CD-RW Plextor 48/24/48A or Premium2?

Hello everyone. I hope I posted in the right place.

I’ve read on the internet that Plextor stoped their production of CD/DVD RW in 2007 and now they have only rebranded.

Now the things are quite simple:

  1. I have the opportunity to buy a Premium2 at 100 euro .

  2. I have also the opportunity to buy a second hand Plextor 48/24/48A ar only 30 euro. The drive is buied in 2004 and the guy who sell acclaim that he use the CD-RW for 100 rippings and 50-60 burnings, all his audio CD collection.

I want to know what’s the possibility that the Premium2 to be a rebranded drive? If they stoped production in 2007 how can be the drive still available online? Those are drives that are in stock? Or they are made at request? Please give me a light cause I’m lost…

On the other hand… what about the older second-hand drive (Plextor 48/24/48A ). What would you chose?

PS. I want to use the drive (any of them) for the backup of my audio CD collection and as an audiophile I want this thing to happen as accurate is possible.

From what I’ve read on the internet Permium2 is over 48/24/48A , it has AMRQ but I’m concerned that this drive could be a fake.

Thanks in advance (in special for patience).

The Premium 2 is still a current model and is made in limited quantites by Plextor in Japan. You can buy them from Amazon in the UK and other places in Europe for around 100 Euro. I would go for a brand new Premium 2 rather than a used 4824.

Cheers

James.

Thanks for your reply.

Is there something else, now, in the market that would be a better option than the Premium 2, for Audio Ripping/Backing-up ?

PS. The audio (almost) perfect copy is the only reason why I would spent 100 Euro on a CD-RW like Plextor (Premium2 for example) ?

Thanks.

Without a doubt the Premium II you can’t beat the AMQR feature.

Get the Premium2 its by far the best CD-R drive still available with todays available CD-R media.
I wouldnt go with the older model unless you have older media with which the Premium2 could have/has some problems. And by older Media i mean 6,8,12, 16x or older media.

Geez, it’s like everywhere I look nowadays, people are shouting “Premium2!” without ever giving the original Premium any credit as being an awesome ripping drive for the money (there’s nothing wrong with buying a used Premium for ripping purposes). People get so fixated on the AMQR or VariRec or 2x burning that they forget (or don’t know) what it means for a drive to have a Write Offset of -30, as opposed to -6 or +48. People pay so much more attention to graph tests, than checksums of the original audio CD versus the copy. Enough already. The smoothest burns aren’t worth a damn if your Write Offset is responsible for mismatches.

The Premiums (original or Premium2) are both awesome audio ripping drives, so if you want to back up an audio CD collection, Premiums should certainly have a role in that (but not the role).

If ripping is your #1 concern (you keep backups on HDD/SSD/etc), and you’re only going to burn after your originals have been lost, then go find yourself a used Premium and save yourself at least 50 euros compared to buying a new Premium2. There’s nothing ‘better’ about the Secure ripping capabilities of the Premium2. It is a burning-oriented drive, that’s what you’d be paying extra for, and it’s not necessarily the best drive to be burning every last one of your albums.

As for burning, if you have a large collection, there are albums you’re going to burn where a -30 Write Offset cannot quite yield exact copies of your original CDs. Your rip might be the same, but not your CD-R. For burning some albums you will need burners with smaller Write Offsets, or positive Write Offsets. Basically you will need some very specific nonPlextors just for the few albums that the Premiums can’t burn an exact match of. You can’t just burn everything with a Premium2 and not know or care if your copies aren’t exact. You need to take responsibility and check each album you are copying, with something more than just a “Verify” option. You need to Securely rip the copies the same way you ripped the originals, then compare third-party checksums (not calculated by the ripping/burning software). If you’re not doing that, then you have no idea how many albums the Premium2 isn’t copying properly. All you’re doing is making assumptions about everything beyond what the graph tests are saying.

If I were on an extremely tight budget I would get a 48/24/48A at least for ripping, due to its full Overreading capabilities, but it will take more than twice as long to Securely rip an audio CD as any of the Premiums. When you’ve got a large collection and you’re ripping with only one drive at a time, we’re talking about more waiting with the 48/24/48A than most human beings have the patience for. It’s not that there’s anything seriously wrong with the 48/24/48A, but that Secure ripping on most drives is notably slow (the 48/24/48A being no exception), despite whatever speeds the drives may be rated for with unSecure reads.

The Premium2 is as refreshed version of the original Premium and as such of original Plextor design (and manufacture, as far as Plextor manufactures drives themselves). The “2” has gained some additional functionality over the original drive, namely 2x and 48x writing, AMQR, 0.9 and 1.1 GigaRec settings and PlexEraser.

For DAE only I don’t see much difference between the 48/24/48 and the Premium2 as far as audiophile quality ripping goes (i.e. ripping with EAC or Plextools). See what [I]Glathannus [/I]wrote for some different behaviour. It really depends on just how audiophile your want to get. However there are some other points that might be worth to consider:

[ul]
[li]The P2 does DAE up to 52x on any kind of media (ROM, RW, R) whereas the 48/24/48 is limited to lower speeds (40x and even 32x on RW).[/li]
[li]If you run into problems when doing DAE, the P2 offers advanced Q-Check scanning features to analyse the problem. This may be of help for successful recovery. The 48/24/48 is limited to C2 scanning.[/li]
[li]The design of the P2 is much newer and as such the IDE interface implementation has the chance of knowing and fixing possible ‘uncooperative’ environments (i.e. controllers) that may have issues with ODD and DAE. As such it’s much more future-proof (as far as PATA is concerned).[/li][/ul]

There may be other points I haven’t thought about but these are probably the more important ones.

If you just plan to rip your existing collection on a budget, go and get the 48/24/48. If your collection still grows and you’ll go on rippingn in the future i’d recommend the P2.

In this (kind of ) tutorial they teach how to correct the ( read/write ) offset.
http://users.fulladsl.be/spb2267/offsets/offsets.htm

So, maybe I get it wrong, but I undrestand from the tutorial that the write/read offset doesn’t count if you can find it (read/write offset) and put the right value in EAC. So… if you can correct it , is the offset a real problem?

PS. My ASUS - DRW-2014L1 has the offset : +6. It’s ok?

Source : http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm

Knowing what the Offset is, won’t fix everything. If you are talking about a Read Offset and if your drive can’t fully Overread, there are many albums you won’t rip properly.

The very least of what Offset Correction does is fixes the ripple effect where content from one track oh-so-slightly bleeds into the boundaries of another track. If a drive cannot do full Overreading, then what I just mentioned is the most that Offset Correction will fix. There is a similar ripple effect with Write Offsets, and you can fix the ripple, but you cannot fix both the beginning and the end of the disc. Something is missing somewhere.

For exact audio copying purposes, there is no burning equivalent to Overreading (even though there is something called “Overburning”). If you have a Write Offset of anything other than 0, your drive cannot be used to burn exact copies of every possible audio CD. Different burners with positive or negative Write Offsets can be used for burning exact copies of different albums. There is no one burner with a Write Offset that can do everything right, but everyone keeps praising the Premium2 as if there’s nothing wrong with the fact that it has a Write Offset of -30. If you can’t have 0, then at the very least, the smaller the better. If you can have a Write Offset of 0, then you probably don’t have any bells and whistles like with the Premium2.

What you have to do is be conscientious about which albums the Premium2 can or can’t completely duplicate, have fun with the bells & whistles on the many albums that a Premium2 can completely duplicate, but at the same time you have to be ready with other very specific drives for the few albums a Premium2 can’t completely duplicate, and you’ll have to live without AMQR on those albums if you want every last 1 or 0 on the CD-R to be the exactly same as the original disc.

Now again, let me stress this as strongly as possible:
A -30 Write Offset cannot exactly duplicate every possible album, even if you or your burning software are aware of the offset. Stop trying to regard the Premiums (or Plextor drives in general) as any one-stop-shop for authentic audio CD duplication. Be scientific, test your burnt copies with Secure ripping and independent checksums, and stop making assumptions that your copies from a Premium2 are always completely exact.

If a drive cannot fully Overread (most nonPlextors or fake Plextors can’t), don’t use it to test your burnt discs. Only use a fully-Overreading drive, and only with a Read Offset you actually know, with ripping software that supports Offset Correction. Otherwise you could be burning some inaccuracies that your testing process cannot catch. To the best of my knowledge, ASUS drives cannot fully Overread (because they fall into the tragic category of “most drives”), so they should have no involvement in the ripping of the original, or involvement in the testing of the copy.

Thanks again for replys (all of you).

I’ve read some pages about: offset (read/write) , overread etc but the first logical question that came into my mind was:

“Why on earth it this trick with read/write offset?”

It’s something that goes wrong (humman error etc) in fabrication process of the writer? or is something put it that way just for us, just for those who make audio cd copies?

Hope this wasn’t a lame question…

Thanks again.

There is some “human error”, but it has more to do with the audio CD standard than with the specific drives. It’s not a deliberate form of copy-protection, but just a side-effect from one of several ways that Phillips and Sony decided cut corners for how many minutes they could cram onto a disc at the cost of data quality or data integrity. Try putting 48kHz/16bit stereo WAVs onto a data CD with no GigaRec or overburning, then you’ll see how many less minutes you can get onto a disc if the Redbook standard were what it should have been. Just burning 44.1kHz/16bit stereo WAVs onto a data CD will get you significantly less minutes than with a usual audio CD, but the pay-off is that no computer will ever misconstrue any of that content.

There’s no offsets to deal with on data CDs. It’s only a problem on audio CDs, all of which throw away some extra mapping and error-correction information so they can have a little more audio information. Without the extra mapping or error-correction, drives don’t really know a lot about the audio CD - mostly what the drives do is make estimates or assumptions. Even if you had a drive with a Read Offset of 0 (so that no Offset Correction would have to be performed), it doesn’t change the fact that audio CDs have weaker error correction where it’s possible on unSecure ripping to read something slightly different than what is actually on the CD, while believing that nothing could be wrong.

Even if you don’t use anywhere near the maximum possible minutes, you still have to conform to the sloppy Redbook standard if you want to guarantee that players will understand the disc.

The Premiums are special more because they are the fastest Secure ripping drives in the world, rather than because they can produce smooth burnings that are fairly easy for most players to read.