How is the BenQ 1640 at CD ripping? I have an old Lite-On 42327S (hope that's the right model) I want to pull from my box at home. The Lite-On is a great CD ripper. I need to make room for my old Plextor 708A since I cannot seem to get my new BenQ 1640 to read the DVDs I burned on the Plextor, so I need the Plextor as a reader.

moose_jeers.
The Benq 1640 is moreover an excellent CD ripper; the best mode of ripping:
Burst, secure on error (EAC)

I have used Burst a long time, just as long as the first and second rips' CRCs match.

I am confused by the read/write offsets. Another thread suggests that the software used to burn a disc and the speed at which it is burned can affect the offsets. My brain started hurting so I left it at +618 for read sample offset correction and +66 for write samples offset. I'll use Nero to burn a CD-R.

moose_jeers
Offset is easy can be removed, by reading information given from the service area.
Offset have known value and completely correctable.

Where do you configure "burs secure on error" - I have only found burst mode in eac without secure.

cu,

Jackie

Using two separate known discs, and the EAC offset CD, the correct values for my BenQ DW1640 are:

read: +618
write: +138

Hi Alex,

is that offset important? What is it good for? My rips sound perfectly right without setting an offset

cu,

Jackie

It's important if you're uncompromisingly pedantic about achieving a perfect rip. That's a given for serious EAC users.

If the offset is not specified, you could truncate a song by (offset divided by 44100) seconds, which is a whole 0.014 seconds in this case — very important indeed

Uhmm... are you sure about the write offset? The read offset correction is right (it is the same that AccurateRip reports), but I've just tested the write offset of my 1640 and it is indeed +66 (684-618)... This is reasonable because they are the same offsets of the 1620 model... Did you set the write offset to 0 before burning the Offset CD? Did you make the detection on a drive with the correct Read Sample Offset Correction?

ET

It seems a fast ripper - it took ~ 1.45 mins to rip G4's CD (CDA to WAV), using CDex, which is s slightly (~ 5 seconds) slower than my LG 4163; my NEC 4550 took ~ 8.10 mins.

I normally use EAC for archiving - but it's not very fast.

CDSpeed gave it a 10 for DAE :

Yes.

Yes.

Yes and I checked the same disc on my LiteOn 1635S and LG 4167B. Seems to be consistently 138 samples over the correct read offsets shown in the screenies.

A new hardware revision, erhaps?

Could be, I have no idea. This is the first time that I see two drives of the same model with different offsets.

Regards,

ET

HI,

thanks for all your answers. I found in the EAC FAQ that there are some commercial CDs to test the read offset, but it does not tell me which ones, or where to find their data

Anyone help?

Thx.

cu,

Jackie

Have a look at the list on this page. You have to scroll down a couple of pages to find the list.

I think I remember reading a thread on the forum a while ago, where someone had discovered that the correct write offset for the BenQ 1620 or 1640 (don't remember which) depended on the writing speed.

Try searching for it if you are interested.

That was for the 1640, IIRC if you burned faster than about 8-10x the offset changed.

You're right. My previous screenies were made using a TDK HS-CDRW [made by CMC] which EAC would've burnt @ 10x (max speed reported by CD-DVD Speed) . So I bought a Mitsubishi 24x US-CDRW and this is what it now gives me with +138 and +66 samples offsets respectively.

In summary:

- If the burn speed is 10x or slower, write offset is +138.

- If the burn speed is greater than 10x, write offset is +66.

Already discussed here

http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=149956

Hi,

I am cinfused now, I have two of the CDs in the database, they give me these values for read offset:

Roxette Look Sharp: +740
Genesis Calling All Stations +618

How do I know which value is correct?

cu,

Jackie

Hi Jackie,

I would believe +618 is the correct value. Discs pressed in different countries can have different offset values -- hence the Roxette CD would be recognised, but the value would be inaccurate.

You can always try the Advanced DAE Quality Test in Nero CD-DVD Speed to get the correct read offset value.

I think you're right, 618 seems okay. Btw, I have tested some scratched discs with burst mode in both Benq1640 and Liteon166s reader, and they give me identical CRC values, so I believe both drives must be excellent for reading audio, otherwise the crc would be different, right?

cu,

Jackie

Thanks!
Really weird BTW, I'm happy that I almost only use Plextors for DAE/Audio burning...

ET

Why?

cu,

Jackie

Well, there are IMO several reasons:

• all modern Plextor drives have the same read/write offsets (30): in my previous post I was referring to this weird "write-speed-dependant writing offset" (discussed in the thread kindly spotted by LedZeppelin) that I wasn't aware of;
• ability to overread into both lead in and lead out;
• very good DAE capabilities, trustable C2 error reporting;
• Plextools as an excellent alternative for ripping (but not only), and expecially with CDS200 audio titles ( ); in particular, the Plextor Premium is great with some recent nasty titles (e.g. Coldplay - X&Y)
• GigaRec (expecially at less-than-1x), resembling late Yamaha's Audio Master Quality Recording;
• very good support and testing of all Plextor drives with EAC...

I don't say that other devices can't do a good job with DAE and CD-Audio burning, but I almost use my Plextor Premium(s) (I have 4) for that.

Regards,

ET