i thought the 1620 couldnt read/report c2 errors?
There shouldn’t even be any. I would guess an anomoly.
The BenQ 1620 can report C2 errors just use the latest version of CD-DVD speed. Though there shouldnt be any C2 errors on any disc. I also dont like the high jitter on that disc, it isnt too good.
from this article [ http://www.cdfreaks.com/article/159/2 ] i read, i thought 1620 couldnt report any c2, but hey i can be wrong!
ive already fugured out that the benq is a better dvd burner than the liteon 1693s. and now the only thing i really need to find out is that which of these are better @ cd burning. coz if it turns out that the benq can also burn cds better than the 1693s then i can return the liteon for a refund and use that money to buy the 1640 later on. and im getting the distinct feeling that the ltr-52327s is really screwed up somehow, just dont know how tho, coz i really thought the burns on it would be better than either the 1620 or the 1693s
but whats really screwing me is that i cant make any head/tail out of the scnas [ http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1058136&postcount=16 ; the post b4 it are the cd scans and the 1 b4 that are scans of dvds.] if som1 can help me make som sense of these scans itll be really really helpful.
also the last cd scans [of the benq branded daxon 52x cds, that i burned on all 3 drives @24x] ive redone the scans on all 3 drives [benq 1620, liteon show-1693s and ltr-52327s] @ 24x of all the 3 cds yesterday. if som1 wants me to post the new scans, i can do it here.
thanx a bunch for the help so far guys.
As indicated in NeroInfoTool, the BenQ1620 does not report C2 errors. I have posted earlier in the CDSpeed thread regarding this matter but never got any reply from Erik
Deppe. May be he has overlooked my post. So I can only assume, as others in the forum have suggested, that what was reported in the C2 scan are just some unreadable sectors. You can try the Read Test in Scan Disk with the 1620 and then with the 1693 using the same disc and you will see the difference. In previous versions of CdSpeed, a warning message will remind you that the 1620 drive does not support the read function. Anyway, whether they are true C2 errors or just unreadable sectors, they shouldn’t be there for a good burn/disc.
thanx for the info factfinder. u c the thing is i already did another set of scans [well 3, 1 on each drive actually] of all the 3 cds burned with the 3 drives
and its the scans thats totally confusing me. im including the scans for u guys here and in the following 2 posts.
benq 52x cd-r [daxon]
dw1620 b7v9 @24x
00049: NOTE- the first picture @ the very top of this thread is the very last picture in this group
benq 52x cd-r [daxon]
52327s qs0e @24x
When I burn DVD, my 1640 can give some PIF. But the disc is completely readable. I am sure that BenQ can report C2 error (or some like C2 error)
If C2 error is 0, that means the disc is good.
Different drive can give different scan. My Liteon 1213s give COMPLETELY different scan when comparing with my BenQ DW1640 and Liteon 24102B. So it may be the case for your 1693s and 52327s
Please bear in mind that C1/2 or PIE/PIF error can reflect part of the quality of the disc. Even you get an excellent C1/2 or PIE/PIF scan, you may notice a bad transfer curve and even unreadable file. I normally compare the file with original to ensure no burning error.
Enjoy your BenQ
Don’t compare scans from different drives, that’s what I’ve learned here. Pick the drive you like and stick to it. So if you want to compare the burn quality of the 3 drives, compare the 1640 scans as one set and the 1693 as another, not a 1640 scan with a 1693 one. Based on what you have posted, the 52327S gives you the worst burn. When you compare the scans using the 52327S, the BenQ burn is better than the 1693 one for that BenQ disc you used. Btw, you should set the scan speed to Maximum instead of 24X.
abalone: i know what u mean by diffrent scan results from diffrent drive [after all i went nuts from trying to make sense of these scans.] but the point of these scans were [besides the confusion over c2 error reporting by the benq] was to find out which of these 3 drives were better @ burning cds, so i could use that drive exclusively for that purpose. since i put another 50 bucks into the 1693s, if cannot do anything other than just better scanning id rather return it and put that amount towards a 1640 instead [plus i also have that 52327s, but im not sure whats wrong with it, as the burns dont seems that gr8 anymore!]
i also know from experience that most dvd burners are not that good at burning cds, ie. nec nd-3500. as for the benq, well after the hell i went through with the 3500 [screwed up atleast 30+ discs and a whole lot of data ill never get back b4 i figuered it went crap,] lets just say im impressed.
FactFinder: thanx for the comments. but like i said, im trying to find out which of the 3 drives are better @ burning cds [i already figuered that the 1620 is far better @ burning dvd’s than he 1693s.] and the reason for my posting these scans were that [experts] with experiences with these particular models for years and a good knowledge in scans [well im just beginning with the scans, but atleast ive got the hang of dvd pie/pif scans but these cd scans are totally confusing and not least because the benq is reporting c2 errors where i thought after reading countless articles/reviews that it couldnt,] could make some suggestions/comment that would help me out with cd burn quality issues.
and yeah btw factfinder, i have posted cd scans set @ MAX b4, its here http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1058135&postcount=15
and thanx for all the help u guys.
finally decided to return the liteon 1693s and use the money towards the 1640 instead.
Does anyone know if the new DW1640 supports C2 reporting?
Not according to jan70 in his “First look: BenQ DW-1640”, on this page.
But then, the same was said about BenQ 1620.
then the C2 error reported in Nero DVD Speed is not real C2 error?
Can DW1640 reports PIF for DVD?
Yeah, it supports PIF.
Good choice and enjoy.