Buy separate ripper and scanner?

I currently own a PX716SA. After ripping about 500+ severaly scratched cds and abusing it for two years, I think its dying. It consistently burns CDs and DVDs with huge burst of errors at the same spots every time. These errors do not exist with burns from about a year ago with the same media from the same spindles.

I am now willing to buy two separate devices to cover the functionalities of scanning/ripping and burning. I can settle for a single device solution, but I think I rather buy two devices so I won’t wear out the burner so quickly like I did with the PX716. For the scanner/ripper, I am planning to rip both CDs and DVDs. For burning, I am planning to archive data on DVDs, burn DVD movies, and create audio CDs. I don’t mind buying two burners if it means that a burner is a better ripper. SATA and IDE interface are acceptable. Any suggestions?

My recommendation would be one of the late model Benq drives for ripping/scanning (ie 1650 or 1655) and then the Pioneer 111D for burning. At least, that is the configuration that I will be using. :wink:

I have been considering the Pioneer 111D as a burner for the past two weeks, so I will probably end up buying that drive. I think having the ability to make good burns across various grades of medium is important. I use cheap media for short term storage and more expensive media such as Ty for longer term storage.

However, I am not convinced that BenQ 1655/1650 make a good scanner, especially when DrageMester mentioned in a few other postings that BenQ drives have problems scanning burns from other drives under certain conditions ( ). Also, some other postings have mentioned that Liteon usually has a reputation for being good scanners too. If I burn stuff from a pioneer 111D, the scanner should also be able to reliably read and scan the burn media form the pioneer 111D. I am confused which scanner I should buy and why its so difficult for companies to build a good scanner if they have to read the media reliably in the first place?

It’s wright that BenQs are only realy reliable scanners for their own burns. So one solution could be to end up with only one drive, the BenQ. Cause it is a perfect and fast ripper and good for scanning it’s own burns and one of the best burners either.

Another solution may be to take the Pioneer 111 and flash the alternative 8.26L firmware modified with MediacodeSpeededit. In this condition the PIO is a respectable ripper too. For scanning you can take a LiteOn as second drive. It´s a little bit of waste cause the new LiteOns are good burners too. But you can take the advantage of two good burners, so sometimes with some media the PIO is better and may be the other time the LiteOn.

Here’s a link to a recent thread which has some good info for you. :slight_smile:

I use my LiteOns as scanners (and occasional burners, since they’re nice little burners in their own right)…so as scanning drives, I’d recommend one of those. I’d happily buy one of the newer ones myself (I have two 1635S’s at the moment).

As a dedicated burner…LG or BenQ get my vote. I’ve had a BenQ 1650 and LG 4163/4167 both paired with a LiteOn in my PCs, the pairs seem to work well together for me. :slight_smile:

I don’t tend to use my BenQs for scanning, because of the “peculiarities” with scanning other drives’ burns.

IMHO the thing that really holds back the Lite-On is that there currently isn’t any rip-lock removal firmware for the latest models. The thought of being stuck ripping at the slowest possible speed is enough to put me off of it for now. Especially when I have an Asus E616A with great ripping abilities.

I’d get a Lite-On 6S series model for scanning and ripping. Use the latest test firmware, it has 12x ripping, IIRC.

For quality burning, I’d most likely go with the Pioneer DVR-111 series.

I couldn’t agree more with everything that Jesterrace has already stated. Pio 111 = burn. BenQ 1650/55 = rip/san. LiteOn new stuff = firmware needs more work for the aftermarket.

So both the 1606S and the 1656S have the ability to rip faster? Any idea how these drives would compare with an Asus 16x E616A drive?