Does it Make Sense to Buy a DVD RW and a CD-RW?

[MrControversial]

I was thinking about purchasing a DVD RW and a CD-RW for my new rig. Does it make sense to do that or does the DVD RW drives rip CD's pretty good as well?

 

[iamskew]

I've got both...but I bought the DVD-rw later. It's nice getting the 52x or whatever it is on CDs instead of the 24x or whatever that comes from the DVD-RW

 

[Malak]

Of course. Would you waste a whole DVD for one small file? DVD burner is good for backups and DVDs, that's it.

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: malak
Of course. Would you waste a whole DVD for one small file? DVD burner is good for backups and DVDs, that's it.

Are you serious?

DVd burners can burn cd's you know & the latest dvd burners can but cd-r's very fast now.

So no there is no reason to buy 2 units when a dvd burner will do both.

 

[ribbon13]

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=27-106-961&depa=0

thats 52x CD-R, 24x CDRW

It makes no sense to buy two drives.

 

[bigboxes]

Originally posted by: malak
Of course. Would you waste a whole DVD for one small file? DVD burner is good for backups and DVDs, that's it.

You do realize that your DVD burner can burn CDs as well as DVDs? Guess not.

 

[dashiki]

Originally posted by: malak
Of course. Would you waste a whole DVD for one small file? DVD burner is good for backups and DVDs, that's it.

1600 posts in the forums and he doesn't know that dvd-rw's also burn cd's.

PUT THE MOUSE DOWN AND STEP AWAY FROM THE COMPUTER

 

[mechBgon]

Tangentially, this may or may not matter, but I've found that some OEM burner software will pout and throw stuff if you try to get it to burn to any burner except the one it came with. So if you get a CD-RW drive that came with Nero Express, don't expect NE to burn to the DVD drive too.

 

[JPMNICK]

What I did was get a DVD-RW as my burning drive (CD's and DVD's) I then got a DVD-ROM drive for my other drive. The reason I did this was because the -ROM drives typically read quieter with less fan noise. I am not that interested in burning a CD at the fastes speeds possible.

 

[daniel49]

they burn both nowadays on the same drive. why pay for 2 drives:Q....I burn both with mine and it works fine.

 

[narcotic]

This might sound odd, but I'd get a DVD drive instead of cd-rw. Sure you can burn cd-r's using your dvd-rw, but a friend of mine who has a dvd-rw told me that he can't play DVD's on it, it keeps jumping, so he got a plain DVD rom, which is fairly cheap.

 

[wchou]

Originally posted by: bigboxes

Originally posted by: malak
Of course. Would you waste a whole DVD for one small file? DVD burner is good for backups and DVDs, that's it.

You do realize that your DVD burner can burn CDs as well as DVDs? Guess not.

CD is becoming obsolete, just let it R.I.P. already~!




























Amen.

 

[ribbon13]

too bad there's nothing good to replace cds. SACD and DVDA both has issues with audio purists, and unneccesary copy protection. not to mention the white noise to overzealous limiter/gate/compressor use. I wish there was a portable that read DVD-Rs with FLAC files on them. Then maybe I'd say CD is obsolete.

 

[Jeff7]

I also like having both available, because only my CD-RW drive can still burn as low as 2x. This helps reduce errors on CD-RWs - if I try to play an MP3 CD in my car or portable MP3 player that's been burned at 4x, it skips a lot. If I use a disc burned any faster, the devices usually can't even see any files.
Burned at 2x - everything's just fine.
My DVD-RW is also a Liteon drive; it can only burn as low as 4x, at least in Nero. The 2x option is simply not available.

Originally posted by: ribbon13
too bad there's nothing good to replace cds. SACD and DVDA both has issues with audio purists, and unneccesary copy protection. not to mention the white noise to overzealous limiter/gate/compressor use. I wish there was a portable that read DVD-Rs with FLAC files on them. Then maybe I'd say CD is obsolete.

One thing I thought of with portable DVD players - skip protection. The laser has to focus much tighter, and read even smaller pits of data than CDs, and they still have skipping problems on portable players, at least with compact data like MP3 files. You'd need a heck of a good optical pickup assembly, and a big buffer to compensate for skips.

 

[Baked]

DVD Writer + DVD-ROm. /thread

 

[jterrell]

I only have the nec 3520a right now but I am going to get a combo lite-on dvd-rom/cd burner so I can rip dvd to dvd instead of going to HD first as it just wastes time.

Its worth the 40 bucks to me for that simple time saver.

Also some games dont like dvd burners but will work with dvd-rom drives. I know you can hack them but it is an issue for a small few.

Oh and you might wanna use that dvd-rom drive to play games or something else while you are using the dvd burner. PCs can multitask.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

The question you should be asking is $40 worth the time you'll save burning CDs on a solid CD burner at 52x rather than 24x on a DVD burner. I burn a lot of audio & data CDs, so to me it is. If you'll only occasionally be burning CDs, then maybe not. And it's not like you can't buy just the DVD burner now, and buy the CD burner later if you find 24x CD burning is too slow.

 

[fstime]

No it does not make sense since for one thing, dvd burners can burn on regular CDs fine, and two, I like to be able to rip the dvd from the DVD rom and then have it burn automaticly, CloneDVD2 does this.

 

[Zepper]

If you burn a lot of CDs it will take the wear and tear off of your DVD burner. But I'd get a CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive just for the added flexibility - not much more expensive any more.

.bh.

 

[Baked]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
The question you should be asking is $40 worth the time you'll save burning CDs on a solid CD burner at 52x rather than 24x on a DVD burner. I burn a lot of audio & data CDs, so to me it is. If you'll only occasionally be burning CDs, then maybe not. And it's not like you can't buy just the DVD burner now, and buy the CD burner later if you find 24x CD burning is too slow.

WTH, 24x? You can burn CDs at 48x w/ all the latest 16X DVD writers.

 

[fstime]

Wear and tear, state your source, I think this has to do with the quality of the burner, but I really dont know, as stated above a cd-rw, dvd-rom isn't such a bad idea, but certainly get at least a dvd-rom so you can rip of the cd directly.

 

[Rock Hydra]

I don't think it was an economical thing to have a DVD-RW drive and a CD-RW drive. I have a DVD-/+RW drive and it writes CD-Rs at 40. It replaced my 48x CD-RW drive, but in real world, it translates to like a 15 second difference. Whoopdie doo. So, eh, if you're really anal about having the fastest CD burning experience get a CD-RW, for the most economical sese, just use the CD writing capabilities of your DVD-RW drive and throw in a DVD-ROM drive for quick 1:1 copies of CD or DVDs.

 

[Zepper]

Source = ability to think rationally. Less use = less wear and tear, duh...

.bh.

:moon:

 

[fstime]

Your telling me using burning a lot of media will mess up the burner? I have used a burner for years in one of my computers, I have never experianced problems, like I said, it probaly have to do with the quality of the burner.

 

[suse920]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
The question you should be asking is $40 worth the time you'll save burning CDs on a solid CD burner at 52x rather than 24x on a DVD burner. I burn a lot of audio & data CDs, so to me it is. If you'll only occasionally be burning CDs, then maybe not. And it's not like you can't buy just the DVD burner now, and buy the CD burner later if you find 24x CD burning is too slow.

umm my $50 lite on burner can burn cds at 48x. If it were me i'd just buy the dvd burner. then you have more space to buy a blue ray/HD DVD burner down the road. Plus you save some money