DW1670 better reader ? My experience!

vbimport

#1

Yesterday, I was a hero salvaging a 8 cm CD disc that is totally wrecked, it is a bit warped/bent :confused: and worst it is badly scratched by a keys in a pocket.

It was my friend’s uncle who recklessly sat on it in his jeans back pocket and without a case ! :a He just cried out loud when he received that CD from him ! :frowning:

Look these scandisc results on my both drives ! Seems like my DW1670 wins isn’t it ? : :iagree:

Now, other 1670 owners can confirm this similiar result ? especially on really bad disc and compare with your best other reader ! Fyi, my 1620 is working fine !

PS : DW 1670 don’t support Quality Disc Scanning, ADQ and C1/C2-PI/PO Test on disc scanning like other Benq’s Nexperia drive families !


#2

Yes as I’ve mentioned a few times in the 1670 threads it is a great reader. So far it’s been even better than an old drive that put to shame all ~15 other drives I own, it’s incredibly good for damaged/poor discs so for that reason alone I’m glad I have one (actually have 2).

Having said that, it SUCKS as a general use ripping drive. Its ripping behaviors are the worst I’ve seen. I’ve tried both drives on multiple systems, multiple firmwares, crossflashing to a Sony, and the behavior remains unchanged. And a couple other owners of this drive have also confirmed similar issues. It rips at a slower speed than what is performed in TRTs, which is baffling. With many discs, though not all, it will slow down and come to a complete stop at regular intervals during the rip and makes horrible noises like the drive’s going to destroy itself for maybe 10 seconds or so, then resumes the rip. It often does it around 25%, 50%, 75%, or 33%, 66%, then it also does it when there’s literally maybe 1MB of data left on the disc and often takes another 20 seconds or so to complete the rip as it makes awful noises. Makes me want to throw the Pieces of S#(* against the wall. If only I could get the ripping performance to match the Transfer Rate Test performance, as they do just fine with TRTs (though you need an older version of CD-DVD Speed as they also don’t test properly with newer versions of CD-DVD Speed… I use 4.51).


#3

Scoobiedoobie, thanks for confirming. Yeah, its really powerfull on really bad disc !

Another comparison on ISOPuzzle 1.4 ! See ! DW1670 eats DW1620 alive ! :bow:

Gave up on 1620 after about 8 minutes while 1670 grab the ISO on single run, worry it will shorten it’s live when keeping re-reading that crappy disc ! :wink:

Man, I’m thinking about to buy the 2nd 1670 like you did ! :o Even though its an average burner & poor ripper !



#4

I’m not sure if you saw me mention it in another 1670 thread a week or two ago, but I worked on a disc with a small but deep gouge in ISOpuzzle for almost 90 minutes in about 5 different drives, including a Liteon 165P6S, a 1640, Pioneer 111L, and my old Toshiba which was previously my best reader by FAR. They were slowly chipping away but they were hitting a wall with about 16MB left if I recall correctly. Set up my 1670 and it was done in maybe 5 seconds. For it to rip the remaining data basically instantly after over an hour with the other drives was incredible.

When I bought the drive initially I had no idea about its reading abilities, and I bought the drives as rebadged I/O Magic sight unseen online, hoping for something like an LG or Liteon instead. It is a decent burner at 8x and 12x, though I only really use them for reading bad discs lately. Because of a website screw-up, I only paid $5 for each of mine :stuck_out_tongue: . Among my 15+ drives, only 2 have stood out as being exceptional readers, my old Toshiba and the 1670. I’ve confirmed both models from other owners as being awesome readers for them as well. I’d like to see how it stacks up with some of the other great readers but considering how good my Toshiba already was and for the 1670 to surpass it, I’m not sure I’d find anything that would match the 1670. So although it’s not a great drive overall, it’s always good to have one great reader among your drives and this would be a good choice if only for that purpose.


#5

Enough said, 2nd DW1670 is on it’s way ! Thanks to you ! :bigsmile:

I dunno bout others, for me, words like “the BEST burner” or “the BEST accurate scanner” would be meaningless without “the BEST reader” isn’t it ?

In optical media activities, I still believe the “ultimate & final” goal is able to get the archieved data properly and “as fast as possible” would be nice. :o
The fact is no one will not be able to fully control the quality of the archieved data isn’t it ? Stupid example, “My cat clawed my disc or the dye is fading away thingy…” :iagree:

Anyway, I can’t find your thread or post about that testing, all I could find were the problem threads about how poor this 1670 on ripping ! Mind point where is it ?

Well especially for the price of $5 a piece you got and for optical drives collector like us, I suggest from now that you should see it as a BEST bad disc reader, not for ripper for sure for you to get a peace of mind ! For sure its a keeper for me ! :wink:

Cheer !


#6

I posted it here, I basically just mentioned what I’d mentioned above. Actually you responded to my comments in that thread. http://club.cdfreaks.com/showpost.php?p=1736236&postcount=34

It’s true as you say, you aren’t always going to have the luxury of perfectly readable discs, so owning a drive like this is valuable for those moments when your other drives are unable to extract even a few MBs of data. It might seem a waste to spend the money on a drive just for its readability, but after my Toshiba and 1670 have saved a number of damaged/poor quality discs, I’m obviously glad to have them.


#7

I will gladly spend that little money if the 1670 is as good a reader as touted by you guys. :smiley:


#8

Actually, like I said on the link scoobiedoobie provided, 830A is also a good reader.


#9

I can confirm that my 1670 is sometimes a better reader on a bad disc or slightly scratched disc compared to my other drives. In general, a slower reader is better on this. It might also be the advantage of Panasonic chipset.


#10

Could you confirm about the DRU 830A also, Zevia? I saw at your sig that you have one :slight_smile:


#11

Hi DimeDevil. Unfortunately I don’t use the DRU-830A long enough to compare the readings and I don’t have that many bad/scratched discs. :wink: The 830A uses Mediatek chipset and it’s Samsung SH-S182D OEM. This chipset is known to be a good reader and read at 12x. I still believe that slower reader is better on bad/scratched discs, but not all the time (that’s why I said “sometimes” in my post above). The BenQ with Nexperia chipset (DW1620 ~ 1655) is too fast for such discs. On a good disc or very light scratched, then my 1655 will rip it without any problem.


#12

so do these drives suck for burning and really are great for reading? I already have a lg 4167 and liteon 20a1s now. Would this be a good drive to pickup as a backup for reading and emergency burning?


#13

Well, to clarify further, it is NOT a great speedy disc reader, but a really good “BAD” disc reader ! :slight_smile:

For writing, it just so so and abit picky, mine likes only verbatim or ty media, others are not really that great.



#14

what drive is a really good reader and adequate burner?


#15

I’d consider this drive perfectly decent for burning at 8x and 12x with most media, it doesn’t seem to do too well at 16x but then I rarely ever burn at 16x anyway. To burn at 12x you’ll have to modify the firmware’s write strategies in MCSE, but that’s easily done. I’ve burned quite a number of different media codes, mostly at 8x, with mine and the results are respectable. Jitter could be better, but then I’ve seen worse jitter from burners that some people consider very good burners. Put it this way - I have several burners and while I use it mainly for reading damaged/poor discs, I have no issue with occasionally burning discs with it and have tested a number of media codes with it. It doesn’t match some of the better burners for burn quality so I wouldn’t want to personally use it as a primary burning drive, but it does a decent job. Another drive that has a good reputation as a reader would be the Samsung 182x series of drives, it seems to be a bit better as a burner.


#16

[B]scoobiedoobie:[/B]

Any possibility of some more details as to the identity of these other burners? PM answer if you prefer not to name here :slight_smile:


#17

Yeah, Scoobiedoobie, I’d like to know as well if you don’t mind ? :slight_smile: