ronross
Mar 5 2004, 08:23
Here are the results from Nero CD speed on a clean commercial audio CD:
CD Speed
05 March 2004 - 3:22:34
CD-ROM drive information
Vendor LITE-ON
Product LTR-52327S
Firmware Version QS54
CD information
Type Audio
Length 64:57.45
Test results
Transfer rate
Average 23.70x
Start 14.25x
End 31.16x
Reading type CAV
DAE quality
Score 10
Accurate stream Yes
Seek times
Random 76 ms
1/3 Seek 90 ms
Full 150 ms
CPU usage
1X 4%
2X 6%
4X 18%
8X 34%
-----------------------------
DMA is enabled in both device manager and the bios. CD-RW is Master on Secondary Channel.
Rips in EAC and CDEX run at ~5Xs
Per LiteOn message board firmware is OEM and there is no update available. Apparently the latest firmware available from LiteOn doesn't recognize these OEM drives.
What's up?
Thanks, Ron
Try disabling the "Allow speed reduction during extraction" option in EAC's drive options. Ripping speeds should start out at around 5X and slowly speed up to about 11X towards the end of the disc.
ronross
Mar 5 2004, 08:39
QUOTE(calx @ Mar 5 2004, 02:35 PM)
Try disabling the "Allow speed reduction during extraction" option in EAC's drive options. Ripping speeds should start out at around 5X and slowly speed up to about 11X towards the end of the disc.
I've read this and am optimistic it will help. However, is 24Xs right for a CD Speed test that doesn't impose any of the "inhibitions" on DAE that EAC does?
Thanks.
Youd drive is one of the new 52327S drives, lacking the eeprom. LiteOn may have changed some routines regarding CDDA extraction in the firmware.
The new drives have firmware revisions like QS5*, the old ones have QS0*.
IMPORTANT: DO NOT try to flash your drive with QS0* firmware.
ronross
Mar 5 2004, 09:28
QUOTE(criZZb @ Mar 5 2004, 02:46 PM)
Youd drive is one of the new 52327S drives, lacking the eeprom. LiteOn may have changed some routines regarding CDDA extraction in the firmware.
The new drives have firmware revisions like QS5*, the old ones have QS0*.
IMPORTANT: DO NOT try to flash your drive with QS0* firmware.
Uhhhh. Does this mean I'm scr*wed until there's a firmware upgrade? Or does the lack of an eeprom mean my new drive will always be second-rate?
It sounds like there's no immediate solution. Glad I didn't go out and buy a new motherboard.
QUOTE(ronross @ Mar 5 2004, 04:28 PM)
Uhhhh. Does this mean I'm scr*wed until there's a firmware upgrade? Or does the lack of an eeprom mean my new drive will always be second-rate?

I don't know the policy of LiteOn concerning the new drive. The eeprom was eliminated to reduce manufacturing costs, the calibration data it contained were moved to the flash memory, AFAIK. So, in short, I don't know if LiteOn will speed up the drive in next firmware revisions (if there will be any and if the firmware is indeed the issue here --- we can't be sure). Personally, I wouldn't count on it.
ronross
Mar 5 2004, 11:17
QUOTE(criZZb @ Mar 5 2004, 05:01 PM)
So, in short, I don't know if LiteOn will speed up the drive in next firmware revisions (if there will be any and if the firmware is indeed the issue here --- we can't be sure). Personally, I wouldn't count on it.
Thanks for sticking with me on this. I think I'll just exchange the drive.
What would you recommend, or should I just spend an extra $20 on a Plextor?
There is to be a new LiteOn CD-RW writer soon (based on a newer MediaTek chip). But I can't really say anything about it

I would stay with the drive you have, really, or got an older 52327S. Try to test your drive with a burned audio CD. The results may change.
dreamliner77
Mar 5 2004, 15:54
I have a copy of the new firmware for your drive if you'd like it.
ronross
Mar 5 2004, 16:24
QUOTE(dreamliner77 @ Mar 5 2004, 09:54 PM)
I have a copy of the new firmware for your drive if you'd like it.
Thank you, but I was under the impression that the firmware version my drive is currently using, QS54, is unique to the "eeprom-less" newer versions of the drive and that no update is yet available for it. cdfreaks.com explicitly warns against updating with the newest firmware available from LiteOn because it will wipe out the drive (being that it is designed for the eeprom-ed version).
Unless you are talking about something LiteOn has yet to make public?
QUOTE(calx @ Mar 5 2004, 06:35 AM)
Try disabling the "Allow speed reduction during extraction" option in EAC's drive options. Ripping speeds should start out at around 5X and slowly speed up to about 11X towards the end of the disc.
With my Liteon LTR24102B CD-RW drive, when disabling that option I got much more read errors with scrached disks. I compared .wav files with EAC comparer and comparing wave forms with soundforge.
criZZb
Mar 15 2004, 14:59
QUOTE(askoff @ Mar 6 2004, 06:10 PM)
QUOTE(calx @ Mar 5 2004, 06:35 AM)
Try disabling the "Allow speed reduction during extraction" option in EAC's drive options. Ripping speeds should start out at around 5X and slowly speed up to about 11X towards the end of the disc.
With my Liteon LTR24102B CD-RW drive, when disabling that option I got much more read errors with scrached disks. I compared .wav files with EAC comparer and comparing wave forms with soundforge.
Does your drive have the SMART-X feature? Disallowing the speed reduction helps keeping up the ripping speed in drives featuring SMART-X only, I guess.
askoff
Mar 16 2004, 02:22
QUOTE(criZZb @ Mar 15 2004, 12:59 PM)
Does your drive have the SMART-X feature? Disallowing the speed reduction helps keeping up the ripping speed in drives featuring SMART-X only, I guess.
Yes it does. You can see my drive specs
here
criZZb
Mar 16 2004, 03:28
Well, nobody else (to my knowledge) had problems with more common Mediatek chipsets, I mean the '5' and above. It would be nice to track down this issue.
I assume your drive behaves standard way with 'allow speed reduction' checked: slows down on track-to-track synchronisation. Are the read errors you're getting correctable?
askoff
Mar 16 2004, 11:52
QUOTE(criZZb @ Mar 16 2004, 01:28 AM)
Well, nobody else (to my knowledge) had problems with more common Mediatek chipsets, I mean the '5' and above. It would be nice to track down this issue.
I assume your drive behaves standard way with 'allow speed reduction' checked: slows down on track-to-track synchronisation. Are the read errors you're getting correctable?
I haven't heard that anyone else has been testing this thing with scrached disks.
Yes my drive slows down between tracks, but what do you mean "Are the read errors correctable?" How they should be? I've done some testing with one scrached disk and "allow speed reduction" disabled I got clearly audible clicks.
criZZb
Mar 16 2004, 14:03
QUOTE(askoff @ Mar 16 2004, 06:52 PM)
I haven't heard that anyone else has been testing this thing with scrached disks.
Well, I always do copy and test, if you ask me. And I've ripped many discs in various condition.
QUOTE
but what do you mean "Are the read errors correctable?"
I ask whether EAC reports read or sync errors. Sorry for not being specific enough.
askoff
Mar 17 2004, 04:02
QUOTE(criZZb @ Mar 16 2004, 12:03 PM)
QUOTE
but what do you mean "Are the read errors correctable?"
I ask whether EAC reports read or sync errors. Sorry for not being specific enough.
I can't remember. I'll try it later today.
criZZb
Mar 17 2004, 08:08
In the meantime, I'd like to say, that there may be several issues concerning one drive or firmware in particular. My point is, that every case needs an individual appproach --- that's all.
My present drive is my third LiteOn rewriter, I think I just like the way they do (the price is also important). And I've experienced several annoyances concerning audio extraction using LTR-48125S with 1S07 firmware. The problem was, I got a lot of read and sync errors trying to rip CDs pressed by PMDC, Germany (only made by this specific manufacturer, ripping of all the other CDs went without such problems). All of them were in perfect or near perfect condition (despite the fact, they were qiute old --- '93 - '96). As soon as I downgraded the firmware to 1S05, all the problems were gone --- all the mentioned CDs were perfectly readable even in burst mode.
I can't check it at the moment (but I'll surely do, unfortunately not sooner then April 15th, I'm afraid), but there is of course a possibility, that this issue was somehow connected with disallowing speed reduction.
So, once again --- such as issues need an individual approach IMHO.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.