) The prices of F1 are low enough to compete 48X and 52X recorders
8) The SONY CRX220E1 has 100% accuratly C2 error information that can be used to extract AudioCDs with a software like EAC, while the F1 doesn't support C2 error information
9) The SONY CRX220E1 can be used with software like CD Doctor to "measure" burned CDs
10) SONY CRX220E1 can be transformed from CRX210E1/CRX215E1, while the YAMAHA drives cannot be overclocked

I may missed some other points but the choice is always yours!


_____________________________

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 12
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/15/2003 4:37:59 PM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
John, thank you for the reply.
You speak a technical language as opposed to just emotions. That's what I need.
1. I'ven't have to make a final choice between the two drives yet. To do it, I'd need to sell my older PC which is not that certain yet. However, the person, who is likely to buy it from me, will 100% have more fun with the Yamaha burner. So that I won't have a choice. But it's Okay as I like how the Sony performs.
2. The quality of written audio CDRs by CRX220E1 is quite satisfactory, as for me and, which is more important, for my wife, who is a pianist.
3. I've never felt a necessity to use AAMQR and, upon reading some reviews on it in the past, am quite sceptical about this technology. The AAMQR may be suitable to satisfy some older CD players like from my old Yamaha servo or referenced in the thread DENON (I'm sure, it's also a servo one) combines. Personaly I dumped the CD player unit, while keep the rest because of features and outstanding sound quality. As needed, I can use a modern CD reader with the Yamaha sound system. When I tested and tried to adjust that CD servo player, I came to conclusion that because of the high sencitivity of the servo mechanism, it was able to properly read only very narrow portion of the available today pressed CDs and writable CDRs. That's by its design. In other words, it is simplier to use a modern CD player with that old and still good sound system. Thus, the scope of usefulness of the AAMQR technology is extremely narrow (maybe CD players in the car).
4. As up today yet, I've never got a chance to backup game CDs. Nor have I any games on my PCs - just don't have time to play. The exceptions are Chess and Japanese game GO but there is no need to back them up. However, for many of us this may be important.
5. 8 Meg buffer is a nice feature. But with today's powerful PCs it's no a big deal. When multitasking, in order to interfere with the burner, I'd have to have a heavy data traffic like processing an Oracle database. As for the surfing the Internet, doing Word documents or printing, as I could notice, even the 2 Meg buffer is always full.
6. DiskT@2 is definitely a nice feature but not of much usefulness.
7. In the USA - 1 year of warranty for the Yamaha as well. Of course, the Yamaha's support is outstanding while the Sony's one sucks. I know that after my Sony F707 camera. However, the Sony's products are outstanding in quality and features, that's for sure. As for the lack of sufficient customer support... It was essential for me a few years ago. Not any more. In addition, not only the Lite-On does release FW updates but also there many users out there (and on this forum - in particular!) who are capable of giving you more that any tech support!
8. I got my Yama F1 for $109. after rebate. Sony CRX215E1 (now overclocked to 52x) came to me for less that $30., after a coupon and 2 rebates. But for a long run, the price is not the point. At least for me.
9. With the better (maybe, as for me) sound quality, large buffer and DT@2 end all the advantages of the F1 drive. Now, those of the Sony one begin:
- Speed of 52x vs. 44x (not that essential), yet it keeps quiet;
- 100% of correct EMF encoding and C2 error reporting, which is important to me as a technically minded person;
- Capability to work with CD Doctor or WSES program by Lite-On;
- Capability to report on damaged sectors - quite essential;
- Capability of reading the lead-out (my Yamaha F1 always creates a bad ending sector when burning from a hard disk data while the Sony never does);
- The offset of reading the lead-in is much smaller.
-
Having these two drives, I've tried to pass the comparison and my personal impressions to the forumers. Those who do not have much technical needs, can't go wrong when giving preference to the Yamaha F1. For me personally, the Sony CRX220E1 seems to be a better choice. Of course, yet it's better to have them both!
John, with your intervention in the discussion, I think, the thread is mainly exhausted, at least for the time being.
Thanks a lot!


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 13
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/15/2003 6:54:12 PM   
john

 

Posts: 4038
Joined: 12/24/2000
From: Greece
Status: offline
We can only compare drives in techical points, while user(s) might have other point of view. Thanks for your feedback, viewers will find this post interesting

PS. Try next time to leave some gap between paragraphs to make reading more pleasent


_____________________________

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 14
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/22/2003 12:44:28 PM   
sambs0

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 11/21/2002
From: USA
Status: offline
[^]Today I got a chance to closer compare the two drives (and even beyond this scope) using just downloaded CD Doctor ver. 1.04 beta, English.

Actually, I ran all the tests in order to make up an impression for myself. However, I believe the somewhat lengthy report below may be interesting to many of us.

In fact, a lot of Lite-On 52246S (and its rebagged twins) owners are eagerly awaiting for John's promised to appear soon comparison of its audio recording quality to other drives, the Yamaha F1 - in first turn.

Well, I have both of them now and for at least two more weeks. So, here I am with some comparisons.[^]

Quality Audio Recording comparison between Yamaha F1-ZE and Sony CRX220E1 drives.

Today I picked 48x certified FujiFilm (Taiyo Yuden make) CDRs at local BestBuy store. With two more 48x type I already had, it's good enough to begin with.

Two more types of media in my posession (Prodisk and CMC make) are not worth testing. Not only their quality below any comparison but also they are certified for much lower speeds.[V]

The Idea of the Comparison.

I've created two sets of three CDRs of different types each. The same audio CDR was copied on all of them via both Yamaha and Sony burners.

Thereafter, I ran CD Doctor in both 8x and 52x read speed modes to see the C1/C2 errors on every CDR.

Sequence of steps.

Firstly, I've checked the initial media that I've written at 24x a couple of weeks ago. It is in a good shape (by CD Doctor at 8x):
C1 Min = 0 Max = 11 Avg = 1.315
C2 Min = 0 Max = 0 Avg = 0.
The CD contents: 73:23:26 on 23 tracks, finalised.

Next, this CD was copied on three CDRs from Sony to the Yamaha drive.
Thereafter, the same - from Yamaha to the Sony.
Copied not on the fly but via an image on HD.
Read speed - 24x. Write speed - 4x.

[xx(][}:)]I did not want Advanced Audio Recording to kick in at 4x, thus used CD copying. Why? First off, it's another testing. Secondly, I do not see any good particular reason for me to use the AAMQR. Regular 4x is definitely good enough when it comes to low jitter level and sound quality (I follow John's review in the issue). It is quite comparable to AAMQR at 8x. Finally, 73 mins extended by the AAMQR could not fit 80 minutes CDRs.

During the recording I did something else - just read E-mail and articles on the WEB. No any suspicious program (like AntiVirus) on the backgroung though.

Upon completion of the writing, I restarted the PC and launched the CD Doctor (see the results below).
Of course, I'm not able to test the jitter level. C1/C2 errors level test is the best I can do.

A few words on the system.

Windows XP Pro. The OS, all the hard- and software are fully up-to-dated.
Motherboard - Soyo 6BA+ 100, Intel 440BX/ZX chipset (fast!).
Processor - Intel PIII @1000Mhz.
Memory - 1 Gig PC133, latency=2.2.2, Infineon.
Video - NVidia TNT2 Pro 32 Meg PCI.
Hard Disks - 3*IBM 30 Gig 7200 rpm on built-in HPT370 (no RAID).
System is very stable.
The Yamaha F1 is alone on the primary EIDE.
The Sony CRX220E1 is master on the secondary EIDE with the LS-120 behind. I've never noticed that the latter has a negative impact on it.

Media used for testing.

1. Circuit City (abbreviation - PD-CC)
Manufacturer : Prodisc Technology Inc.
Code : 97m32s19f (-11231)
Disc Type : CD-R
Usage : General
Recording Layer : Dye Type 9: Short Strategy (Phthalocyanine)
Capacity : 79:59.74 (359849 sectors) 702.83 MB
Overburn Capacity : 81:36.18 (717 MB)

2. FujiFilm (abbreviation - TY-FF)
Manufacturer : Taiyo Yuden Company Limited
Code : 97m24s01f (-11849)
Disc Type : CD-R
Usage : General
Recording Layer : Dye Type 1: Long Strategy (Cyanine, AZO)
Capacity : 79:59.72 (359847 sectors) 702.83 MB
Overburn Capacity : 83:02.42 (729 MB)

3. Verbatim (abbreviation - MC-VB)
Manufacturer : Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation
Code : 97m34s23f (-11077)
Disc Type : CD-R
Usage : General
Recording Layer : Dye Type 3: Long Strategy (Cyanine, AZO)
Capacity : 79:59.73 (359848 sectors) 702.83 MB
Overburn Capacity : 81:44.18 (718 MB)

[8)]How to read the Data Table below.
I tried to creat the table so that it speaks for itself. Under each recorder, presented data, consequently, are Min, Max, and Avg. As all the minimums are zeroes, they could be eliminated from viewing. I kept them, however, for the sake of CD Doctor report's integrity.

[8]Remarks on Digital versus Graphical data.
As my reader perhaps already knows, the CD Doctor not only gives the numeric scores on C1/C2 testing but also provides graphical representation of the distribution of them across the media.
Of course, I have no way to present these graphics (I keep all of them) in the post. So that the reader is to trust me for now until similar reports are posted by administration or moderators of the forum.

What I've noticed is that the numerical scores do not always reflect what you see on the chart. At least, such correlation is not obvious. Or yet, I have to accumulate experience in using the CD Doctor.

[B)]A bright example is the data (see below) on C1/C2 errors for the Circuit City (Prodisk make) media written by the Sony drive. By that data, error level is outrageous. On the graph, however, it's not that bad. C1 level is high, if compared to other medias, but is still within 100 units (on logarithmic scale). And there was just only one spike, though high, of a C2 error.
Same is true for some other results in the table.

In average, however, the results do follow the graphs, so that my conclusions below, based on the table, are solid enough.

[:0][8)]What really impresses me is how clean from C1 (not to mention C2) errors are the graphs for Taiyo Yuden media. You gotta see them! Just a dozen, not at all any contigious area!, of short spikes. Marvellous!

[8)]C1/C2 Error Check Data Table.

x___________________Sony_CRX220E1____________Yamaha_F1-ZE
=
PD-CC C1 @8x________0___14096____6.366___________0______15____2.343
______C2 @8x________0___16663____3.893___________0_______0____0.000
_____C1 @52x________0_____138___10.328___________0______23____2.680
_____C2 @52x________0______45____0.019___________0_______8____0.002
=
TY-FF C1 @8x_________0_______8____0.480__________0_______9____0.124
_____C2 @8x_________0_______0____0.000___________0______0_____0.000
_____C1 @52x________0_______9____0.569___________0______7_____0.116
_____C2 @52x________0______12____0.003___________0______0_____0.000
=
MC-VB C1 @8x________0______18____4.045__________0_______22___3.419
_____C2 @8x_________0_______0____0.000___________0______0_____0.000
_____C1 @52x________0_____195___33.538___________0_____11_____0.476
_____C2 @52x________0______94____0.028___________0______0_____0.000
=

[?]Conclusions. Part 1. 8x vs. 52x speed check.

In advance, I'd expect that 8x reading introduces (much) less errors than 52x one. While it's so in average, there are also comparable examples. Yet, there are those just the other way around.
Why? At this time, I do not know.[?]

Of course, it would be great if CD Doctor provided the feature to set the reading speed to some interim level. Well, maybe next version will do.

Conclusions. Part 2. Media.

The Taiyo Yuden appears to be far superior when it comes to audio recording, even though its usage is defined as "General". If we add its eligibility for DiskT@2 writing (though not as good as the Mitsubishi make), I have to say that it's the champion among all of the medias in my posession.
Looks like "jwcrim" is right when highly propaganding this make, ha?

A couple of days ago I found an on-line deal on 24x FujiFilm CDRs at BestBuy. Today I got a chance to visit a local store. Well, there were not 24x but 48x of the same brand and with the same deal. The 100-spindle was just a buck more expensive. I paid $27.55 after tax but before $18. rebate. Now I see how good this deal really is.

Hey, TY make lovers: get in a hurry!!

[:(!]Previously I believed that the Mitsubishi make, Verbatim, is at least as good - relying my on personal experience. Well, now I have to back off when it comes to quality audio recording. As for the data and DT@2... Yes, the Verbatim is.

Conclusions. Part 3. Yamaha is the WINNER.
As my reader can see from the table (and beyond that, believe me), in the quality audio recording, the F1 beats the Sony CRX220E1 in every test!
As we already know that the F1 also outperforms the Plextor and Teak make, the conclusion is that this drive is the absolute champion.
Bravissimo, Yamaha![:o)][:p]

Well, I like this Sony drive. It does behave. Without it, I wouldn't be able to use the CD Doctor (it does not work with the Yama). I even like the sound written by it. But the facts are the piggish thing: you can't beat 'em...[:I]

[?][8)]Questions, insufficient data...
First off, how reliable and consistent the data I'm using for the conclusions?
Well, I tried my best and fastest. I can hardly ask more from myself for a single day (not 24 hours, of course, not even half of it). Nonetheless , it is to time to talk about consistency: many more tests would be needed.
I even don't know if the results above are reproducable next time I run the same tests!
Well, I'm sure, there will be more tests by the other people...

Now, how about audio recording at speeds higher than 4x? There are reports that Plextor is good at around 20x. No reports on Lite-On make yet but I'm happy with the Sony's performance at 24x. Well, it's still no match to 4x quality recording, while may have an independent value.

Unfortunately, I have not yet installed (and don't have time for this in the near future) the WSES program - to confirm the CD Doctor's results. However, there are posted reports that they go head to head.

Also, how reliable the CD Doctor's results in my performance? Don't know.

Anyhow, the gotten results are better than nothing.
Any discussion on them is highly appreciated.[}:)]


_____________________________

When intellectual values trashed, not me who gets over.
Am I obligated to mark broken environment?
2003-09-18. Time to depart the board...

(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 15
RE: Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? - 1/22/2003 1:18:02 PM   
Boy_Wonder

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 1/2/2003
From: Norway
Status: offline
Very intresting, thanks for posting these results.
There are some strange stuff in here that make me doubt some results.
Look at Circuit City media with the sony drive. C1 level is, as mentioned, outrageous with x8 burning. At 52x it is much better. Tis make no sense and makes me belive the media used at 8x is faulty. The test need to be reproduced here. Same goes for 52x burning (MC-VB)with the sony. More logical, but still a high number.

And how do you get Yamaha up to 52x burning? Guess it should ba 44x instead.
As for the sony, it makes me wonder if the firmwareupgrade you did was for the good. Would be nice to see test done wih the original firmware.

My last question is simply this. Does the jitter make any difference to your ears? Have you played the CDs in your home stereo?



(in reply to sambs0)
Post #: 16
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Optical Storage] >> CD, DVD, BD Drives >> Yamaha F1ZE vs. Sony CRX220E1 (FW=6S0A Lite-On)? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125