INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: MC is slower than Nero at burning  (Read 2881 times)

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
MC is slower than Nero at burning
« on: May 16, 2004, 03:15:31 am »

MC takes approx 1 minute more to burn an audio CD than Nero - using exactly the same settings and files.

Repeated the test several times with the same result.

It happens whether the files are compressed, eg mp3, or wav.

Most of the difference can be explained by  the "analysing files..." stage in MC once you tell it to go ahead and burn your compilation.  This takes approx 40 to 60 seconds - Nero takes about 5/10 seconds to analyse the same files.

At the moment, it's actually quicker to drag and drop files from MC to Nero and burn in Nero, than it is to drag and drop to MC action window and burn in MC.  :o

JohnT - any plans to look at this?
Logged

JimH

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 72438
  • Where did I put my teeth?
Re:MC is much slower than competition at burning CDs
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2004, 07:28:09 am »

It should not take 40 to 60 seconds.  It should take around 5 or less.  I know that, in the past, we've had problems with Nero.   Please try uninstalling it and rebooting.
Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2004, 12:58:20 pm »

OK I'll try that when I get a chance.

However, I don't have packet writing part of Nero installed - this is usually what causes problems.

What is MC doing when it says "analysing files.." ?.

If it's just 'analysing files' I don't see how Nero could interfere as 'analysing files' isn't really a burning function.   ?
Logged

JimH

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 72438
  • Where did I put my teeth?
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2004, 03:09:49 pm »

I'm sorry.  I read your post as "analyzing devices".  Nero may not be a factor.  Check your settings for the CD writer.  You may be telling MC to apply DSP settings there.
Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2004, 02:22:37 pm »

Uninstalled Nero - no difference.

I'm not applying any DSP settings when burning.

In this 50 second 'delay' where MC is "analysing files" there doesn't seem to be a lot going on - no noticeable CPU load - what is happening?

It makes no difference whether the files burned are wav, ape or mp3.

Any other suggestions?
Logged

edbro

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2004, 02:36:25 pm »

I just finished burning a cd so I think I know what you are talking about. I tried twice to burn the cd from inside of MC but each time MC locked up while it was analyzing the files. So I gave up and loaded Nero.

When you load mp3s in Nero, it will analyze the files. At least, that is what it is saying it is doing. What I really suspect is that it is converting them to wave files during this process. (?) Anyway, Nero "analyzes" the files as does MC.

Still don't know why MC will lock up during this process. Jim, where is the option to apply DSP to the cd writer? I want to check to make sure that is not my problem. Also, what does "decode files directly to cd" mean?
Logged

jolo

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2004, 01:43:53 am »

 ;D There have been many times when MC is not able to burn to a CD and I have t ogo to Nero which usually takes care of t he process.

I would like to use MC for more, but sometimes when ripping, I get CDs that might skip, and a lot of unusual problems.

Of course MC does everything, which might be the issue.

Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2004, 02:23:22 am »

This thread is going off topic here.   :P


The issue I raise is very specific.  

Quote
MC takes approx 1 minute more to burn an audio CD than Nero - using exactly the same settings and files.

Repeated the test several times with the same result.

It happens whether the files are compressed, eg mp3, or wav.

Most of the difference can be explained by  the "analysing files..." stage in MC once you tell it to go ahead and burn your compilation.  This takes approx 40 to 60 seconds - Nero takes about 5/10 seconds to analyse the same files.

MC has always been slow at burning Audio CD's - as long as I've been using it.  That's why I thought that what I was experiencing wasn't a bug but just the fact that MC was slow at burning.

JimH's post indicates that MC shouldn't  take so long to burn.  

JRiver guys / Anyone.  Any ideas?
Logged

jolo

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 173
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #8 on: May 21, 2004, 02:47:56 am »

Why is this off-topic ? It is about issues I have had with inconsistent burning with MC are are we not allowed to mention the post popular (that does not make it any good), burning and ripping software.

I am just a person who wants the best for MC and is a paid for registered user for many years and want it improved and hope others would help me as I want to help others.
I am talking aboout t he latest version of MC.



Logged

JohnT

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #9 on: May 21, 2004, 02:37:35 pm »

Sauzee-
During the "analyzing..." stage, MC is actually filling a large startup buffer to prepare for beginning to write the CD. This should be reworded to better explain what's going on.
Our pipeline for writing audio CD's is somewhat slower than Nero because we use the MC playback engine which gives us a lot of flexibility for applying effects, crossfading, replay gain, re-sampling, etc. Having said that, we are constantly trying to speed up the pipeline so look for improvements in this area in the future.

Jolo-
Can you give more specifics on the problems you are encountering? You mentioned a problem in "ripping", but did you actually mean "burning" (creating) a CD?

Edbro-
Did it actually lock up, or just take a long time?

Thanks,
John T.
Logged
John Thompson, JRiver Media Center

edbro

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 734
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #10 on: May 21, 2004, 02:47:08 pm »

Edbro-
Did it actually lock up, or just take a long time?

Thanks,
John T.
Mine locked up on me. After waiting quite a while I went into Task Mgr and it said it was not responding. I found where the option for applying DSP was and it was not checked. Worked fine in Nero so I'm not too concerned.
Logged

Sauzee

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 714
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2004, 04:15:32 pm »

Sauzee-
During the "analyzing..." stage, MC is actually filling a large startup buffer to prepare for beginning to write the CD. This should be reworded to better explain what's going on.
Our pipeline for writing audio CD's is somewhat slower than Nero because we use the MC playback engine which gives us a lot of flexibility for applying effects, crossfading, replay gain, re-sampling, etc. Having said that, we are constantly trying to speed up the pipeline so look for improvements in this area in the future.


JohnT

Thanks for the reply.  So I think you're telling me that the approx 1 min longer burning time in MC, is not a bug specific to my set up, but is MC standard performance?

It would be great if you could maybe look at some performance improvements in this area.  

I appreciate what you say about cross-fading, dsp effects etc.. but Nero offers all of these and more but is much quicker at burning.

I would imagine the majority of MC users don't use dsp effects when burning, so it would be nice to have a faster 'no dsp effect' burning mode.

I appreciate Nero is a specialist burning app and will have more options etc  but I wouldn't expect it to be faster than MC.


Anyway, thanks for the info.

Logged

Tor

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #12 on: May 23, 2004, 10:32:48 am »

Hi,

I have the same problem. I tried a couple of times burning with MC, but gave up after a minute or so and had to terminate the prog due to it just sitting in analyzing audio. However I just had another go, and after 2 min 45 sec it started to burn. I'm running without any DSP settings.

Media Center Registered 10.0.140 -- C:\Programfiler\J River\Media Center\

Microsoft Windows XP 5.1 Service Pack 1 (Build 2600)
Intel Pentium 4 2806 MHz MMX / Memory: Total - 1047 MB, Free - 282 MB

Internet Explorer: 6.0.2800.1106 / ComCtl32.dll: 5.82 (xpsp1.020828-1920) / Shlwapi.dll: 6.00.2800.1400 / Shell32.dll: 6.00.2800.1233 (xpsp2.030604-1804) / wnaspi32.dll: 4.71 (0001) , ASPI for Win32 (95/NT) DLL, Copyright © 1989-2002 Adaptec, Inc. / Aspi32.sys: 4.71 (0001)

Ripping /   Drive G: _NEC    DVD_RW ND-1300A   Mode:Normal  Type:Auto  Speed:Max
  Digital playback: Yes /  Use YADB: Yes /  Get cover art: No /  Calc replay gain: Yes /  Copy volume: 32767
  Eject after ripping: Yes /  Play sound after ripping: No  

Burning /  Drive G: _NEC     DVD_RW ND-1300A    Addr: 3:0:0  Speed:16  MaxSpeed:16  BurnProof:Yes
  Test mode: No /  Eject after writing: Yes /  Direct decoding: Yes /  Write CD-Text: No
  Use playback settings: No /  Normalization: None
Logged

JohnT

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2004, 09:47:54 am »

I'll take another look at this area since 2:45 certainly seems excessive. Do you get snappy performace if you burn plain wave files to audio CD?

Thanks,
John T.
Logged
John Thompson, JRiver Media Center

Tor

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2004, 10:17:08 am »

Depends what you mean by snappy  :P

I converted an album of MP3's to uncompressed wave, and started burn session. This time it "only" took 45 sec w/analyzing audio before starting to burn lead-in.

-Tor-
Logged

JimH

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 72438
  • Where did I put my teeth?
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2004, 04:59:12 pm »

Please try build 141.
Logged

Tor

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 43
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #16 on: May 26, 2004, 10:39:39 am »

Well, I tried 141 twice, and both time it only did analyzing some 4-5 sec's, but both times it also gave an error message:
First attemt: Not able to send cue file. Clicked ok and burn button again, it started and finished OK.
Second attemt: Unable to burn. Clicked ok and burn button again and it started and finished OK.

So beside from these odd messages it seem to be working as it should be.
-Tor-
Logged

JohnT

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 4627
Re:MC is slower than Nero at burning
« Reply #17 on: May 27, 2004, 02:13:51 pm »

Well, I tried 141 twice, and both time it only did analyzing some 4-5 sec's, but both times it also gave an error message:
First attemt: Not able to send cue file. Clicked ok and burn button again, it started and finished OK.
Second attemt: Unable to burn. Clicked ok and burn button again and it started and finished OK.

So beside from these odd messages it seem to be working as it should be.
-Tor-
Please try build 144, I think this issue will be gone.
Logged
John Thompson, JRiver Media Center
Pages: [1]   Go Up