[^]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
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)
(abbreviation - TY-FF
Manufacturer : Taiyo Yuden
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)
(abbreviation - MC-VB
Manufacturer : Mitsubishi
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.
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
[?]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!
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.