Best ATAPI 24x drive that does DAE?? The TEAC!!!
Heikki Kähkölä
I see this same question being asked over and over again: Which ATAPI
CD-ROM should I get for fast DAE, which ones are quiet, which ones don't
vibrate like they got D-cells in them..
Well I tell ya, having asked that same question myself and after having
the chance to try out various ATAPI drives, we only have one winner: The
TEAC CD-524E 24x ATAPI CD-ROM drive. I have compared it to Hitachi,
Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung, Creative, Samjung (yes, SamJung), Acer
(Vuego), Mitsumi, Philips - you name it, they all stink compared to
TEAC. The Teac was a bit more expensive (at least here in Finland), but
it's well worth the extra dosh.
1) It's fast. 95ms access time isn't the FASTEST we have, but it's good.
2) The tray opening is the fastest I've ever seen. Quiet also, no
rattling sound when it opens.
3) The drive spins up in about two-three seconds, which is hardly
audible. Compare to Acer - it sounds like a jet plane.
4) Absolutely NO vibration. Very quiet reading. Whereas the Panasonic
sounds like it got a sack of nails stuck in it.
5) Finally, the DAE speed. I use WinDAC for ripping CD-tracks. The
average speed is about 13x, NO JITTER, perfect copies. This is the best
I've had any ATAPI drive do. Because of this, I can also copy CD's on
the fly, directly from the TEAC to my CDD3610. Mixed mode, anything
goes. No buffer underruns.
So you looking for a decent - no, BEST available ATAPI drive? 24x?? Get
the TEAC!!!!!!!
hk
(ps. this was not a commercial, I just like to have a product that ROCKS
for a change :-)
Alan Burton
>I see this same question being asked over and over again: Which ATAPI
>CD-ROM should I get for fast DAE, which ones are quiet, which ones don't
>vibrate like they got D-cells in them..
>
>Well I tell ya, having asked that same question myself and after having
>the chance to try out various ATAPI drives, we only have one winner: The
>TEAC CD-524E 24x ATAPI CD-ROM drive. I have compared it to Hitachi,
>Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung, Creative, Samjung (yes, SamJung), Acer
>(Vuego), Mitsumi, Philips - you name it, they all stink compared to
>TEAC. The Teac was a bit more expensive (at least here in Finland), but
>it's well worth the extra dosh.
I hope you're right cos I've just ordered one due to youre
recommendation.
Alan
Mike Farmwald
I tried a 32x Teac. The DAE was great. > 11x and appeared to be jitter free (or at least very
low jitter). I returned it because I couldn't adjust the spindown time to more than 30 seconds or
so. This caused various games (Flight Unlimited II) to have totally unacceptable performance.
I tried the Spindown utility, but couldn't get it to work. What do others do to get around this
problem?
I'll go buy back the Teac in a second if there was a solution.
Mike
Mark
On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 22:15:12 GMT, bu...@zetnet.co.uk (Alan Burton)
wrote:
He's right. I got one also and it kicks ass. Had a new Mitsumi 24x
come in on a new Gateway system and it's a piece of shit. Don't like
the Hitachis Micron packages either. Their new Pioneer with the slot
loading is pretty cool though. Overall, the Teac rocks. My 12x at
work is great, and my 24x at home is even better.
Mark
Tom Robeson
In <34BA0D...@BOLLOXSPAM.iki.fi>, Heikki Kähkölä <he...@BOLLOXSPAM.iki.fi> writes:
>I see this same question being asked over and over again: Which ATAPI
>CD-ROM should I get for fast DAE, which ones are quiet, which ones don't
>vibrate like they got D-cells in them..
>
>Well I tell ya, having asked that same question myself and after having
>the chance to try out various ATAPI drives, we only have one winner: The
>TEAC CD-524E 24x ATAPI CD-ROM drive. I have compared it to Hitachi,
>Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung, Creative, Samjung (yes, SamJung), Acer
>(Vuego), Mitsumi, Philips - you name it, they all stink compared to
>TEAC. The Teac was a bit more expensive (at least here in Finland), but
>it's well worth the extra dosh.
>
>
>2) The tray opening is the fastest I've ever seen. Quiet also, no
>rattling sound when it opens.
>
>3) The drive spins up in about two-three seconds, which is hardly
>audible. Compare to Acer - it sounds like a jet plane.
>
>4) Absolutely NO vibration. Very quiet reading. Whereas the Panasonic
>sounds like it got a sack of nails stuck in it.
>
>5) Finally, the DAE speed. I use WinDAC for ripping CD-tracks. The
>average speed is about 13x, NO JITTER, perfect copies. This is the best
>I've had any ATAPI drive do. Because of this, I can also copy CD's on
>the fly, directly from the TEAC to my CDD3610. Mixed mode, anything
>goes. No buffer underruns.
>
>So you looking for a decent - no, BEST available ATAPI drive? 24x?? Get
>the TEAC!!!!!!!
According to the Teac website
http://www.teac.com/dsp/cd/cd-524.html
this drive does not support CDR and CDRW (Multiread). Perhaps it does, but I
eliminated this drive from my list due this apparent shortcoming.
I bought the Samsung 24E. 512K buffer. Nice spring loaded tray to reduce
vibration. I have no idea how the Samsung performs on DAE as I do not
perform this function.
Tom
Mark
On 13 Jan 1998 02:17:08 GMT, dr...@norfolk.infi.net (Tom Robeson)
wrote:
>According to the Teac website
>
>http://www.teac.com/dsp/cd/cd-524.html
>
>this drive does not support CDR and CDRW (Multiread). Perhaps it does, but I
>eliminated this drive from my list due this apparent shortcoming.
>
>I bought the Samsung 24E. 512K buffer. Nice spring loaded tray to reduce
>vibration. I have no idea how the Samsung performs on DAE as I do not
>perform this function.
>
>Tom
Whoa, that's wrong. I've used a variety of CD-Rs with mine, and it's
never once been unable to read a disc.
Mark
Danny Payea
Mark wrote in message <69epph$d...@newsops.execpc.com>...
>On 13 Jan 1998 02:17:08 GMT, dr...@norfolk.infi.net (Tom Robeson)
>wrote:
>>
>>http://www.teac.com/dsp/cd/cd-524.html
>>
>>this drive does not support CDR and CDRW (Multiread). Perhaps it does,
but I
>>eliminated this drive from my list due this apparent shortcoming.
>
>Whoa, that's wrong. I've used a variety of CD-Rs with mine, and it's
>never once been unable to read a disc.
>
Have you specifically tried a Multiread CD-RW in your drive? I'd like to
know before I buy one as MultiPacket/MultiRead is going to be important.
Also does anyone know if the new TEAC 532 (32x) is MultiRead compatible if
the 524 is not? The www site is not specific on either model.
Danny
Danny Payea
Mike Farmwald wrote in message <34BABF52...@chromatic.com>...
Do you know if the 24x or 32x support Multiread CD-RW discs?
My NEC 12x IDE's DAE is useless, pops and jitters even at x2
Danny
Chuck Dinsmore
In article <34BA0D...@BOLLOXSPAM.iki.fi>,
>
>(ps. this was not a commercial, I just like to have a product that ROCKS
>for a change :-)
I agree with the above. I have a TEAC 24X and it performs exactly as
described. I am very happy with it.
--
**************************************************************************
| ci...@eskimo.com ~ CHUCK DINSMORE P.E. S.E. ~ Seattle, WA.|
| c...@skilling.com www.skilling.com Seattle, WA.|
**************************************************************************
T.
On 13 Jan 1998, Chuck Dinsmore wrote:
> I agree with the above. I have a TEAC 24X and it performs exactly as
> described. I am very happy with it.
Hi, I'm considering purchasing a TEAC as well, and have the
following questions:
1) Is it PIO Mode 4 capable?
2) Is it DMA Mode 2 capable?
3) Has anyone done DAE on the same audio track twice at the TEAC's full
speed and compared the extracted audio files with the FC command to see if
they are identical?
I'm wondering because I need a drive that does not need a lot of
CPU overhead (hence the PIO and DMA mode questions) and does DAE reliably
at high speeeds. TIA for any insight you can provide.
T.
Bob V
>According to the Teac website
>
>http://www.teac.com/dsp/cd/cd-524.html
>
>this drive does not support CDR and CDRW (Multiread). Perhaps it does, but I
>eliminated this drive from my list due this apparent shortcoming.
>
>I bought the Samsung 24E. 512K buffer. Nice spring loaded tray to reduce
>vibration. I have no idea how the Samsung performs on DAE as I do not
>perform this function.
>
>TomI
I got the Teac 32x and I love it .
Joe
>>I see this same question being asked over and over again: Which ATAPI
>>CD-ROM should I get for fast DAE, which ones are quiet, which ones don't
>>vibrate like they got D-cells in them..
>>
>>Well I tell ya, having asked that same question myself and after having
>>the chance to try out various ATAPI drives, we only have one winner: The
>>TEAC CD-524E 24x ATAPI CD-ROM drive. I have compared it to Hitachi,
>>Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung, Creative, Samjung (yes, SamJung), Acer
>>(Vuego), Mitsumi, Philips - you name it, they all stink compared to
>>TEAC. The Teac was a bit more expensive (at least here in Finland), but
>>it's well worth the extra dosh.
>
>recommendation.
Heh... Same here :)
Replace "spam.sucks" with "bludpool" to reply via email..
Heikki Kähkölä
> >I bought the Samsung 24E. 512K buffer. Nice spring loaded tray to reduce
> >vibration. I have no idea how the Samsung performs on DAE as I do not
> >perform this function.
> >
> >Tom
Yeah forget Samsung from the topic there charlie! I had a Samsung here
when I compared all these 24x drives. The Samsung performed DAE at a
lousy 3X. The tray opening was NOISY and slow. The operating sound
itself was quiet, BUT it definitely vibrated more than the TEAC.
> Whoa, that's wrong. I've used a variety of CD-Rs with mine, and it's
> never once been unable to read a disc.
The TEAC doe of course read CD-R, but NOT CD-RW I'm afraid. The Samsung
does, however, as does the Hitachi 24X.
hk
Heikki Kähkölä
T. wrote:
> Hi, I'm considering purchasing a TEAC as well, and have the
> following questions:
Well consider no more!
> 1) Is it PIO Mode 4 capable?
No, PIO 3.
> 2) Is it DMA Mode 2 capable?
Too right!
> 3) Has anyone done DAE on the same audio track twice at the TEAC's full
> speed and compared the extracted audio files with the FC command to see if
> they are identical?
I will look into this.
> I'm wondering because I need a drive that does not need a lot of
> CPU overhead (hence the PIO and DMA mode questions) and does DAE reliably
> at high speeeds. TIA for any insight you can provide.
The TEAC is very CPU friendly and supports busmastering, just make sure
you connect it to the IDE connectors on the mainboard, NOT any soundcard
etc. Otherwise the busmatering will not work.
hk
Martijn de Jong
Peter Dampier wrote:
> I also just bought one on the recommendation... (Tho I got the x32 unit)
> Only had 15 mins playing with it...
>
> Results so far using checker.exe it read the whole NT4 WS CD at an
> average speed of 3,922k per sec (~an x26 average speed - not bad at
> all!!)
>
> Average access times 90ms...
>
> EZ-CD-Creator reports DAE at 1674k per sec... (~x11) but WinDAC only
> seems to manage x4 to x6....
>
> And it reads my cd-r disks at full speed to whereas my x32 memorex only
> managed 600k per sec!
>
> Its also extremely quiet... (just like the old x8 units used to be!)
Can you tell us if this drive is capable of reading CD-rw disks?
(Multiread)
Martinus
--
To contact me please replace the -at- for a @ and remove
the "nospam@" from my emailadress.
Heikki Kähkölä
Peter Dampier wrote:
>
> >>I hope you're right cos I've just ordered one due to youre
> >>recommendation.
> >
> >Heh... Same here :)
>
> Only had 15 mins playing with it...
>
> Results so far using checker.exe it read the whole NT4 WS CD at an
> average speed of 3,922k per sec (~an x26 average speed - not bad at
> all!!)
Hey! I told ya it would rule. Now how about this: I've gotten AT LEAST
three people to buy the drive, not to mention the ones that bought it
but never posted to this group about it. Hell, TEAC ought to give me
some commision revenues for this ;-))))
Anyway, glad to see people being happy with the TEAC.
hk
Peter Dampier
On Tue, 13 Jan 1998 11:42:00 -0500, "T." <Tr...@NOSPAM.COM> wrote:
>On 13 Jan 1998, Chuck Dinsmore wrote:
>
>> I agree with the above. I have a TEAC 24X and it performs exactly as
>> described. I am very happy with it.
>
> Hi, I'm considering purchasing a TEAC as well, and have the
>following questions:
>
>1) Is it PIO Mode 4 capable?
Yup
>2) Is it DMA Mode 2 capable?
Yup
>3) Has anyone done DAE on the same audio track twice at the TEAC's full
>speed and compared the extracted audio files with the FC command to see if
>they are identical?
Yup tried it last night.... Ripped a 4 min audio track (some classcal
music to make listening for popls clicks etc easy) ripped it twice and
did a fc /b.... No binary differences and the track sounded perfect...
ex-cd-creator reports DAE at 1,950k per sec...
T.
Okay, you sold me. =) I'm placing an order for the TEAC 32X from
NECX tonight. Thanks for the info.
T.
Patz!
> Okay, you sold me. =) I'm placing an order for the TEAC 32X from
>NECX tonight. Thanks for the info.
quiet too! Love it!
Regards,
Patz!
Peter Dampier
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 11:54:29 -0500, "T." <Tr...@NOSPAM.COM> wrote:
> Okay, you sold me. =) I'm placing an order for the TEAC 32X from
>NECX tonight. Thanks for the info.
Let us know what firmware revision you get... Mine was 1.0A
I don't like getting 1.0A of anything....
Incidently I bought mine from KC Computers
(http://www.kc-computers.com)
$100 + $6 shipping so a bit more than NECX but Kevin who runs it
offers such EXCELLENT service and support I always deal with them
given the choice...
They have them in stock too...
Brad Franzella
In article <34BE20...@FUCKSPAM.iki.fi>,
Heikki Kähkölä <he...@FUCKSPAM.iki.fi> wrote:
>Peter Dampier wrote:
>>
>> I also just bought one on the recommendation... (Tho I got the x32 unit)
>> Only had 15 mins playing with it...
>>
>> Results so far using checker.exe it read the whole NT4 WS CD at an
>> average speed of 3,922k per sec (~an x26 average speed - not bad at
>> all!!)
>> Its also extremely quiet... (just like the old x8 units used to be!)
>
>Hey! I told ya it would rule. Now how about this: I've gotten AT LEAST
>three people to buy the drive, not to mention the ones that bought it
>but never posted to this group about it. Hell, TEAC ought to give me
>some commision revenues for this ;-))))
>
>Anyway, glad to see people being happy with the TEAC.
I'm about to get the T4eac 32x based on this discussion too! Thanks for
the info!
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Clear Skies, www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~wizz
Brad Franzella
Irwin Pui-Yin Choy
peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter Dampier) wrote:
>Let us know what firmware revision you get... Mine was 1.0A
Mine is also 1.0A.
>I don't like getting 1.0A of anything....
My old SONY has a firmware of 3.0. Are you happy now? :)
>
>Incidently I bought mine from KC Computers
>(http://www.kc-computers.com)
>
>$100 + $6 shipping so a bit more than NECX but Kevin who runs it
>offers such EXCELLENT service and support I always deal with them
>given the choice...
>
>They have them in stock too...
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------
Irwin Pui-Yin Choy
e-mail: pyc...@unity.ncsu.edu, pyc...@usa.net
M.S. (Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management) program
North Carolina State University
Martin
Everyone is writing about ATAPI Teacs (I presume) Has anybody tried the
SCSI version of the 32X... I've been trying to get some info about this
drive (DAE, CPU Utilization ....) but so far w/o any response. I suspect
that it will not be any worse than the ATAPI 24X, but still I don't want to
buy it before i get more info. Anyone has some experience with this drive
???
Martin
Mark
Kevin is cool, I bought my Asus MB from him. I found the hard drive
at Insight though for 69 bucks. they rip you off on shipping though.
CDW has it for like 72, so with 2.99 shipping it's 75 bucks. Awesome
deal.
Mark
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 19:03:33 GMT, peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter
Dampier) wrote:
>
>Let us know what firmware revision you get... Mine was 1.0A
>
>I don't like getting 1.0A of anything....
>
>
Patz!
>Incidently I bought mine from KC Computers
>(http://www.kc-computers.com)
>
>$100 + $6 shipping so a bit more than NECX but Kevin who runs it
>offers such EXCELLENT service and support I always deal with them
>given the choice...
>
>They have them in stock too...
peripherals are so cheap in Singapore! Got 2 sticks of 32mb (for a total of
64mb) Hyundai SDRAM with EEPROM(1st party, not the cheap OEM 3rd party ones)
for US$110.(yes, that's US$55 per stick!) It came with full certification
and everything!
Regards,
Patz!
lklkj lkjlkj
>I see this same question being asked over and over again: Which ATAPI
>CD-ROM should I get for fast DAE, which ones are quiet, which ones don't
>vibrate like they got D-cells in them..
>
>Well I tell ya, having asked that same question myself and after having
>the chance to try out various ATAPI drives, we only have one winner: The
>TEAC CD-524E 24x ATAPI CD-ROM drive. I have compared it to Hitachi,
>Panasonic, Toshiba, Samsung, Creative, Samjung (yes, SamJung), Acer
>(Vuego), Mitsumi, Philips - you name it, they all stink compared to
>TEAC. The Teac was a bit more expensive (at least here in Finland), but
>it's well worth the extra dosh.
>
>1) It's fast. 95ms access time isn't the FASTEST we have, but it's good.
>
>2) The tray opening is the fastest I've ever seen. Quiet also, no
>rattling sound when it opens.
>
>3) The drive spins up in about two-three seconds, which is hardly
>audible. Compare to Acer - it sounds like a jet plane.
>
>4) Absolutely NO vibration. Very quiet reading. Whereas the Panasonic
>sounds like it got a sack of nails stuck in it.
>
>5) Finally, the DAE speed. I use WinDAC for ripping CD-tracks. The
>average speed is about 13x, NO JITTER, perfect copies. This is the best
>I've had any ATAPI drive do. Because of this, I can also copy CD's on
>the fly, directly from the TEAC to my CDD3610. Mixed mode, anything
>goes. No buffer underruns.
>
>So you looking for a decent - no, BEST available ATAPI drive? 24x?? Get
>the TEAC!!!!!!!
>
>hk
>
>(ps. this was not a commercial, I just like to have a product that ROCKS
>for a change :-)
Anyone know if the Teac 16x SCSI performs the same ? Does it read
Mode 2 (XA) at high speed ?
Heikki Kähkölä
Miikka Sauramo wrote:
>
> Mitsumi's 8X IDE-cd-rom is a wonderful el-cheapo buy (~50$)
>
Hey come on beefy tits, you can't be serious. The Mitsumi8x isn't even
comparable to the TEAC CD524. I've had the Mitsumi and it's a piece of
shite. Slow as bitch, and what annoyed me most, was its incapability to
read audio tracks from CD-R discs without skipping. I tell ya it really
burns your ass - playing Carmageddon and having the fukkin' music
breaking up and changing track all by itself. I tried two separate
drives, both had the same problem (yes, even with different brands of
CD-R media).
So far the only good thing Mitsumi has ever produced is their ATAPI
CD-recorder. It really SEEMS to be reliable!
hk
Boyington
DAE - is this digital audio extraction? Is this the same
thing as ripping a cd? If so....is scsi a lot better for
doing DAE?
Thanks
Matt
Heikki Kähkölä wrote in message <34BD04...@FUCKSPAM.iki.fi>...
Joe
>The TEAC doe of course read CD-R, but NOT CD-RW I'm afraid. The Samsung
>does, however, as does the Hitachi 24X.
The Teac 32x reads CD-RW disks.
John Gerard
Hello,
I am not going to do a lot of DAE with my CD-ROM drive but I
may play around with it. So on that stand point is the Teac 32x drive
better than the Toshiba 32X? I have a Tohiba SCSI 6.7x and it works
fine for me. What is the warranty on the Teac drive. I know that the
Teac floppies only have about a 30 day warranty.
Thanks,
John
David Frost
I've got the Teac CD-524E and it has no problems reading CDR disks.
A BIG problem though, is that when it plays CD-Audio, my whole machine
slows down.
(I have a Pentium-II 233 with 32MB EDO). For example, Quake2: with CD
Audio on
it is very jittery (unplayably so) but with CD-Audio off it is very
smooth. The same
occurs with several other games.
I have the CD on a separate IDE channel to the hard disk, and the
motherboard
is an ABIT AN-6. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
David Frost
Tom Robeson wrote:
> According to the Teac website
>
> http://www.teac.com/dsp/cd/cd-524.html
>
> this drive does not support CDR and CDRW (Multiread). Perhaps it does, but I
> eliminated this drive from my list due this apparent shortcoming.
>
Joshua Hill
Ok, ok. I get the point: it's a kick-ass CD-Rom player.
I am going to buy a new CD-Rom player this weekend (mainly for mp3...)
so this one would be the best buy!?
I do have some questions though:
1) I've got some mp3 CD's, so I want to play them decently. I can't
grab audio with my old CD-Rom player, so it's great that this player
can grab (at high speed). I am currently testing a Mitsumi 24x speed,
which works fine with data... and can grab audio...(testing at the
moment). However, when playing a MP3 CD the drive spins up (and -down)
every time a piece of the 'track' is read. This is pretty annoying.
Although it doesn't sound like a jet-plane you can hear it through the
audio.
SO: IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO SPIN-DOWN THE CD-ROM DRIVE?
2) When playing games, I guess 24x or 32x wouldn't improve gameplay.
Someone said it has a larger processor usage. Is this true? And can I
avoid this. (SAME QUESTION AS 1)
Well, in fact it's only one question I guess. However, I think it's
important that you can set the drive at a slower (max.) speed to avoid
frequent spin up/down's.
Joost van den Heuvel.
On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 14:34:19 +0200, Heikki Kähkölä
<he...@BOLLOXSPAM.iki.fi> wrote:
Jerry Lin
Is the 24x Teac DMA capable? If so, enable it and you should see your CPU
ultilization decrease. This should speed up your system when the CD-ROM is
being accessed.
- Jerry
David Frost wrote in message <34C516D3...@mcmail.com>...
Alan Burton
On Mon, 19 Jan 1998 08:33:23 GMT, jo...@hooked.net (John Gerard)
wrote:
I've bought the Teac CD 524E as suggested in this thread but its
popping like hell on DAE for me. I feel like I just wasted my money.
Any thoughts appreciated.
Jim Gilliland
> I've bought the Teac CD 524E as suggested in this thread but its
> popping like hell on DAE for me. I feel like I just wasted my money.
> Any thoughts appreciated.
Join the club. You're one of several of us who have posted the same report here
over the past few days. Mine is in the box to be shipped back to the vendor.
Mark
What DAE program are you using? I'm using WinDac32 and having no
problems at all.
Mark
On Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:15:35 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
Johan de Wit
Same here. If I use WINDAC to read audio tracks (average 7-8x) the
result is a wave file with 'pops' and 'cracks'. The same if I use Easy
CD pro to copy an audio CD. I did find out that some discs result in
more 'noise' than others.
Does anyone know of a program where you can select the reading speed,
so you can set the reading speed e.g. to 4x or 6x?
I use NT4 Cx166+ 32Mb
Johan
Jim Gilliland
Mark wrote:
> What DAE program are you using? I'm using WinDac32 and having no
> problems at all.
>
> Mark
>
> On Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:15:35 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> I've bought the Teac CD 524E as suggested in this thread but its
> >> popping like hell on DAE for me. I feel like I just wasted my money.
> >> Any thoughts appreciated.
> >
> >Join the club. You're one of several of us who have posted the same report here
> >over the past few days. Mine is in the box to be shipped back to the vendor.
Yes, I assumed so. I'm using the same software and having nothing but trouble.
There are several folks like you who are reporting perfect results, and there are
several folks like me who have got drives that are unusable for DAE.
Let's try this - everyone with a Teac 532 who is using it for DAE, please report your
firmware version and whether or not you get clean DAE results. Maybe we'll find a
trend, or maybe not.
I doubt that it will matter whether it's the 532E (IDE) or the 532S (SCSI), but
report that, too, just in case. Thanks.
magu
>
>Yes, I assumed so. I'm using the same software and having nothing but
trouble.
>There are several folks like you who are reporting perfect results, and
there are
>several folks like me who have got drives that are unusable for DAE.
>
>Let's try this - everyone with a Teac 532 who is using it for DAE, please
report your
>firmware version and whether or not you get clean DAE results. Maybe we'll
find a
>trend, or maybe not.
>
>I doubt that it will matter whether it's the 532E (IDE) or the 532S (SCSI),
but
>report that, too, just in case. Thanks.
>
>
Well here we go...
I have the 532E (firmware 1.0A) and using WinDAC I get excellent results so
far. Tried normal, sync and burst modes in WinDAC and compared the *.wavs
with fc /b and they were exactly the same. Only once, when copying in burst
mode, I was doing something in the background and the file I got was a bit
longer than the other ones of the same track in normal and sync modes. When
you leave it alone while it does DAE in burst mode it's always around 12x
and the results are perfect in my case. (I have 80MB of RAM just in case it
matters)
I have to add that I was disappointed by the TEAC at first, because the one
I got was dead (the tray wouldn't open at all !). The one I got as a
replacement is excellent though :-).
Martin
Jim Gilliland
> I have the 532E (firmware 1.0A) and using WinDAC I get excellent results so
> far. Tried normal, sync and burst modes in WinDAC and compared the *.wavs
> with fc /b and they were exactly the same. Only once, when copying in burst
> mode, I was doing something in the background and the file I got was a bit
> longer than the other ones of the same track in normal and sync modes.
Well, we're off to a fine start <g>. My Teac also has 1.0A firmware. And just
to keep providing appropriate detail, I should point out that the wav files that
resulted from my DAE efforts with the Teac were quite consistent in size from
one attempt to the next. However, they were far from consistent in content.
There seemed to be just as many errors from one test to the next, but they were
never in the same place twice.
Mark Tamashiro
532E w/ Firmware 1.0A
WinDac 1.33
Burst and Normal @ any speed is unacceptable
SectorSync @ Default, 32, and 16 are unacceptable
SectorSync @ 4x produces (so far) error free DAC.
Easy CD Creator Deluxe 3.01a
Slow, Middle, and Fast Audio Extraction settings all produce unacceptable DAC.
System test reports audio extraction at 1700kbs
Jim Gilliland wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
> > What DAE program are you using? I'm using WinDac32 and having no
> > problems at all.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:15:35 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >> I've bought the Teac CD 524E as suggested in this thread but its
> > >> popping like hell on DAE for me. I feel like I just wasted my money.
> > >> Any thoughts appreciated.
> > >
> > >Join the club. You're one of several of us who have posted the same report here
> > >over the past few days. Mine is in the box to be shipped back to the vendor.
>
Boyington
windac 1.33 allows you to select the read speed. I too bought
and received a teac 32x recently. I found that if I limit the
read speed to 4x then it does DAE w/o a snag. On most
cd's I can get away with 8x but on some cd's I have to limit it
to 4x.
Matt
Johan de Wit wrote in message <34cb2b02...@news.worldonline.nl>...
>Same here. If I use WINDAC to read audio tracks (average 7-8x) the
>result is a wave file with 'pops' and 'cracks'. The same if I use Easy
>CD pro to copy an audio CD. I did find out that some discs result in
>more 'noise' than others.
>
>Does anyone know of a program where you can select the reading speed,
>so you can set the reading speed e.g. to 4x or 6x?
>
>I use NT4 Cx166+ 32Mb
>
>Johan
>
>
>
Phil Murray
I just bought a Memorex CD-322E, 32X from Best Buy for $119.00 that does DAE
at 7.0X. The resulting wav files are clean and sound great. I used WinDAC
1.33.
The drive is an AOpen product renamed to Memorex I believe. Go to the AOpen
web site and read the specs on it's new 32X drive. Same as the specs that
came with the Memorex. Also the DOS CD-Rom driver is AOpen.
I was very skeptical of the faster drives as my Hitachi 8X would vibrate
very badly with certain CDs. These same Cds in the Memorex barely hum.
Very good chassis maybe. I'm impressed so far. Now if it will last for
awhile.
I hope this helps some one with a buying decision.
Phil Murray
pmu...@nospaminx.net
Remove "nospam" if contacting me via E-Mail
tom
>532E w/ Firmware 1.0A
>
cdcreator 2.xxx won't even look at the drive
ezcdpro extracts 5+min. of audio in less than 30 sec.
have checked disconnect and DMA in device manager
any ideas about cdcreator?
this appears to be a super drive for DAE
no pops or gaps like my old torsen 16X drive
using osr2 with all updates
>> Let's try this - everyone with a Teac 532 who is using it for DAE, please
report your
>> firmware version and whether or not you get clean DAE results. Maybe
we'll find a
>> trend, or maybe not.
>>
hope this adds to the trend
tglt...@toledolink.com
tom
Jim Gilliland
Peter Dampier wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 00:33:15 +0100, "magu"
> <NOSPA...@stud.uni-hannover.de> wrote:
>
> >I thought maybe it would help to provide the time of production and the
> >serial number of the drive ? The one I have is from Nov. 97, sn is 158xxx
> >(I'm too lazy to look up the exact one). The first one I got, (the one that
> >was dead) had sn 146xxx and was also from Nov.
>
> Mine was Dec 97.... Not going to open the case (again) to find the exact
> serial number tho. :)
As I said I would, I went out and bought another Teac 532E today. I brought it
home and tested it with several CDs and several different DAE programs. The
results were exactly as before - the drive produced wav files that were flawed
from beginning to end. I note that both of the drives that I have tested were
manufactured in November. I didn't keep track of serial numbers, sorry. These
drives came from two completely different sources, so they're not just part of a
bad batch. One came from Computer Discount Warehouse via mail order, the other
came from Best Buy in an Atlas 32s box (a small sticker on the outside of the
box lets you know what drive is actually inside).
I was really hoping that it would work, but it didn't, so I took it back.
Now I'm trying another - a Memorex 322E. So far, it is working rather well.
That is, the wav files show no obvious errors, and DAE performance is good
(about 6x, the same as the Teac). However, a file comparison does show some
differences between wav files when I extract the same music twice from the same
disc, so obviously it's not perfect. But it is _far_ superior to the two Teac
532Es that I tried. I haven't decided yet whether to just keep this one, or to
keep looking for something better. I've seen several other 32x drives on store
shelves here in town, all at about the same price point.
Has anyone tried DAE on the NEC 32x drive? Any other suggestions? - my
criteria: IDE, 32x, MultiRead, $80 to $120 or so, and most important, fast
accurate DAE.
Jim Gilliland
Peter Dampier wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:14:57 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Now I'm trying another - a Memorex 322E. So far, it is working rather well.
>
> My experience with the Memorex was good for DAE but poor for reading
> blue/green cd-r's... It would only read data off these at 600k per sec.
> :*(
Thanks. I haven't experimented with those yet.
> >That is, the wav files show no obvious errors, and DAE performance is good
> >(about 6x, the same as the Teac). However, a file comparison does show some
> >differences between wav files when I extract the same music twice from the same
> >disc, so obviously it's not perfect. But it is _far_ superior to the two Teac
> >532Es that I tried. I haven't decided yet whether to just keep this one, or to
> >keep looking for something better. I've seen several other 32x drives on store
> >shelves here in town, all at about the same price point.
>
> See my latest post.... DAE on my previoulsy flawless Teac is now
> failing for me.... Just after I installed the latest Adaptec ASPI layer
> update... Previous to that it was fine in NT and Win95.... Now its still
> fine in Win95 as that has not had any new software added to it....
> This is odd....
It certainly is. For the record, I've never applied an Adaptec ASPI layer to my
system. Whatever ASPI is in there, it is the code that installed with NT. So ASPI
wouldn't appear to be the problem with my two Teacs. I did note something
interesting, though. The Teacs gave much more accurate DAE at the beginning of the
disc than at the end. However, even in track 1, there were some skips. By track
12, you could barely tell what song you were listening to.
> >Has anyone tried DAE on the NEC 32x drive? Any other suggestions? - my
> >criteria: IDE, 32x, MultiRead, $80 to $120 or so, and most important, fast
> >accurate DAE.
>
> Tried the NEC x32 drive... it does DAE at x1.5. :-(
Well, that will save me from wasting time on that one anyway <g>. Thanks.
magu
Peter Dampier schrieb in Nachricht <34ce0133...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 15:34:20 -1000, Mark Tamashiro <tam...@ibm.net>
>wrote:
>
>>WinDac 1.33
>>Burst and Normal @ any speed is unacceptable
>>SectorSync @ Default, 32, and 16 are unacceptable
>>
>>SectorSync @ 4x produces (so far) error free DAC.
>>
>>Easy CD Creator Deluxe 3.01a
>>Slow, Middle, and Fast Audio Extraction settings all produce unacceptable
DAC.
>>System test reports audio extraction at 1700kbs
>
>
>
>Weid.... Maybe they are sensitive to being damaged in transit?
>
>Mine was shipped overnight to avoid the UPS ground trashing service....
>
>
It's really strange to see so many varying reports on the 532E. Makes you
wonder if Teac ever heard of quality control :-\.
I thought maybe it would help to provide the time of production and the
serial number of the drive ? The one I have is from Nov. 97, sn is 158xxx
(I'm too lazy to look up the exact one). The first one I got, (the one that
was dead) had sn 146xxx and was also from Nov.
Martin
Steve
So far, from the posts in this newsgroup, the Teac 532 IDE version is
having problems with clean DAE. Has anyone experienced the same
problem with the SCSI version? I would like to know what version of
the drive (IDE or SCSI) people who are getting good results are using.
Peter Dampier
On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:32:58 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>> See my latest post.... DAE on my previoulsy flawless Teac is now
>> failing for me.... Just after I installed the latest Adaptec ASPI layer
>> update... Previous to that it was fine in NT and Win95.... Now its still
>> fine in Win95 as that has not had any new software added to it....
>> This is odd....
>
>It certainly is. For the record, I've never applied an Adaptec ASPI layer to my
>system. Whatever ASPI is in there, it is the code that installed with NT. So ASPI
>wouldn't appear to be the problem with my two Teacs. I did note something
>interesting, though. The Teacs gave much more accurate DAE at the beginning of the
>disc than at the end. However, even in track 1, there were some skips. By track
>12, you could barely tell what song you were listening to.
Back to more testing this morning.... Since I installed Easy CD
Creator and the 1/12/98 Apadtec ASPI update to 4.57 1008 I now cannot
rip successfully from the Teac 532E in NT4, WinDAC produces pops and
clicks and general skipping/jumping of the .wav while CDCopy now
refuses to find any cd drives on my system...
However rebooting to Win98 Beta 3 and installing Easy CD Creator 3.0
(Build 055) (so far just the standard version that came with my new
Ricoh cd-rw drive) I can rip audio with WinDAC at x9-x11 speeds with
100% accuracy again...
It seems that the Teac 532E will do fast and good DAE but is sensitive
to the software/driver revisions you have in your system...
Problem I have now is I can't remove the problem within NT4 despite
uninstalling all the adaptec stuff that caused the initial failure of
WinDAC!!!!
Jim Gilliland
> this appears to be a super drive for DAE
> no pops or gaps like my old torsen 16X drive
> using osr2 with all updates
>
When was your drive manufactured? The date should be on the sticker on
top of the drive. The two I've tried were both manufactured in
November, and produced garbage for wav files. Of those who are
achieving good results, only one has reported the date of manufacture,
and he specified December. It appears that everyone has the same
firmware, so that doesn't seem to be a factor in determining which
drives work and which ones don't. Unfortunately, I didn't keep any
serial numbers, but if all those getting good results have December
drives, that might be a clue.
Peter Dampier
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 13:08:50 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
> Of those who are
>achieving good results, only one has reported the date of manufacture,
>and he specified December. It appears that everyone has the same
>firmware, so that doesn't seem to be a factor in determining which
>drives work and which ones don't. Unfortunately, I didn't keep any
>serial numbers, but if all those getting good results have December
>drives, that might be a clue.
Yup, but I'm (being the one with the Dec 97 drive) beginning to feel
its some sort of software/driver issue as DAE stopped working for me
with the Teac last night in NT4 after installing the very latest
Adaptec ASPI layer, reboot to Win98 and all works fine with WinDAC...
Jerry Lin
My motherboard detects the Teac 532E as a Mode 3 device while the manual
says it is a Mode 4 device. How do you know you're running at Mode 4?
- Jerry
Peter Dampier wrote in message <34cc75ba...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 09:25:27 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
>Teac 533E (Running as Mode 4 EIDE as Master on Secondary EIDE Channel)
ALAN BURTON
On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 03:42:52 GMT, jo...@spamoff.execpc.com (Mark)
wrote:
>What DAE program are you using? I'm using WinDac32 and having no
>problems at all.
>
>Mark
Hi Mark,
I am using Golden Hawk on direct copy. It clicks terribly.
Its OK if I write an image first but it must be from the writer not
the TEAC.
Alan
Dave Balcom
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 02:20:04 -0500, "Jerry Lin" <JL...@Compuserve.Com>
wrote:
}My motherboard detects the Teac 532E as a Mode 3 device while the manual
}says it is a Mode 4 device. How do you know you're running at Mode 4?
Same here on my FIC PT-2200 motherboard. The manual says it is a mode
4 device but my system don't think so.
Later,
Dave
Key ID: 0xEBD0867B Key Type: Diffie-Hellman/DSS Key Size: 2048/1024
Fingerprint: 6FF8 3A7D 8F92 775A 8E3C DED5 3C23 7185 EBD0 867B
Martijn de Jong
Hi,
Peter Dampier wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:14:57 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Now I'm trying another - a Memorex 322E. So far, it is working rather well.
>
> My experience with the Memorex was good for DAE but poor for reading
> blue/green cd-r's... It would only read data off these at 600k per sec.
> :*(
>
I believe, you told me the Memorex was an oem'd Acer-Open 32 speed. I
bought an A-Open 32speed yesterday. I put in a Philips Rainbow cdr
(which is green, I believe) and it reads at 20speed (3000 KB/s), so I
think that's not bad at all. The A-Open does DAE at 8 speed (1375 KB/s).
I extracted the same file three times at all the different speeds I
could choose from within Adaptecs Easy CD Creator dlx 3.01a and compared
them. They were all the same. To my ears the the file sounds perfect.
I'm very happy so far.
regarding this experiences and the statement below, the Memorex might
not be an oem'd A-Open...
For those eager to know, CD-RW reads at about 600 KB/s.
> >That is, the wav files show no obvious errors, and DAE performance is good
> >(about 6x, the same as the Teac). However, a file comparison does show some
> >differences between wav files when I extract the same music twice from the same
> >disc, so obviously it's not perfect. But it is _far_ superior to the two Teac
> >532Es that I tried. I haven't decided yet whether to just keep this one, or to
> >keep looking for something better. I've seen several other 32x drives on store
> >shelves here in town, all at about the same price point.
>
> Jim,
>
Martinus.
--
To contact me please replace the -at- for a @ and remove
the "nospam@" from my emailadress.
Peter Dampier
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 22:24:33 GMT, ba...@gte.net (Dave Balcom) wrote:
>Same here on my FIC PT-2200 motherboard. The manual says it is a mode
>4 device but my system don't think so.
Tell your bios its mode 4 and it will work fine as mode 4...
Peter Dampier
>I believe, you told me the Memorex was an oem'd Acer-Open 32 speed. I
>bought an A-Open 32speed yesterday. I put in a Philips Rainbow cdr
>(which is green, I believe) and it reads at 20speed (3000 KB/s), so I
>think that's not bad at all. The A-Open does DAE at 8 speed (1375 KB/s).
>I extracted the same file three times at all the different speeds I
>could choose from within Adaptecs Easy CD Creator dlx 3.01a and compared
>them. They were all the same. To my ears the the file sounds perfect.
>I'm very happy so far.
>regarding this experiences and the statement below, the Memorex might
>not be an oem'd A-Open...
>For those eager to know, CD-RW reads at about 600 KB/s.
The Memorex x32 is diffinately a AOpen x32 OEM'd drive (at leat to the
best of my ability to tell but it comes with aopen drives, same back
panel/front panel as the aopen, same specs, mention of aopen in manual
etc).
Maybe Philips Green CD-R is better quality than mine but my Memorex
x32 would only read my generic green/blue CD-R's at 600k per sec while
it would read my Mitsui Golds and other green cd-r's at fullish speed
(2,000k per sec)....
But it was definately much more fussy in reading the cd-r's than my
x32 Teac now is... That blasts through the generic green/blue ones at
3,600-3,900k per sec.... (same with the golds etc)
Dave B
On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 13:08:50 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>When was your drive manufactured? The date should be on the sticker on
>top of the drive. The two I've tried were both manufactured in
>November, and produced garbage for wav files. Of those who are
>achieving good results, only one has reported the date of manufacture,
>and he specified December. It appears that everyone has the same
>firmware, so that doesn't seem to be a factor in determining which
>drives work and which ones don't. Unfortunately, I didn't keep any
>serial numbers, but if all those getting good results have December
>drives, that might be a clue.
Just got a Teac CD-532E this week. Manufactured Dec 1997 with Ver 1.0A
firmware. Produces excellent pop free DAE consistantly at 9-11 speed
with WinDac 1.33 on a P200 MMX system.
Jim Gilliland
After all the discussion we've had about the Teac 532 and its DAE problems
(or lack thereof), I've just read a couple of notes posted within an hour or
so of each other which discuss the DAE performance of the Teac 524. Guess
what - one of the posters describes perfect DAE, while the other reports a
total failure.
So it may be that there is some inherent characteristic of Teac drives that
makes them particularly vulnerable to this problem when placed in specific
configurations.
The errors produced by these drives are extreme - they are not subtle. The
drive currently in my system, a Memorex 322, produces DAE wav files that
sound quite clean, but a file compare shows that some sync errors do slip
through. I can't hear them, but the fact that the files don't compare
exactly tells me that some errors are occuring. I deduce that they are sync
errors because I can eliminate them by turning on the "jitter correction"
capabilities of the software (WinDAC or other program). Once I've done
that, the wav files compare perfectly.
On the other hand, the Teac produces huge jumps within the audio, and no
amount of sync overlap will correct these errors - I've tried up to 16
segments of overlap. That suggests to me that these are not sync errors at
all, but some other mechanism.
When I listen to the wav files, I hear the song in fragments. Certain
fragments are repeated, others seem to be skipped. The song seems to jump
about randomly, but the length of the jumps or repeated segments seems to be
quite consistent - I'd estimate them to be roughly an eighth of a second.
That's a short amount of time, but it's _much_ bigger than a CDDA frame.
When reading data from a disc (or hard drive, for that matter), the
mechanism is generally as follows: The interface instructs the drive to
read a certain amount of data from a certain point on the disc (or disk),
the drive acts on that instruction, the data winds up in a buffer, the drive
then indicates to the interface that the action has been completed, the
interface generates an interrupt to trigger the appropriate action from the
driver. It is up to the interface and its software driver to leave that
buffer alone until it has been properly filled by the drive, then to process
the retrieved data. (Actually, in the case of IDE, I think it is the
interface that fills the buffer, but that doesn't change anything for the
purpose of this discussion.)
If, through some interaction error between the drive, interface, and driver,
this buffer were being accessed at an improper time, I would expect to
achieve results exactly like those that I'm getting with this drive. In
other words, the symptoms of this failure suggest to me that some sort of
buffer error is occuring, rather than a synchronization error at the disc
itself.
If the buffer is just large enough to hold, say, an eighth of a second of
audio, and the driver were accessing it without being properly synchronized
with the action of the drive, then sometimes the right data would be
retrieved, and other times incorrect data would be retrieved. But the
errors in general would be much larger than the small errors that occur (and
are correctable) with frame synchronization. And they would tend to be
equal in length - the length of the buffer. The result would be audio that
jumps around exactly as I've described it above.
On the other hand, some systems that used slightly different mechanisms for
synching with the drive might get very good results. So the Teac problems
may depend on what motherboard you own, what IDE chipset you use, what
service pack you have installed on NT, what ASPI software and settings you
have, etc.
Obviously, this is speculation. There are certainly other possible
explanations. But this hypothesis seems to fit all of the available
evidence, including Peter's experience with errors on NT, but good
performance in Win95, and my finding equally disastrous results with
multiple Teacs.
Jim Gilliland
magu wrote:
> Just a question to those who haven't had succes at DAE with their 532E. Did
> you guys copy the TEACATAP.VXD that is on the drivers-disc to
> [Windows]\SYSTEM\IOSUBSYS ??? I don't know if it really makes a difference
> just trying to find out why it works for some and does not for others :-/.
No, vxd's aren't used in the NT environment. Is there a comparable driver for
WinNT?
I'm not aware of one.
Jim Gilliland
Peter Dampier wrote:
> I would add that I have had the Teac working 100% in NT4 and Win95 but
> on installing the latest 4.57 1008 (I think) Adaptec ASPI layer it
> produces the exact symtoms you describe Jim.... While rebooting to Win98
> (with no apdatec aspi layer, and then Easy CD Creators 4.56 1003 layer)
> both produces 100% perfect DAE....
Peter, in your working mode (Win98, say) have you actually used a binary
comparison to make sure that you're not getting any errors? Obviously,
you're not getting the problems that I get, but are you getting any
discrepancies at all? If you haven't tested it, I'd appreciate it if you
would. Just run the same wav extract multiple times, perhaps twice without
any error correction, and then twice more with it on. The two files created
with error correction on should certainly be identical, and if the others
are also identical, that's better yet. Make sure to use a clean source CD
for your tests.
The reason I'm asking is because I've yet to see any drive that would
produce perfect wav files every time (yes, I know the Plextor's
reputation). I'd be interested in learning just how "perfect" the Teac
actually is when it is working correctly.
Thanks in advance.
Jim
magu
Just a question to those who haven't had succes at DAE with their 532E. Did
you guys copy the TEACATAP.VXD that is on the drivers-disc to
[Windows]\SYSTEM\IOSUBSYS ??? I don't know if it really makes a difference
just trying to find out why it works for some and does not for others :-/.
Martin
Darin Genereux
On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 21:47:29 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>Peter Dampier wrote:
In all my tests, my working machine (see other post) duplicate WAV
files that compared byte for byte 100% of the time. I think I must've
tested anywher from 10 to 20 pairs of WAV files, so I think the TEAC
produces very consistent results, with the right hardware.
I can't explain Peter's problem with the lastest ASPI layer from
Creator. I also had Creator 3.01 installed when I ran those tests and
it worked fine. Strange.
Darin
Darin Genereux
On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:49:40 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>After all the discussion we've had about the Teac 532 and its DAE problems
Hi Jim, very nice post. From my own experiences with the TEAC I
completely agree with you. The drive, when it produces poor DAE,
exhibits syptoms of data flow problems and not jitter problems. I'm
not an expert on IDE system or buffer configurations, but what you say
makes sense.
I picked up the TEAC 532E the other day, mainly because my first drive
of choice the Panasonic 585B was out of stock. So I took a chance,
hoping I would get a 'good' drive... I brought it home and
immediately replaced a 12X Cyberdrive (don't ever buy one!) with it on
my main system wanting to try it out before installing it in my
burning machine. I have a HP 7110e drive that normally sits on the
burning system, but I had it on my machine a few days ago and still
had all the necessary software for testing DAE: CDCopy, WinDAC32, and
Easy CD Creator Deluxe.
After first inserting my RW disc, and being totally astounded that it
read it (no mention of multiread compatability in the docs), I was
practically floored by the performance of the TEAC. On a couple of
test rips with WinDAC, I averaged above 12X speed with no errors,
audible or with FC /b. After enabling DMA (standard Intel
bustmastering drivers supplied with OSR2) and setting the secondary
master IDE channel to PIO mode 4, I recorded a couple of record
breaking rips at 14.5X speed (WinDAC) and still no errors!
After deciding that this drive totally rocked, I moved it over to the
burning machine where it would permanently reside. As you may have
guessed, it was here that I encountered all the problems of previous
posters... First off, WinDAC wouldn't extract any faster than about
8.5X, and secondly, all the files had errors where either small
segments of the track would be repeated or skipped. I tried every
setting in WinDAC, every setting in the BIOS, and re-installed all the
burning software (Win95 had just been re-installed also). I did my
best to mimick that machine's configuration to my own, but still no
dice.
In order to see what the real problem was, I removed the hardrive and
TEAC from the burning machine and installed them on my motherboard.
Though the drive is slower than mine, the TEAC again performed
flawlessy at around 13X speeds in WinDAC. Moved the hardware back to
the other machine and the same problems came back.
On the more positive side, Easy CD Creator seemed to do a much better
job at extracting than WinDAC, but Creator again has the missing 2
seconds bug (which it didn't have a few weeks ago!). And I've found
that CDCopy is not only faster than WinDAC, but also produces flawless
DAE so that's what I'm currently using and it works fine, just not as
fast as it could be.
I've tried everything, BIOS, drivers, software, etc, and firmly
believe the problem lies in the motherboard and/or its IDE controller.
I'd like to get a good add-on IDE controller card, like a Paradise
UDMA, and see if that helps.
Here are the system configurations:
My system:
K6-233 @250Mhz on 83Mhz bus
ASUS P55T2P4 Rev. 3.1, Intel HX Chipset
IBM 4.3GB Deskstar 5 Hardrive, PIO mode 4 Primary master
Cyberdrive 12X, Secondary master (was replaced by TEAC for testing)
Mitsumi 4X CD, Secondary slave
32MB EDO RAM
etc...
CDR Burning Station:
AMD K5-PR166 at normal 66Mhz bus speed
AOpen AP5VM, Intel VX Chipset, very inexpensive board
32MB non-EDO RAM (FP, 60ns)
Quantum 1.0 GB Fireball (over 2 years old), Mode 4, Primary Master
TEAC 532E, Mode 4, Secondary Master
etc...
For software I am using Win95 OSR2, EasyCD Creator 3.01, WinDAC 3.3,
and CDCopy 3.802.
All in all I'm am very happy with the drive, especially it's
performance on my ASUS and the fact that it reads RWs. I'm
considering either selling the AOpen board and replacing it, or
keeping the TEAC for myself and trying a different drive for DAE on
the burning computer.
I think I've covered about everthing, but don't hesitate to post if I
left some info out. This DAE issue is kinda strange and I am still
experimenting with it.
Regards,
Darin
Jim Gilliland
Darin Genereux wrote:
> After first inserting my RW disc, and being totally astounded that it
> read it (no mention of multiread compatability in the docs), I was
> practically floored by the performance of the TEAC. On a couple of
> test rips with WinDAC, I averaged above 12X speed with no errors,
> audible or with FC /b. After enabling DMA (standard Intel
> bustmastering drivers supplied with OSR2) and setting the secondary
> master IDE channel to PIO mode 4, I recorded a couple of record
> breaking rips at 14.5X speed (WinDAC) and still no errors!
>
> After deciding that this drive totally rocked, I moved it over to the
> burning machine where it would permanently reside. As you may have
> guessed, it was here that I encountered all the problems of previous
> posters... First off, WinDAC wouldn't extract any faster than about
> 8.5X, and secondly, all the files had errors where either small
> segments of the track would be repeated or skipped. I tried every
> setting in WinDAC, every setting in the BIOS, and re-installed all the
> burning software (Win95 had just been re-installed also). I did my
> best to mimick that machine's configuration to my own, but still no
> dice.
>
> In order to see what the real problem was, I removed the hardrive and
> TEAC from the burning machine and installed them on my motherboard.
> Though the drive is slower than mine, the TEAC again performed
> flawlessy at around 13X speeds in WinDAC. Moved the hardware back to
> the other machine and the same problems came back.
>
> I've tried everything, BIOS, drivers, software, etc, and firmly
> believe the problem lies in the motherboard and/or its IDE controller.
> I'd like to get a good add-on IDE controller card, like a Paradise
> UDMA, and see if that helps.
Darin, that's very helpful! Thanks for posting all of your results. I'm going
to go off to do some IDE research now.
Darin Genereux
On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:41:24 GMT, peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter
Dampier) wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 03:59:58 GMT, dar...@ksu.edu (Darin Genereux) wrote:
>
>>I can't explain Peter's problem with the lastest ASPI layer from
>>Creator. I also had Creator 3.01 installed when I ran those tests and
>>it worked fine. Strange.
>
>No this was Creator 3.01a (which worked fine) AND THEN adding the new
>1/12/98 ASPI layer from Adaptec (another download)
>
Ahh, I wasn't aware there was a separate ASPI update also. Thanks for
the warning, but I may just try it out anyway since I don't have much
too lose. I can always re-install Windows anyway. :)
Darin
Peter Dampier
On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 14:21:06 GMT, dar...@ksu.edu (Darin Genereux)
wrote:
>Ahh, I wasn't aware there was a separate ASPI update also. Thanks for
>the warning, but I may just try it out anyway since I don't have much
>too lose. I can always re-install Windows anyway. :)
Yup www.adaptec.com has it
ftp://ftp.adaptec.com/pub/BBS/winnt/aspi32.exe
Its dated 1/12/98 and is newer than the ASPI layer that comes with the
3.01a (284) update of Easy CD Creator....
Win98/NT reinstall for me this weekend..... (2nd weekend in a row)
:(
Jim Gilliland
> Yes I tried this (again) last night I also tried extractions at Max
> speed and at x4 limited speed..... All were binary perfect with fc
> /b....
>
> If I did the same extract usinf CDCopy and compared that extract to
> WinDAC's then there were differences - How relevant that is I don't
> know....
Excellent, thanks. I don't think it means much to see differences
between the wav files produced by different programs as long as each one
produces consistent results.
I'm planning to get yet another Teac and do some experiments with IDE
settings, maybe even replacing my IDE to see if that makes a difference.
Darin Genereux
Hi again,
I just ran some more tests with the new ASPI update. Everything seems
about the same. For small tracks, about 2 minutes in length, WinDAC
seems to extract ok. But for larger tracks, > 4 minutes, it starts
skipping occasionally.
Easy CD Creator and CDCopy still produces consistently good results,
at about the same speeds as with the previous ASPI. I did some more
testing with Creator, and compared 5 extractions of both a 4 minute
and 15 minute track. They all came out identical using FC /b, and I
timed them at about 12.5X speed. It's too damn bad that Creator loses
2 seconds from some tracks though, or I'd not need another program. I
also noticed that changing the DAE speed slider bar under the Options
menu has no effect on the TEAC, it only seems to affect the DAE speed
of my recorder.
Anyway, bottom line is the ASPI update didn't seem to affect my system
much. If anything, I'd say it improved performance a little bit.
Again, I'm using Win95 OSR2 (no 2.1 update).
Darin
Peter Dampier
On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:29:05 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>I'm planning to get yet another Teac and do some experiments with IDE
>settings, maybe even replacing my IDE to see if that makes a difference.
Good luck with it and let us all know hoe you get on!!
Peter Dampier
On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 18:01:38 GMT, dar...@ksu.edu (Darin Genereux)
wrote:
<snip'd some good info>
>Anyway, bottom line is the ASPI update didn't seem to affect my system
>much. If anything, I'd say it improved performance a little bit.
>Again, I'm using Win95 OSR2 (no 2.1 update).
Weird... ok so my ASPI update was applied to NT.... Let me apply the
new one to Win98 tonight and see if all is ok....
Thanks for the info...
Mark Tamashiro
Is there anything the rest of us less technically inclined Teac owners
could do to encourage the manufacturer to take an active interest in the
DAE issue? I would think that they could see the market potential that
a $100 32x ATAPI 100% accurate DAE CDROM reader would have.
Jerry Lin
Not true. I set bios to mode 4 for the Teac and it's still reported as mode
3. Mobo is a Asus TX97-E.
- Jerry
Peter Dampier wrote in message <34d09095...@snews.zippo.com>...
Mr.Basser
I think alot of the problems come from using the busmastering drivers
if you are having problems doing DAE try restarting in safe mode and
changing your secondary harddisk controller to Standard Harddisk
controller.
This also gives faster data reads
This is only for those of you that have your cd on the secondary IDE.
Before you say busmastering has to be faster and use less cpu get some
cd benchmarking utilitys and try it first
I have tried it on four differnt systems all with same results
Standard Harddisk controller is faster.
Jim Gilliland
Peter Dampier wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 12:29:05 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I'm planning to get yet another Teac and do some experiments with IDE
> >settings, maybe even replacing my IDE to see if that makes a difference.
>
> Good luck with it and let us all know hoe you get on!!
Well, I did just what I said - I bought another Teac and also bought a
replacement IDE board. First I installed the Teac, and found that it
continued to provide useless wav files. Then I installed the replacement IDE
board (DTC EIDE Ultima - an inexpensive ISA board), and found that the Teac
still provided unusable wav files, it just did so more slowly than before
<g>. So much for that idea.
I removed the add-on board, and went back to the integrated IDE on my
motherboard (it uses an Intel chipset), and continued to try different
configurations, but without any better results. Then I switched to Win95,
just to confirm my past tests on that platform. I tried WinDAC on 95, and
found the usual result. But then I tried using the NTI software to do DAE,
and I was able to retrieve three perfect (and identical) wav files. So I was
able to get usable results in at least one environment. That's the first
time I've ever achieved a usable result with the Teac.
I went back to NT, and retried the same test with the same NTI software. It
failed, so did WinDAC and Adaptec Creator. Hmmm. I went back to Win95 and
tried a couple more programs: CDDA32 and Adaptec Creator. Both produced
perfect wav files with the Teac.
So here's the wrapup. On Win95, NTI, Adaptec, and CDDA can all get good
results from the Teac. WinDAC cannot. On WinNT, _none_ of those same
programs can get good results from the Teac.
Clearly, then, it's not a hardware problem in the motherboard or IDE. And
it's not a problem in the application software. So it must be some
unexplained intereaction between the Teac drive and the WinNT ASPI layer.
And there's something about the WinDAC program that is different from the
others - knowing more about that might help to close in on the solution to
this problem.
Is anyone getting good results with this drive using WindowsNT? If so, what
software are you using? And can you think of anything that might be
different in your system from mine or others here?
Darin Genereux
On Sat, 31 Jan 1998 07:25:26 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
WinDAC is definitely different. I have had good results on my
dedicated CDR computer using both Adpatec's Creator and CDCopy (by
Markus Barth), but never using WinDAC. However, on my own machine,
WinDAC works flawlessly. For example, yesterday I extracted a 70
minute CD using WinDAC (averaged about 13X for the disc) and listened
to all the WAV files. Didn't hear a single pop or click. Using the
same hardrive on the dedicated system, every song had errors and it
only extracted at an average of 9X. The only difference between the
two tests was the motherboard, memory (non-EDO vs EDO), and video
card.
On a side note, even though Creator seems to extract individual tracks
to the hardrive just fine, where WinDAC fails, I tried copying an
audio CD on the fly (2X recorder) and the disc had lots of errors.
Wierd.
>
>Is anyone getting good results with this drive using WindowsNT? If so, what
>software are you using? And can you think of anything that might be
>different in your system from mine or others here?
>
Have you tried using the older ASPI files for Windows NT? According
to this page: http://www.magma.ca/~aa571/cdda32.html Windows NT
doesn't ship with ASPI drivers and Adaptec's current drivers don't
support ATAPI drives. It suggests installing an older version of
Adaptec's ASPI drivers that do support ATAPI drives. That page may be
a bit dated, but it's worth a shot. Here's a link to the older
drivers:
ftp://ftp.tardis.ed.ac.uk/users/psyche/cdrom/drivers/aspi32old.exe
Good luck,
Darin
Jim Gilliland
Darin Genereux wrote:
> WinDAC is definitely different. I have had good results on my
> dedicated CDR computer using both Adpatec's Creator and CDCopy (by
> Markus Barth), but never using WinDAC. However, on my own machine,
> WinDAC works flawlessly. For example, yesterday I extracted a 70
> minute CD using WinDAC (averaged about 13X for the disc) and listened
> to all the WAV files. Didn't hear a single pop or click. Using the
> same hardrive on the dedicated system, every song had errors and it
> only extracted at an average of 9X. The only difference between the
> two tests was the motherboard, memory (non-EDO vs EDO), and video
> card.
Are you saying that you booted NT from the same build on the same hard drive using
two different motherboards? And got different results? If so, that would suggest
a hardware issue.(Though not necessarily - NT may adjust some aspects of its
behavior according to the specifics of the hardware on which it finds itself.)
But I loaded Win95 and WinNT on the same hardware and got different results, which
would suggest that it's a software issue. Hmmm....this gets muddier by the
minute.
> Have you tried using the older ASPI files for Windows NT?
Yes, in fact, those are the ones I started with. I've been through several sets
of ASPI and ATAPI drivers for NT in my quest to resolve this. I'd love to find
that there was a driver fix or NT setting that would make a difference here, but
no such luck so far.
Jim Gilliland
Peter Dampier wrote:
> I would agree there seems to be a problem with the ASPI Layer, NT4,
> WinDAC etc and the Teac drive.... BUT, answer your question quoted
> below, I DID manage to get perfect DAE from the Teac in NT for ages
> until I installed the latest Adaptec ASPI layer... On doing that nothing
> did DAE (not WinDAC, CDCopy, EZ-CD etc) but before that (I only had NTI
> and Easy CD Creator installed this point) is did do DAE perfectly in
> NT...
What were you using for ASPI before you loaded the new Adaptec drivers? The
version that I'm using now is dated 10/22/97, but the version that I was using
originally was dated 7/10/95. I didn't find any difference between those two
versions of the driver.
> So its not:
>
> Motherboard/Bios/IDE hardware related
> or the Teac drive from what we can tell so far....
Well, I wouldn't go that far. Clearly, the Teac drive has some design
characteristic (flaw?) that sets it apart from all of the other drives out there,
and makes it so quirky for the users who have posted about it here. But it may
be that same characteristic that makes it so fast at DAE when it does work.
Dave Balcom
On Sat, 31 Jan 1998 17:28:22 GMT, peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter
Dampier) wrote:
}Ahhh my BIOS is lieing to me then.... no suprises its a generic no name
}m/board!
Yep, I set the bios to mode 4 but it still boots as mode 3 -- go
figure.
Darin Genereux
On Sat, 31 Jan 1998 16:04:51 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
wrote:
>Darin Genereux wrote:
>
>> WinDAC is definitely different. I have had good results on my
>> dedicated CDR computer using both Adpatec's Creator and CDCopy (by
>> Markus Barth), but never using WinDAC. However, on my own machine,
>> WinDAC works flawlessly. For example, yesterday I extracted a 70
>> minute CD using WinDAC (averaged about 13X for the disc) and listened
>> to all the WAV files. Didn't hear a single pop or click. Using the
>> same hardrive on the dedicated system, every song had errors and it
>> only extracted at an average of 9X. The only difference between the
>> two tests was the motherboard, memory (non-EDO vs EDO), and video
>> card.
>
>Are you saying that you booted NT from the same build on the same hard drive using
>two different motherboards? And got different results? If so, that would suggest
>a hardware issue.(Though not necessarily - NT may adjust some aspects of its
>behavior according to the specifics of the hardware on which it finds itself.)
Well, I'm using Window 95, but yes that is what I did. Since 95 was
originally installed on a VX motherboard, it installed some new System
Devices when I booted it on my HX board. Other than that the
cofiguration was exactly the same.
To be honest, the only problem I am having is on the VX board with
WinDAC. It works fine using sector-sync, but only extracts at about
4X. On the HX board, WinDAC works fine at speeds up to 14X (the VX
board will only do 9X with the same settings).
However, I recommend you try out CD Copy by Markus Barth. It is a
very nice program for DAE with support for CDDB databases if you've
got an internet connection. It's real nice to have the names of the
WAV files be the actual names of the songs. :) More importantly
though, it has a 'Powermode' option that works absolutely fantasic
with the TEAC. I was getting speeds up to 15X, even on my VX board.
And so far, all WAV files check out perfectly, though I've only
compared about 6 tracks with Powermode enabled. Maybe it'll work for
you on NT?
Here's a link: http://members.aol.com/mbarth2193
Darin
Jim Gilliland
Darin Genereux wrote:
> However, I recommend you try out CD Copy by Markus Barth. It is a
> very nice program for DAE with support for CDDB databases if you've
> got an internet connection. It's real nice to have the names of the
> WAV files be the actual names of the songs. :) More importantly
> though, it has a 'Powermode' option that works absolutely fantasic
> with the TEAC. I was getting speeds up to 15X, even on my VX board.
> And so far, all WAV files check out perfectly, though I've only
> compared about 6 tracks with Powermode enabled. Maybe it'll work for
> you on NT?
>
> Here's a link: http://members.aol.com/mbarth2193
Thank you _very_ much for that. I'd heard of CDCopy before, but I had no idea where to
find it. I tried it this morning, and found it to have a quirky user interface, but it
offers quite a few options for the mechanisms that it uses to do DAE. The result: If
I used the ASPI interface, I got errors just like I have with every other program I've
tried. However, CDCopy also offers another "generic" interface, which doesn't go
through the ASPI layer. Using that interface, I was able to extract the same audio
file six times in a row, with no errors and perfect binary comparisons. So it appears
that we've now confirmed that the problems that so many people have been having with
the Teac are directly related to its interace to the ASPI layer. Of course, we still
don't know whether to blame Teac or Adaptec, but I suspect it will be Adaptec that has
to fix it, since there are already quite a few of these drives out in the field.
Incidentally, performance was quite good when using the generic interface - averaging
8x to 10x on the tracks that I tested with.
I'm going be out of town for the next few days, so I will have no time for any more
testing for a while, and little time to even join in the discussion here (in fact, I
should be packing now <g>). Thanks again for the tip, and I'll be active here again
when I get back.
John Navas
[POSTED TO comp.publish.cdrom.hardware]
"Mr.Basser" <mrba...@delaware.infi.net> wrote:
>Before you say busmastering has to be faster and use less cpu get some
>cd benchmarking utilitys and try it first
>
>I have tried it on four differnt systems all with same results
>Standard Harddisk controller is faster.
Confirmed.
--
Best regards,
John mailto:JNa...@NavasGrp.Dublin.CA.US http://www.aimnet.com/~jnavas/
The Landons
I am interested in buying a Teac 32x to go with my HP 7110. Although
after readin this I am not so sure. Any idea if it would work with the
hP and Easy CD software. Specifically the CD copier. I also have
WinDAC 32. The HP writes at 2x so a "slow" speed of 6.5 is fine with
me. I have been through three different drives and several "Expert"
stores who did not even know what DAE is. Thanks in advance
Andy Landon
land...@3-cities.com
Darin Genereux
On Mon, 02 Feb 1998 03:49:22 GMT, peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter
Dampier) wrote:
>On Sun, 01 Feb 1998 18:22:16 -0800, The Landons <land...@3-cities.com>
>wrote:
>I would say if you are using Win95 OSR2 with DMA enabled on a modern
>motherboard you should be fine....
>
>I did a cd to cd audio copy yesterday, while on line in IRC and with one
>copy of IE4, using the Teac x32 as source and a Ricoh MP6200AR as the
>burner.....
>
>Burned a perfect pop/click free cd at x2.... (using WinOnCD)
>
I did a couple of test copies yesterday also, with the TEAC as source
and HP7110 recorder (also while on IRC <G>), and achieved less than
satisfactory results using Adaptec's CD Copier. The disc had many
pops and clicks, which is unusual because Creator seems to extract WAV
files ok otherwise. However, I used Nero's copier and it did the same
disc error-free, so I guess it depends on the software.
Darin
Steve
From the postings in this group it seems that everyone that has had a
problem with the 32x TEAC has been using the IDE version.
Has anyone had any problems with the SCSI version?
So far it seems that the IDE version has been having driver problems
and not specifically a hardware problem.
I am interested in the SCSI version since I will be buying a CD-RW
recorder soon that will also be SCSI.
Johan de Wit
peter_...@bigfoot.com (Peter Dampier) wrote:
It seems I missed a part of an intersting discussion. I to experoence
some problems with DAE and TEAC524E and NT40. Can anyone tell me I you
all reached a conclusion? What is the best way to get decent audio out
of the TEAC using NT40?
Johan
Peter Dampier
On Mon, 02 Feb 1998 21:53:05 GMT, jde...@worldonline.nl (Johan de Wit)
wrote:
>It seems I missed a part of an intersting discussion. I to experoence
>some problems with DAE and TEAC524E and NT40. Can anyone tell me I you
>all reached a conclusion? What is the best way to get decent audio out
>of the TEAC using NT40?
We've not totally cracked this one..... Though people using CDCopy in
NT seem to have had some success.... Also using an older version of
Adaptecs ASPI drivers?
Jim Gilliland
The Landons wrote:
> I am interested in buying a Teac 32x to go with my HP 7110. Although
> after readin this I am not so sure. Any idea if it would work with
> the
> hP and Easy CD software. Specifically the CD copier. I also have
> WinDAC 32. The HP writes at 2x so a "slow" speed of 6.5 is fine with
> me. I have been through three different drives and several "Expert"
> stores who did not even know what DAE is. Thanks in advance
If you're running Win95, you should be OK. If you do buy the Teac, make
sure that you can return it for some period of time, just in case you
run into trouble. I've been able to get good results on both Win95 and
NT, though I've had to choose my software configuration carefully. I
think you'll be successful with Win95 and Easy CD software.
Jim Gilliland
Steve wrote:
> From the postings in this group it seems that everyone that has had a
> problem with the 32x TEAC has been using the IDE version.
>
> Has anyone had any problems with the SCSI version?
>
> So far it seems that the IDE version has been having driver problems
> and not specifically a hardware problem.
I wouldn't be so quick to exonerate the Teac. The problems that we've
had with it may well be specific to certain driver configurations, but
those same configurations seem to work with every other IDE drive on the
market, so it's clear that the Teac is somehow different from other
drives. I have no experience with the SCSI version - sorry.
John Navas
[POSTED TO comp.publish.cdrom.hardware]
Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
>drives. ...
True -- it's a lot faster. From what I've seen, IDE CD-ROM drives that
can perform high-speed DAE are few and far between, and evidence comparing
one such drive to another in a controlled environment is even rarer. Have
I missed something? Or do you know of another drive with comparable DAE
speed that works fine in exactly the same environment where the Teac has
problems?
Jim Gilliland
John Navas wrote:
> Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
>
> >I wouldn't be so quick to exonerate the Teac. The problems that
> we've
> >had with it may well be specific to certain driver configurations,
> but
> >those same configurations seem to work with every other IDE drive on
> the
> >market, so it's clear that the Teac is somehow different from other
> drives.
>
> True -- it's a lot faster. From what I've seen, IDE CD-ROM drives
> that
> can perform high-speed DAE are few and far between, and evidence
> comparing
> one such drive to another in a controlled environment is even rarer.
> Have
> I missed something? Or do you know of another drive with comparable
> DAE
> speed that works fine in exactly the same environment where the Teac
> has
> problems?
No, I've not seen another drive that is as fast, though I've certainly
not surveyed many of them first-hand. It may well be that the Teac's
speed is the source of the sync problems that seem to happen when the
ASPI layer is used to access it. However, they could also be caused by
some other factor - I just don't know.
John Navas
Vendors of CD-R software will tell you that DAE is problematic from most
IDE CD-ROM drives, which is why it's so surprising that the Teac can be
made to perform so well under the right conditions. This makes the Teac a
standout, not an underachiever.
p.s. Unless you have an unusually good CD-ROM (e.g., Plextor), it's
generally a good idea to use your CD-R drive for DAE, rather than your
CD-ROM.
Jim Gilliland
John Navas wrote:
> Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I wouldn't be so quick to exonerate the Teac.
> >
> >No, I've not seen another drive that is as fast, though I've
> certainly
> >not surveyed many of them first-hand. It may well be that the Teac's
>
> >speed is the source of the sync problems that seem to happen when the
>
> >ASPI layer is used to access it. However, they could also be caused
> by
> >some other factor - I just don't know.
>
> Vendors of CD-R software will tell you that DAE is problematic from
> most
> IDE CD-ROM drives, which is why it's so surprising that the Teac can
> be
> made to perform so well under the right conditions.
All true, however, I'm still not convinced that speed is the only issue
here. I've seen similar DAE problems reported by owners of Teac 24x
drives and Teac 16x drives (all IDE), which suggests (to me) that there
is something unusual in the drive's interface electronics. But I
absolutely agree with you that most IDE CDROMS are thoroughly incapable
of the fast DAE that the Teac can provide - under certain circumstances
anyway. That's why I've worked so hard to find a working configuration
for it.
spamb...@ix.netcom.com
On Thu, 05 Feb 1998 22:53:08 -0500 "Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>" posted to
"comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.cd-rom" about: "Re: Teac DAE discussion" :
-->John Navas wrote:
-->
-->> Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
-->> >>
-->> >> >I wouldn't be so quick to exonerate the Teac.
-->> >
-->> >No, I've not seen another drive that is as fast, though I've
-->> certainly
-->> >not surveyed many of them first-hand. It may well be that the Teac's
-->>
-->> >speed is the source of the sync problems that seem to happen when the
-->>
-->> >ASPI layer is used to access it. However, they could also be caused
-->> by
-->> >some other factor - I just don't know.
-->>
-->> Vendors of CD-R software will tell you that DAE is problematic from
-->> most
-->> IDE CD-ROM drives, which is why it's so surprising that the Teac can
-->> be
-->> made to perform so well under the right conditions.
-->
-->All true, however, I'm still not convinced that speed is the only issue
-->here. I've seen similar DAE problems reported by owners of Teac 24x
-->drives and Teac 16x drives (all IDE), which suggests (to me) that there
-->is something unusual in the drive's interface electronics. But I
-->absolutely agree with you that most IDE CDROMS are thoroughly incapable
-->of the fast DAE that the Teac can provide - under certain circumstances
-->anyway. That's why I've worked so hard to find a working configuration
-->for it.
-->
I have the Teac 524e ide cdrom drive. It does DAE incredibly fast, about the
same as read speed. It has occaisional misses on a file compare. The same is
true for data copied from cd to hdd. I missed the beginning of this thread,
would one of you mind reposting the discussion of the specified "environment" in
which the drive is known to have more problems and that in which it is thought
to be more accurate please?
Overall, it has been very usable, and burning directlly from this to an ide
burner satisfactory as well. TS
Jim Gilliland
spamb...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
The answer isn't as clear-cut as I would like, but the problems seem to
be at their worst when using an ASPI layer to do DAE on Windows NT.
Jim Gilliland
kota wrote:
> Teac 532s 1.0a firmware
> Diamond Fireport 40 PCI 4.05
> Windows 96B
>
> Flawless 12X DAE
>
> On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 09:25:27 -0500, Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
> >Let's try this - everyone with a Teac 532 who is using it for DAE, please report your
> >firmware version and whether or not you get clean DAE results. Maybe we'll find a
> >trend, or maybe not.
> >
> >I doubt that it will matter whether it's the 532E (IDE) or the 532S (SCSI), but
> >report that, too, just in case. Thanks.
Thanks. I posted that request several weeks ago, and we've learned quite a bit about the
Teac in the intervening weeks. I don't recommend the Teac 532E (IDE) to anyone. Even if
you get excellent results with it initially, you may find that some minor configuration
change causes it to fail completely at some point in the future - several people here have
reported that experience. Others have had a great deal of difficulty getting adequate
results from it right out of the box. A few have gotten excellent results, but even they
may be living on borrowed time. And it seems to have trouble reading some CDRs and
CDRWs. In general, it is a very finicky drive.
I can't say whether or not the same problems will affect the 532S - we just haven't seen
enough reports on it yet.
Paul Dormer
Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
>John Navas wrote:
>> Jim Gilliland <rri...@ibm.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I wouldn't be so quick to exonerate the Teac. The problems that
>> we've
>> >had with it may well be specific to certain driver configurations,
>> but
>> >those same configurations seem to work with every other IDE drive on
>> the
>> >market, so it's clear that the Teac is somehow different from other
>> drives.
>>
>> True -- it's a lot faster. From what I've seen, IDE CD-ROM drives
>> that
>> can perform high-speed DAE are few and far between, and evidence
>> comparing
>> one such drive to another in a controlled environment is even rarer.
>> Have
>> I missed something? Or do you know of another drive with comparable
>> DAE
>> speed that works fine in exactly the same environment where the Teac
>> has
>> problems?
>No, I've not seen another drive that is as fast, though I've certainly
>not surveyed many of them first-hand. It may well be that the Teac's
>speed is the source of the sync problems that seem to happen when the
>ASPI layer is used to access it. However, they could also be caused by
>some other factor - I just don't know.
My Panasonic CR584B drive has been extracting at 12x for about a year,
never any jitter whatsoever