Will we get a review for TEAC CDW540E/B? I have a feeling that this is a better drive than LITEON LTR-40125S.

Very soon. We are waiting several answers from TEAC.

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to burningwheel)

Intresting.
Who is going to have the first review out. ;)
i know Ian from cdrlabs also has the drive and has almost a review ready. Ian already has some things about the review in his forum
http://www.cdrlabs.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=3731
Check it out

I know cdfreaks is also trying to get the drive, don't know if they already have them.

(in reply to burningwheel)

> Who is going to have the first review out. ;)

I would ask who will post the most "accurate" review out first. We could have easily posted the review but there are some issues which must be first explained from TEAC. We want to bring something good and accurate. I would imagine tomorrow we will be ready.

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to burningwheel)

where is all my text?


But youre right about it, it's not a race that's why i put a ;) behind it

btw. the review of Ian is online and it's a good review just like your's will be for sure.

(in reply to burningwheel)

> btw. the review of Ian is online and it's a good review just like your's will be for sure.

I know. I would suggest reading our coming review. It will be more in depth and with less "mistakes"

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to burningwheel)

Hey hey, you don't seem to like the guys over at cdrlabs a lot, but that's your thing...

Anyway, I can't wait to get a second opinion on the TEAC!

(in reply to burningwheel)

> you don't seem to like the guys over at cdrlabs a lot

I don't like reviews that mislead users. . If you bought the drive ,based upon that review, and afterwards found out it cannot do SD2 how you would feel? Not good i suppose .

For the record, TEAC CD-W540E CANNOT do SD2 v2.5x like some people claim

> Anyway, I can't wait to get a second opinion on the TEAC!

Would be more accurate, that's for sure

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to burningwheel)

I could understand that John might get a little annoyed at people posting links to other review sites, but calling them misleading?

John -- If you read the cdrlabs forums at all you'll find that Ian and his guys do not review safedisc things on purpose because it is a shady topic (borderline illegal in the U.S. and can get you in A LOT of trouble.)

Often times there are other users who have the drive or he posts the results of the tests in the forum for specific users who want to know about copy protections, or he refers them here for *your* tests.

quote:

---

It will be more in depth and with less "mistakes"

---

It seems to me that cdrinfo is so hell bent on covering safedisc ability that they neglect all of the DAE erros the asus 32x produces... *cough*

-hjs
It is a race for them, it brings in the hits more often than not when you're the first to review a new drive. Why do you see cdrinfo say "world exclusive" or "first" etc when they have a new unit up? None of the other review sites do that except this one so it shows you the negativity there. CDRLabs, Got Apex, CDRW Central, they all post links to each others reviews, do you see that here? No...

The last time I saw CDRInfo on slashdot, they got torn a new one for essentially posting "press release" items that are verbatim copies of press releases, no commentary or anything. See the link below:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=29357&threshold=1&commentsort=0&tid=173&mode=thread&pid=3151848#3151949

At least on the other forums I visit (anandtech, cdrlabs, ars technica, etc) there is mutal respect between them, but not here, that's why I stopped visiting so frequently :/

I notcied that there is part of the review up on the web site. However several pages do not load including the conclusion and none of the graphics load.

(in reply to burningwheel)

As far as cdr-info's linking to other sites is concerned, see below:
http://www.cdr-info.com/Sections/News/Details.asp?RelatedID=2114

(in reply to burningwheel)

Okay for nit picking purposes, yes they do link other sites, but the common practice of posting news items like the other sites do when a new review is announced is not found.

(in reply to burningwheel)

> do not review safedisc things

Hi Jar and thanks for your input. The main problem here is that we forget the recent history. In short the same persons that called us "pirates" (cause we "dared" to test drives under DAO-RAW writing mode), now "trying" to do similar tests, however with wrong testing procedure and of course results...In my opinion, if you don't know how to test it, better leave it out. I explain.

The SD2 backups must be checked with cheap CD-ROMs in order to identify if the backup is 100% correct or not. Lets say that you only tested with one drive , in our case LiteOn, and you found it works. So does it really works? Nope...You need to use CD-ROMs (and several) to make sure it works.

So where is the problem? The problem is that users keep asking for the "EFM correction" feature. If someone told me it works ok, i paid 150$ for a drive, and afterwards didn't worked as i was told, at least would be @%& with him.

> but calling them misleading?

That is what i call "mislead". If your are ok with it then...

> It seems to me that cdrinfo is so hell bent on covering safedisc ability

The other guys keep telling/commenting the same thing. I cannot really understand how come 12 pages of review, with 10 lines upon the DAO-RAW performance of the drive, overpass the other content. Maybe those people wish to keep presenting us as the "bad guys" to gain other benefits? Most likely.

We are the only site that checking writing quality and testing which media performs better with each drive. Posting burning time is not anymore enough. I cannot really see any comparison between ours and the rest reviews.

> he posts the results of the tests in the forum for specific users

Some time now they keep adding those tests in the reviews. Maybe you haven't visited them for a long time?

> they all post links to each others reviews, do you see that here? No...

Actually we do sent mailing list with reviews to many other websites. I don't remember any mail from the mentioned sites dropped in our mailbox recently

> The last time I saw CDRInfo on slashdot

I thought we "slashdotted" only one time. It was about the Cactus Data Shield 200 article, that covered almost any aspect of this "copy protection". We had great feedback for that article and frankly we are very proud about it. Its also interesting that PHILIPS have expressed negative thoughts about AudioCD copy protection.

> there is mutal respect between them,

Really? I heard there is/was a big fight between the big sites for CPU/MB (Anand, HardOCP and Tom).

> yes they do link other sites,

Ok now we do link other sites. Again i have to repeat when someone drops an email we usually link, unless its illegal content

> that's why I stopped visiting so frequently :/

You will hardly find any negative comment about other websites, unless we see something wrong. So maybe it is about time to start re-visiting

Visit www.cdrinfo.com - The Recording Authority

(in reply to burningwheel)

Any chance we see the Teac review this weekend? I'm very interested in the writing quality tests since the Teac has this aggressive Z-CLV implementation...

Will it burn the SD 2.51 protected software with the new CloneCD beta 4? It really has no priority on my list of needed features, but still good to have.

In terms of Audio-CD quality, how do you think the Teac stacks up compared to the Yamaha? BTW, what's you recommendation for a real good audio burner?

Ok, final question: Can the Teac read (or copy?) protected Audio-CDs? Most important, can it rip the CDs (preferably with EAC)? I need copies for my car player, I won't take those CDs in my car! Did that once and the CDs went bad especially when there's a lot of humidity in the air and the water condenses. Apart from that it does not play protected CDs and I think this SUCKS big time!

(in reply to burningwheel)