Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Additional CD burner

  1. #1
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Penna.
    Posts
    409

    Additional CD burner

    My computer (Pentium 4 running XP Pro) has a 40 gig HD connected to IDE #1 and an older 8x CD Burner connected to IDE#2. I am buying a faster Buslink 52X CD Burner. Best Buy has it on sale for $29.00 after rebates. If I deceide to keep the older CD burner in the computer as a read only, what is the best wiring setup ? Should I put the two CD burners on the same cable and set the faster one to Master, and the slow one to Slave ? Or should one of the burners be with the hard drive ?

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,941
    AFAIK, keep the two CDRW drives on the same IDE cable. Set one to master (most likely the faster) and one to slave (the slower). It should work flawlessly. That is a good price on a CDRW 52X drive.


  3. #3
    Techzonez Governor Super Moderator Conan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    4,343
    I concur with Booger's advice.

  4. #4
    Titanium Member efc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,329
    mike13 - I bought the Buslink 48x burner a few months back. It installed as a LiteOn and has performed flawlesly. You got a good drive at a great price.

  5. #5
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Penna.
    Posts
    409
    Thanks BB, that was my guess, but just wanted to check with the experts.

  6. #6
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Penna.
    Posts
    409
    Also thanks to EFC and Conan. I was trying to figure out how to add those smily faces before I hit the "submit button"

  7. #7
    Friendly Neighborhood Super Moderator phishhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    San Diego, Ca.
    Posts
    3,732
    guys i thought the rule of thumb is the slowest as a slave on IDE 1 and the fastest as master on the other, because this way you are reading and writing from 2 different IDE channels not taking turns with one channel.



  8. #8
    Techzonez Governor Super Moderator Conan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    4,343
    Originally posted by phishhead
    guys i thought the rule of thumb is the slowest as a slave on IDE 1 and the fastest as master on the other, because this way you are reading and writing from 2 different IDE channels not taking turns with one channel.
    From what I know, it's better for hard drives and cdrw's/rom's to be on different IDE channels.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator Super Moderator Big Booger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    JAPAN
    Posts
    10,941
    From what I know, it's better for hard drives and cdrw's/rom's to be on different IDE channels.
    I have to agree with that statement.

    From PricePC.com

    Install the Hard drive (HDD) and CD-Rom

    1. Before you install these devices, you need to configure the HDD and CD-Rom. In most, the motherboard has two IDE channel which are called as Primary (IDE 1) and Secondary (IDE 2). Each IDE channel can support one or two devices. If you connect two devices to a single channel, you must configure one of the devices as Master and the other device as Slave. As a tip, usually the HDD and CD-Rom use separate channel. Hence, if possible, do not mix them into one single IDE channel. In this case, let's assume that you have one HDD and one CD-Rom.

  10. #10
    Titanium Member efc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    North Central Arkansas
    Posts
    2,329
    Just because you are supposed to be able to to something doesn't always mean that it is smart to try. I have never been able to configure two CDRWs without experiencing problems. The most common is the addition of time to Windows boot. I have also experienced conflicts with shared resources.

    Since you would never record directly from another CDROM drive due to undersampling, I don't understand what you gain by keeping the old CDRW in your computer.

    Consider keeping the old drive as a spare or give it to a family member. I do the latter.

    I don't record music. Maybe there is a sequencing process that makes the second CDRW worth the setup problems, however I doubt it. If there is - I am willing to listen.

  11. #11
    Hardware guy Super Moderator FastGame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Blasters worm farm
    Posts
    3,416
    Originally posted by phishhead
    guys i thought the rule of thumb is the slowest as a slave on IDE 1 and the fastest as master on the other, because this way you are reading and writing from 2 different IDE channels not taking turns with one channel.
    That (was/is) a rule of thumb in copying on the fly. When you say "slowest as a slave on IDE 1" you mean that the optical drive is slower than the hard drive so optical is the slave...the optical slave (reader) on IDE #1 still should be the faster of the two optical drives.

    IMO it's better too have HD and optical drive on diffrent IDE channels, read the image to HD first and take full advantage of error correction & once done then burn the image. Other than that it's no diffrent than say two HD's (master&slave) on the same IDE channel transfering data between each other, except that data transfer between optical & HD on same IDE channel will be done at the slower ATA rating of the optical drive.

    Originally posted by mike13
    If I deceide to keep the older CD burner in the computer as a read only
    You will find that the new Buslink is a much better reader (DAE, C2 error, sub channel data, CD text and speed) than your older drive. You would be better served to save up for a nice DVD drive ta go with that new Buslink

  12. #12
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Penna.
    Posts
    409
    My only reason to keep the old CD burner was I thought it would be faster when I wanted to make an exact copy of a disc. Instead of first copying the info to the hard drive, then putting a blank disc in the burner, and then burning the new disc. I thought with two units it would cut out the time copying the info to the HD. It was my understanding that the info would be read from unit #1 and then burned in unit #2 at the same time. This is really not a big deal to me since i have only made about 20 copies of anything in the past 10 months. If I am going to have conflicts between the two burners, maybe I should just pull the old burner and install the faster burner . As efc recommended, I could keep the unit as a backup, or possibly install it in my wife's computer.

  13. #13
    Hardware guy Super Moderator FastGame's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Blasters worm farm
    Posts
    3,416
    Originally posted by mike13
    As efc recommended, I could keep the unit as a backup, or possibly install it in my wife's computer.
    That would be the best

    It's best to have HD set as master on IDE #1 and burner set as master on IDE #2

    Forget that copy on the fly thing...let your software do it's job, read the image to the HD & then burn the image.

  14. #14
    Succeded in braking Windo TZ Veteran Dehcbad25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    DE - USA
    Posts
    2,406
    If you want to do on the Fly copy out it in a different channel.
    This is the best set up for you
    EIDE Channel 1 (or 0 depending of the mobo) Master the HD, and Slave the old CD-RW.
    EIDE channel 2 (or 1) the Fast CD-RW as master.
    If you add another HD later, you will have to re-think the layout depending of how much you are going to use it
    As a rule, you keep the devices that you are going to interchange data in different channels to get the best performance and data integrity

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •