I honestly cannot believe this but ev'ry time I burn a disc with nero the C1 error rate is lower than with eac.

In both EAC and Nero I get Max. 23 (more or less depending of the disc) but with Nero I get an average of 0.23 errors while with Eac the average is 1.03 errors.

I use EAC-0.9B4 and Nero 5.5.9.9 for EAC I use Adaptec's Aspi ver 4.60 and with nero Ahead's Aspi ver 2.0.1.59.

I have tried this with about 10 discs and I constantly get *better* burns with Nero.

I use Taiyo Yuden (FujiFilm) 48X media. Burn @ 24X with a Lite-On 32123S (32X/12X/40X) drive. Firmware XS0Z.


BTW the subtitle should read 'Am I crazy?'

Has anyone got any rational explanation for this phenomenon?

Edit: typo

Perhaps it is possible that the different aspi drivers are the reason, after all when was the last good stable Adaptec ASPI driver '4.60 (1021)'.

It would be rather interesting to burn with EAC using Vob's ASAPI to see if the results are either better or worse.

how do you find out the c1 error rate (wanna test too)

WSES?

Well, my take here is that, while EAC ia a hell of a great audio ripper, it might be not-so-good at recording.

Maybe EAC doesn't write at the displayed speed. Use a clock to know exactly the burning speed.

Or maybe EAC and Nero don't use the same burn command (MMC-SAO, MMC-RAW, SAO-RAW...)

Try different options in Nero (close/ don't close the CD, dao96)

I use CD Doctor, Instead of WSES because it's not likely it'll kill my drive and I won't have to make a Dos disk to use it.

I just burned 1 disc using ASAPI and the error rate is now

Max 11 Errors and avrg 0.6.

I guess it was ASPI after all.

Does anyone know any good way of unnistalling Adaptec's Aspi? ( I mean, have I got to do anything besides erasing the files?)

@Xenion. What's your burner? Since just some LiteOns and Sanyos can report C1 errors

????

I periodically test the quality of my audio burns by re-extracting the burned tracks and doing a binary/MD5 comparison against the original WAVs. Why? Because I am slightly paranoid. No, seriously, if I am starting an audio tree of some rare concert, or mastering a new transfer, I want to be sure no errors crept in, and this just reassures my worried little mind.

So why do I mention this? My guess is something else is affecting your burns, because I have never had a freshly-burned disc fail this test when recorded in EAC.

- M.

My LG reports C1 errors, using WSES.

Dunno if it would work with CD Doctor.

It works with:

SANYO CRD-RW2
SANYO CRD-BP2
SANYO CRD-BP4
SANYO CRD-BP5
SANYO CRD-BP900P
SANYO CRD-BP1500P
SANYO CRD-BP1700P
Lite-On LTR-16102B
Lite-On LTR-24102B
Lite-On LTR-32123S (read error reported when using Nero ASPI)
Lite-On LTR-40125S
Lite-On LTR-40125S (4KUS CDR-5W32)
Lite-On LTR-48125W (4KUS CDR-5W32)
Lite-On LTR-48246S
Lite-On LTR-52246S (CDR-6S48)
Lite-On LTR-52486S
Lite-On CDR-6S48
Memorex 48MAXX
Memorex 52MAXX

But I guess if your drive is based on the same chipset of any of these drives there is a small chance it'd work

So you shoud try it.

CD Doctor 1.04 (Beta)

Read the Readme first.

We are not speaking about this, Ephaestous is measuring the Bler of his CDRs, that is the C1 error rate, while you're measuring the C2 failure rate, comparing your CDs with EAC.

C1 error : correction or, if uncorrectable ->
C2 error : correction or, if uncorrectable ->
EAC detects it (Nero CDSpeed can as well) -> correction or, if uncorrectable ->
Different samples reported.

Ephaestous CDs are perfect from the user point of view. CD Doctor is a recently introduced tool that allows to scan the CD for C1 errors (tolerated until 220 blocks affected per second), with some drives, that is, to make a deep analysis of the burning quality, previously only available to overexpensive professional analysers.
Note that since the drive used are not calibrated, the analysis made with CD Doctor can't be compared between different users, and can't be used to know if a CD falls within specifications.

hm i have a plextor 482448a

so i guess it's not able to report c1 errors

I burned couple of test cd's (actually more like this: different programs / same RW media, not sure how reliable it is after all).
What I got is that EAC (with both aspi 4.71 and asapi), nero, bao and feurio produce pretty much comparable results (on same tracks/cue/media).
BTW looks like c1 rate for rw is generally higher comparing with cd-r (smthng around 0.9 and 0.2 correspondingly).

I use Force ASPI (search for it on google)

Btw... if 4.60 isn't the best (or suggested) version of ASPI to be using, what is?

Adaptec ASPI 4.7.1.2 is solid here.

xen-uno

Is VOB's ASAPI recommended?

By Andre