Ripping with Two DVD Drives

Discussion in 'General Hardware Issues' started by mukkamart, Feb 25, 2007.

  1. mukkamart

    mukkamart New Member

    Here's the thing - I'm running Vista 32bit and AnyDVD I have two DVD drives on one IDE channel - master and slave. Both drives do all that they should - read, write etc. But the Master (Philips SPD2400L1) will not allow a DVD to be ripped and the Slave (LG GSA-H22N) will. Neither have a region selcted in Windows.

    Could be an IDE Driver issue but all other functions seem to be fine so it looks unlikely. Both drives are listed and checked in AnyDVD Drive Selection.

    I am pretty sure this used to work fine in XP so I just wondered if there were any bright ideas or if this is by design in the latest AnyDVD version.

    Any thoughts much appreciated

  2. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    Are these the only optical drives in your system? If you want one to read and the other to write--never have them share the same cable (unless you enjoy taking your time to do accomplish the task).
  3. mukkamart

    mukkamart New Member

    Indeed - these are the only two optical drives and yes, in my previous installations of XP (not Vista due to various hard disk reasons) I had each on a dedicated IDE channel. Are you effectively saying that AnyDVD will only work on one drive per IDE channel? Not a problem, just like to get to the bottom of these things
  4. Clams

    Clams Well-Known Member

    See this image for best bitflow in a simple IDE multi-drive setup.

    Attached Files:

  5. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    No. I'm just saying one should never have one's reader and writer sharing the same IDE cable, period.
  6. oldjoe

    oldjoe Well-Known Member

    You might try using CS (Cable Select) instead of the Primary(Master) and Secondary (Slave) jumpers. Vista might prefer that?
    I, personally, have never experienced any problems using two optical drives on the same IDE channel but all of my PC's are home built.
  7. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    That's just bad form, because only one device can be active on an ide cable at one time. So if you're reading and writing, you'll be engaging buffer underrun protection of your burner quite frequently, depending on the burning application you're using (and the method, such as, burning on the fly). This was a very common problem when older cd-r burners didn't have buffer underrun protection and had both the reader and writer sharing the same ide channel.

    Never have the source and destination sharing the same ide channel.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2007
  8. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator


    "The following are some of the issues that you should take into account when configuring multiple IDE/ATA devices, to maximize the performance of your system:

    * Master/Slave Channel Sharing: By its very nature, each IDE/ATA channel can only deal with one request, to one device, at a time. You cannot even begin a second request, even to a different drive, until the first request is completed. This means that if you put two devices on the same channel, they must share it. In practical terms, this means that any time one device is in use, the other must remain silent. In contrast, two disks on two different IDE/ATA channels can process requests simultaneously on most motherboards. The bottom line is that the best way to configure multiple devices is to make each of them a single drive on its own channel, if this is possible. (This restriction is one major disadvantage of IDE compared to SCSI). An add-in controller like the Promise "Ultra" series is a cheap way of adding extra IDE/ATA channels to a modern PC."
  9. oldjoe

    oldjoe Well-Known Member

    I have 4 PC's....all have two optical drives {both DVDRW) on the Secondary IDE channel. I've used the same setup on many personal PC's, and several retail builds, and have yet to experience any problems.
    Again, my PC's are all home built...NO box units.
    I will submit that having a HDD and an optical drive on the same IDE is not the ideal setup.
  10. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    I am not going to get into a long-winded debate about this. The fact remains only one device can be active at one time on an ide channel. If you share source and destination drives on the same channel, you may experience

    1) poor quality burns (due to engaging buffer underrun protection on your burners); burning on the fly is especially horrible if you share source and destination drives on the same ide channel


    2) poor transfer rates

    Experienced gamers and experienced burners know not to share source and destination devices on the same ide channel (big, big, big problem with inexperienced burners before the Plextor PX-WT1210TA cd-rw writer was released)

    If you wish to disagree, that's fine. I'm not responding further.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2007
  11. oldjoe

    oldjoe Well-Known Member

    I respect your opinion and I will not argue the point either. I related my experiences, as a PC builder, and what has always worked my customers and myself. I have over 1000 quality backups using the setup that I described.
  12. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    My apologies . . . I probably shouldn't have been so gruff in my replies.

    If you burn on the fly when the source and destination drives are the same, the problem that I mentioned will become extremely pronounced.

    Anyway, take care
  13. oldjoe

    oldjoe Well-Known Member

    No apology necessary but thank you for the gesture.
  14. Clams

    Clams Well-Known Member

    And I'm afraid as a longtime builder (since the 80's), I'm gonna come down on Webslingers side on this one. If you look at my diagram upthread, you'll see that ripping, burning, and disc to disc copying are all done "cross-channel". I'm not saying Joe's stuff won't work, I'm just saying that *everyone* I've ever read says to move the data across the channels, not to two devices on the same channel. And it makes sence if you apply logic to it.

    And my bonus for using 2 hard drives: Doing redux of a disk already ripped to the HD isn't forcing the same drive to go crazy with reads and writes.

    Last edited: Feb 25, 2007
  15. RAMROD

    RAMROD Well-Known Member

    if using same ide channel for 2 drives you would need to write to your hdd then when finished write to the other but copying on the fly with only one cable could cause bad backups
  16. mencan

    mencan Member

    I also must concure that Webslinger is right on the money here. I found what he is saying to be true back in the mid 90's when building my first unit. It was thru trial and error that I found and learnt a lot about what to and what not to do.

    Good Call ! :agree: :agree: :clap:

  17. mukkamart

    mukkamart New Member

    Well I thank you all for your comments and Clams Canino, thx for the diagram. Always good encourage some lively discussion.

    I tried putting the drive on another channel but to no avail. I've got a spare one lying around so I'll give that a go, see what happens, could be a firmware issue.

    As for the IDE debate, have to say that I've tried both over the years, quite extensively and whilst I cannot fault Webslingers logic, since buffer underrun appreared a few years ago, on the fly with both drives on the same channel has worked fine. Prepared to accept that it might be a little slower though and probably a little riskier.
  18. Webslinger

    Webslinger Retired Moderator

    If the laser is starting and stopping, which it most certainly is, then the burn quality isn't fine; this is recipe for bad burn quality (check pi/po scans).
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2007
  19. Clams

    Clams Well-Known Member

    Make sure your jumpers are set correctly. I've never had a problem using a hard drive as Master and an optical as Slave on any IDE channel. And that's at least as far back as my P1-233 build. Set the BIOS to auto-detect all 4 drives. My next build is gonna use a couple of big SATA drives as the HD's and the 2 IDE primaries for opticals. I usually partition off about 10-20g as the C: "boot drive" and then the rest is D: and the other HD is E: - been doing it that way for eons now.

    With Nero, thanks to the RAM read buffers you CAN do "on the fly" with two opticals on the same channel - but the only way to get a good burn is to go a lot slower than you could cross channel.

    Last edited: Feb 26, 2007
  20. roog

    roog Well-Known Member

    I'm ripping and burning with 3 drives?

    I'm having great success using SYBA SIL680-RAID IDE Controller Cards. I have 2 of them (with the latest Silicon Image bios and drivers) installed on an Intel D975XBX2 motherboard running Vista Premium. My DVD writers are 3 LG GSA-H42L drives. I have one connected to the motherboard IDE connector and the other two connected to the primary IDE connector on each of the SYBA controllers.

    I am able to rip or burn simultaneously to all three drives without any performance hits. I use AnyDVD and CloneDVD for ripping and Nero for burning. The reason I use Nero is that it allows burning to multiple drives and has a verify option.