ImgBurn

this program needs it’s own subforum
imho

I wouldn’t try this at home. :bigsmile:

both burned at the same time? you’re brave. do the scans on those discs reflect that fact or do they look ok?

I’m definitely impressed, but I’ll be even more so if you can post a couple of disc quality scans :stuck_out_tongue:

Ya, I would say it was a risky venture.

:cool: :cool:

I have used nero and imgburn at the same time but only at 4x, and those disks
scanned low 90’s. I got a lot of TYG’s. Another test of that computer was a 16x
COF, from a 99qs verb to another verb, scan 95?

these are for my italian bud geno!



I’ve recently done simultaneous burning at 8x & the burns were of the same quality as normal using TY T02s.
Mind you every device used was on it’s own channel so no contention was experienced. Buffer levels were absolutely fine.

standalone masters rule with burners and hard drives

First scan is not so beautiful for a Taiyo :frowning:

what can I say the 3550 firmware is not mature and these TYG03’s have some inconsistent burns on the same burner, not as bad as my sony yudens tho.
My old TYG01’s all scanned very good. 97-99
benq’s are very particular scanners

Some users agree that liteon drives are more accurate for scanning. Also plextor drives are very accurate for that, but I have not (for now) a plextor, so I can say that the same media scanned with liteon and with benq give about the same results, but scans with liteon usually have a QS lower because cd-dvd speed is very picky when scan with a liteon :frowning:

I find the scanner world pretty well split between a few liteons and the benq 1620/40
but a lot of the people with liteons don’t trust them to burn with.
Actually I feel the new dvdinfopro to be better scanning software than cdspeed,
it weights in the PIE’s and jitter into the QS equation, kinda funny cause neither
can read the plex 716’s PIF’s.

I’m working to buy a plextor drive. If I can afford one I’ll post scans and opinions :slight_smile: