I own a pioneer 110D driver, and IÂ´m looking for a driver with best writing quality.(I was looking the new benq 1650 or the philips 1648 but you can tell me others).I had a LG 4163, and this device burnt in one tone or “colour”, but actual devices like NEC 3520, NEC 3540 and even pioneer 110d burns worse , I mean that when they burns the writing speed is not the same all the time because of the device buffer that increases and decreases. And obviously the writing surface of the media is not burnt at the same “colour” . I made Nero writing tests with differnet medias. IÂ´ll thank your advices
I have both the 1650 and the 1648, and I can tell you that they ar both great drives. Get any of them and be happy!!!
Thanks, but does they burn media 16X at 16X at the same time?
I don’t understand???
that’s because the nec and pioneer use z-clv, and it’s normal to have zones of different color.
thanks seeker 010, then is it better to use full-cav tecnology?
. Can you tell me one brand or model that use it?
I wanted to ask if the time is the same when you burn 16X or 8X media in Both devices (Benq 1650 & Philips 1648). Thank you
honestly I don’t think it makes too much of a difference quality wise… the nec can turn out some beautiful burns.
if you really want §-cav, the dw1650 uses it.
thank you very much.
I have owned several burners ( lg4163-4167, nec3500-3540,pio110d), and IÂ´m trying to find te burner with the best writing quality and good speed to rip. The devices i spoke before hasÂ´nt the skills that i want. Anyone can help me? is there another brand or model better? thank you very much.
I feel both will do you quite well as both have reputable names and performance. I think with either choice you will get what you want. I know the BenQ has much better scanning capabilities over the pioneer however I have a pioneer 111 and can say only great things about it. I would recommend the 111 but only because I know it’s good from first hand use. See if anyone actually has the BenQ and what they have to say about it or better yet someone who has or has used both for comparison.
I’d go with the BenQ 1650. However the Pioneer 111 is an excellent drive too. My only reservation in regard of the Pioneer is that in your initial post you’ve implied that the 110 didn’t measure up. This too I feel to be an excellent drive.
If you are doing an [B]internal[/B] installation I would get the BenQ (UDMA2). If you are doing an [B]external[/B] installation I would get the Pioneer (UDMA4). My burns are better on the PIO but my scans are better on the BenQ.
Can you explain ? I don’t understand the distinction.
With a 1655 (UDMA2) in external you will not hit 16X.
With a 111 (UDMA4) you have the burst rate for 16X burns.
Scans on BenQ show that discs burned on a 111 have less errors that the same media code burned on the BenQ.
sholmes, crossposting (posting the same thing more than once) is not allowed on this forum. Multiple posts just create more work for our members who may provide the same answer that has already been made in the other thread(s). Also by keeping it in one thread the question and all possible solutions are keep together.
One thread deleted and two merged. Please read out rules before posting further.
Moved to the OD forum.
sorry, I didÂ´nt mind about this rule. My apollogizes.
thank you for your answers
beach-hobo, the media used is + or-?
because benq goes better with + I think.
however, yesterday i tested my brotherÂ´s Benq1640 with a TYOG (verbatim -R 8x), and when I played it in my home dvd philips 890r, the reproduction gave me little cuts. But scan gave me right (92%).In my other dvd ( saivod) no.
Do you know why? Thank you very much.