VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Consider supporting us by disable your adblocker or Try ConvertXtoDVD and convert all your movies to DVD. Free trial ! :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 66
Thread
  1. I am leaning to a NEC, from what I have seen on CDfreaks.com speeds are faster with the NEC, not by much. But I already own a Pioneer, love it. but im feeling kind of brave and want to try something new.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Xdreamer
    I am leaning to a NEC, from what I have seen on CDfreaks.com speeds are faster with the NEC, not by much. But I already own a Pioneer, love it. but im feeling kind of brave and want to try something new.
    Do it, you won't be sorry!! i was debating over 3 diff. kinds for my 5th dvd burner and i was leaning towards the NEC and steve2713 gave me acouple of little nudges towards the NEC, bought a NEC ND-3520A, burned Prodisc +R I.J. hub printable & Ritek Ridata -R I.J. hub printable that my LITE-ON SOHW-812S was making coasters out of!!!! (yet my LITE-ON always burns perfect with any other media) But for some reason these disc's were burning pretty bad on the LITE-ON, i could throw in a TY made fuji & they would burn perfect, started burning with the NEC and they burned SUPER!!!
    I will definately buy another NEC. After running some test's on it with stock firmware, i flashed it with hacked firmware to make it automaticaly set the book type to DVD-ROM on +R disc's.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by tsantsa
    They will have a hacked firmware for the 109 soon, if they don't already, to remove riplock. However, if it's anything like the 108 then it will definitely have probs with certain media. (my experience that is)
    The 109 ripping issue has been improved to AOpen 1648 AAP speeds.

    http://forum.rpc1.org/viewtopic.php?p=157636#157636
    Still a few bugs in the system...
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Some say the 3520 is worse than the 3500. Anyone care to comment on that, or any experience theyve had with both?
    COPIED OVER 600 DVDS SO FAR
    Quote Quote  
  5. Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Hmmm.... well... IF the 3520A is worse than the 3500, the 3500 must have been one top burning machine!!!!!!!! 8)
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    I meant anyone with an intelligent comment. No matter if its a new version its gotta be better right.
    COPIED OVER 600 DVDS SO FAR
    Quote Quote  
  7. Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Whoa...
    Okay... well, i'll leave the little insult alone 8)
    I never owned a 3500 so all i can speak of is the 3520A and the burns i have done with it play perfectly and the scans are great!!!!!!!!
    All i need to know
    P.S.
    Lighten up dude... ever heard of a sense of humour
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Havent you?
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Quote Quote  
  10. I'm a Super Moderator johns0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    canada
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Noahtuck
    Hmmm.... well... IF the 3520A is worse than the 3500, the 3500 must have been one top burning machine!!!!!!!! 8)
    Thats what many people say at cdfreaks.com.
    I think,therefore i am a hamster.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    I know. Its also apparently hard to find a 3500 now as well. Even if the store/site says that what they are sending, people often just get the 3520.
    COPIED OVER 600 DVDS SO FAR
    Quote Quote  
  12. Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by johns0
    Originally Posted by Noahtuck
    Hmmm.... well... IF the 3520A is worse than the 3500, the 3500 must have been one top burning machine!!!!!!!! 8)
    Thats what many people say at cdfreaks.com.
    @ johns0 what ?? that they are worse or that they are a top burning machine
    Quote Quote  
  13. I'm a Super Moderator johns0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    canada
    Search Comp PM
    Noahtuck,3500 is generally regarded as a better burner than the 3520,maybe when the 3520 gets better firmware then it can be better.
    I think,therefore i am a hamster.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Pioneer for me everytime baught a 109 abt 3 weeks ago... my 3rd pioneer now..burns 8x at 12x and the 16x media rocks full disc in a little over 5 mins
    Was a bit buggy at first but new firmware 1.40 sorted the probs used nero6 alchol 120 dvddecryypter no coasters as yet must admit i dont buy dirt cheap discs but then again i dont buy expensive ones.
    Was hard decision for me pioneer v nec but i think its personal prefrence myself.
    monty
    Quote Quote  
  15. A data burn on the 109 using Nero 6.0.11


    A Movie burn on 109 using DVD Decrypter


    A Movie burn on my old NEC 1100A using DVD Decrypter


    All readings made using the 109 drive.
    109 was flashed to 1.40 firmware.
    I honestly don't know much about the reading myself but just for anyone that's interested.
    Quote Quote  
  16. It says your NEC burned the RICOHJPNR01 better than your Pioneer 109 :P. The NEC 1100/1300 is a great burner (the 1300 includes -R media burning).

    Transfer rate tests are also good for testing your media. You might want to do a transfer rate test of the RICOHJPNR01 discs for comparison. A relatively smooth transfer rate test almost always indicates a disc that will play back fine on a standalone, unless of course the standalone doesn't have good support of burned discs to begin with.
    Quote Quote  
  17. In my opinion from observing disc quality scans the Pioneer DVR-109 is one heck of deal since firmware version 1.40 if you're concerned about quality over ultimate writing speed. You can even flash it with the Buffalo 8.40 firmware and have DVD+R single/dual layer bitsetting.

    I currently own a Pioneer DVR-106 and DVR-108 and have been extremely pleased with both of them.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member richdvd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Pioneer 109.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Well, I have a Pioneer 108 and a laptop NEC 3500. The NEC will only burn some 8X media at 8X. Forget Prodiscs or Rytek, only Taiyo Yuden will burn at advertised speeds. The NEC also has issues reading some burned discs. My Pioneer will burn the 8X Prodiscs at 12X.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Peterborough, England
    Search Comp PM
    Slightly out of date, but still relevant:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/storage/20041102/index.html

    The NEC comes out on top.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by mcnabb311
    Well, I have a Pioneer 108 and a laptop NEC 3500. The NEC will only burn some 8X media at 8X. Forget Prodiscs or Rytek, only Taiyo Yuden will burn at advertised speeds. The NEC also has issues reading some burned discs. My Pioneer will burn the 8X Prodiscs at 12X.

    I have burned Ritek, Prodisc, MCC, Ricoh, and TY and they all burn at advertised speeds. In addition, they are some of the best burns I have ever seen. People with both drives feel almost as good about the 3520. The burning speed complaints come from some who do not understand that the 8-16 speed burning starts at 4X and they ratchets up as the disc is burned. Also, external enclosures that use the Oxford 911 chip will not burn above 8X while the Prolific 3507 chip will.

    Burning a disc at higher than rated speed does not make it a better drive. I have a BenQ 1620 with stock firmware that will burn 8X TYG02 at 16X. I have scanned the 16X burns and I will be sticking with 8X, thank you.

    Just because you can make a drive burn faster than the rated speed does not mean you will get a good burn. I can set up my Liteon to burn 4X Princo at 16X and it is pure crap.
    Still a few bugs in the system...
    Quote Quote  
  22. I've got a 3520 in one of my machines and have found that it digests a wide variety of media with good results. I've had Pioneer before, a 104 I think, and it was a good piece of equipment. I stayed away from the 109 because if I have to hack the firmware to get it to work or one of the major burning suites won't work at all, I'm just not going to bother. IMHO, calling software crap because it doesn't work on your equipment, when it does work on a wide range of other equipment says more about the person than the product.
    Nyah Levi
    Quote Quote  
  23. I have both an NEC 3500 and 3520 installed with zero coasters burned on a variety of media brands. The only downside is both have trouble reading certain pressed dvds made in china but I'm able to use my laptop Toshiba drive to extract problematic discs.
    I am Jack's medulla oblongata
    Quote Quote  
  24. I've had a few READ problems with my 109 but i think i've traced them to a faulty "ATAPI.sys" file in WinXP Service Pack 2.

    Pioneer 109 (master) with OEM firmware and Toshiba 1712 (on slave), read with DVR-109


    Pioneer 109 (master) with 8.40 firmware and Toshiba 1712 (on slave), read with DVR-109


    After disconnecting the Toshiba Drive from the slave position and getting a clean result i ordered a newer drive (newer firmware) - Toshiba SD-M1912

    Pioneer 109 (master) with 8.40 firmware and Toshiba 1912 (on slave), read with DVR-109


    Is anyone else having trouble with the 109 that also has XP SP2?
    .
    Quote Quote  
  25. I've got an ND3500 and an ND3520 installed on my computer. My experience with the 3520 is that it is not nearly as good as the 3500. I've relegated the 3520 to just read but never write a DVD. Some may have not had problems but I certainly have and I've tried every firmware available. Personally, I will think long and hard before I purchase another NEC for my machine. I just don't think the new ones are as good.
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by Captain315
    I've got an ND3500 and an ND3520 installed on my computer. My experience with the 3520 is that it is not nearly as good as the 3500. I've relegated the 3520 to just read but never write a DVD. Some may have not had problems but I certainly have and I've tried every firmware available. Personally, I will think long and hard before I purchase another NEC for my machine. I just don't think the new ones are as good.
    I have the 3250, 2500 and 1300. With stock firmware there burners are good, with "other" firmware these burners are way up there if not the best in there respective classes. I just got the 3520a and "upgraded" my firmware to Liggy & Dee's new firmware. It adds media for faster burning, bitsetting (automatic or perminent), and just released PI/PO error testing for the 3520. NEC IS the best bang for the buck. The only reason that the 3500 is rated slightly higher is because of the more mature firmware. 3520 will be there shortly, by the day.
    Quote Quote  
  27. I wish my experience with the 3520 had been as good as yours YukonXL. I'm not giving up on it just yet and will keep trying the newer firmware until I feel it's just a exercise in futility. Glad you have good luck with it.
    Quote Quote  
  28. have burned Ritek, Prodisc, MCC, Ricoh, and TY and they all burn at advertised speeds. In addition, they are some of the best burns I have ever seen. People with both drives feel almost as good about the 3520. The burning speed complaints come from some who do not understand that the 8-16 speed burning starts at 4X and they ratchets up as the disc is burned. Also, external enclosures that use the Oxford 911 chip will not burn above 8X while the Prolific 3507 chip will.
    I realize that burners don't burn at the same speed the whole time. Let me rephrase this. With the same Ritek or Prodisc DVD-R it takes roughly 7-8 minutes to burn on my Pioneer 108. The same disc takes 16 minutes on my NEC 3500. I have no problems with these faster burned discs. I have been able to watch, play, rip, access whatever is burned on them 100% of the time.

    Now you can post all the graphs, quotes and reviews you want, they can be helpfull. All I know is that from personal experience, with absolutely no errors and speed compared to slow writing and poor disc recognition, the NEC is inferior to the Pioneer. I have updated the firmware on the 3500 to try to get better performance out of it, but that has been futile so far. Hey it rips super fast on the 85% of the discs it recognizes, but that's not good enough for me.
    Quote Quote  
  29. You're using the wrong FW then mcnabb311. Go over to CDfreaks.com for info on good FWs if your primary concern is fastest burning speed.

    You can write a FW that allows every disc on the planet to attempt burn speeds up to 16x. That doesn't improve the drive's performance.
    Quote Quote  
  30. I'll try out some new FW when I get a chance (really busy these days). But I don't know how much difference there is between a laptop 3500 or a desktop 3500. I have the laptop 3500 if you didn't catch that.

    I'm not too optomistic about the FW helping me out however, because over at www.notebookforums.com there is this guy who has done extensive testing with this drive. He could only get certain few discs to burn at 8X. He used multiple FW's also.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads