Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Many CDs Can You Burn at Once?

Posted by Cliff on from the burn-fevah dept.

kfs27 asks: "In an attempt to help a professor of mine record and duplicate his lectures. I have been asked to put together a CD duplicating box. Commercial products seem to be very expensive and I figured a PC with some SCSI160 Cards (HW or SW Raid maybe), SCSI Burners and a 15K RPM drive (size not an issue) could do the job for cheaper. But the question is, how many CDs can you burn at once of 30 minutes, mono audio. 10 at a time would be excellent I think. More of course better. Cost is not a huge issue, as long as it's less than Commercial Duplicators, it's more of an experiment, but must be stable and easy to operate (I'd be willing to script up a frontend)."

112 comments

  1. RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by Zack · · Score: 5, Informative

    With the prices of RAM being as low as they are, you might want to consider building a ram disk to store the data that's going to get burned. That way you don't have to worry about the speed of the hard drives, the ram will always be faster.

    We have one box here with 4 SCSI burners in it with a 700 meg ram drive. Everything works wonderfully in it.

    1. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by jonistron · · Score: 3, Informative

      hmmm, I really like this idea about RAMDISK. But don't forget duplication services like http://www.ctexinc.com/ or http://www.cd-rom-replication.com/ . Take your total cost of your design and weigh it against using a company like these. 10,000 cd's should run about $4,000.00 US

    2. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by jonistron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh and another thing: 1.Why isn't there an edit post option? and 2.Using a service would save you from swapping new media 1,000 times if you make 10,000 at a rate of 10 at a time. I know a student time is cheaper than prison labor, but that cheap I think not. Spend your time doing real research (not that you aren't ).

    3. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      There isn't an edit post option because this isn't a personal web log, it's comments section. If you could edit your comments, it would result in people debating each other, then constantly correcting their comments to try and make themselves look smarter.

      Also, people could karma whore a comment up to +5 then change it to some goatse.cx esque drivel.

      I agree though, use a service. Who wants to sit there and switch out 10,000 cds? You can get them with nice silkscreened labels, too, even on a cd-r.

      furnace cd has some great rates.

    4. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 2
      Where did any of you get that "10,000 cds" number? He said "help a professor of mine record and duplicate his lectures". He's probably interested in making 30-50 copies. I'm guessing, sure, but so are you.

      As to solving the problem: I'd use a multi-threaded, multi-tasking operating system on a box with 10 SCSI CD-ROM burners and burn 10 disks in parallel (simultaneous but asynchronous -- launch 10 jobs all reading the same source but writing different destinations). You might need/want a huge RAM drive to hold the source, to ensure the 10 reads from one drive can keep up with the 10 parallel writes, but I don't know; maybe a fast hard drive is enough. It certainly depends on the speed of the box and the speed of the burners.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    5. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      Why in the name of god would someone want to pay for this box to make 30-50 copies? There are small run services that will do them in that bulk for like $2.50 a cd- or less.

      I hope the poster needs at least a thousand of these, otherwise he's crazy to spend the money on the replicating system. Even then, furnacecd.com (to pick one company I trust) charges $0.89 each for orders over 500. And that is with a guaranteed 3 day turnaround.

      I don't think he'd have posted this if he just needed 50 cds made. If he's building a system for $2000+ to make 50 cds when he could just pay $125 bucks instead, he's crazy.

    6. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've done the same on a P133 with 128 MB of RAM.
      No coasters, 4 4X CD writers, and all SCSI on a
      dual channel Ultra SCSI card.

      Put in 512 MB of RAM, a dual/quad channel scsi card and a decent processor, and I think you can easily drive 10-16 of those. Shouldn't be too hard anyways, even if I haven't tried it yet. :)

    7. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      If you could edit your comments, it would result in people debating each other, then constantly correcting their comments to try and make themselves look smarter.

      Smarter posts? Oh no, we can't have that.

      Also, people could karma whore a comment up to +5 then change it to some goatse.cx esque drivel.

      Your post goes back to 1/2 (but never up) when you modify it.

    8. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Smarter posts? Oh no, we can't have that.

      Note I said "look" smarter, not actually be smarter.

      Example: say you post a comment, and I reply, correcting you on a point you got wrong.

      Then you go back and correct your comment. Now the comment I made looks like it's correcting something that doesn't need correction... And I get modded down for redundancy. Editable comments would definitely lead to this sort of abuse, a whole new kind of trolling.

      That's just one example of why you can't edit comments. If you feel you left something out or need to clarify, then you respond to your own comment- not change what was said originally. I don't see why editing is a need at all. If you are a bad speller, use the preview button.

      Not to mention it would just make the site really schizophrenic-feeling, if all the comments were changing constantly.

    9. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Example: say you post a comment, and I reply, correcting you on a point you got wrong. Then you go back and correct your comment.

      I see that as a good thing.

      Then you go back and correct your comment. Now the comment I made looks like it's correcting something that doesn't need correction... And I get modded down for redundancy.

      I guess if you think the moderation system is at all useful that is a bad thing. I don't.

    10. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You don't see how it would be an intensely confusing read? If comments that were posted before others were actually more recent? Or were edited so that the responses to them had absolutely NOTHING to do with the new text of the parent? Whats the point of having a reply if it doesn't address points covered in the parent?

      It seems like adding editable comments would just make the trolling worse, as every person would constantly edit their posts to incorporate everyone else's points and discredit anyone who responds to them disparagingly. /. is already too competitive as far as karma goes, this would just make it moreso, it seems.

      (Also, please point me out another site of this size that has an editable comments system that works well.)

      I guess if you think the moderation system is at all useful that is a bad thing. I don't.

      So you like digging through the morass of 'frist post's and 'goatse.cx' posts? I agree that the moderation system is not very good at pointing out quality, but it is pretty good at filtering out the utter garbage.

    11. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Also, please point me out another site of this size that has an editable comments system that works well.

      http://www.everything2.com/ I find their system far from perfect in other respects, but once you get used to the idea, I think the editable comments system is far superior.

      I agree that the moderation system is not very good at pointing out quality, but it is pretty good at filtering out the utter garbage.

      You're right. I definately exaggerated my point. The moderation system isn't useless, it's the karma system that is.

      Whats the point of having a reply if it doesn't address points covered in the parent?

      The point is to stop someone else from spreading untrue crap. Whether it's through responding to them (and hoping your response gets read), or having them change their original comment, it still accomplishes that goal. It's quite likely the reply would get moderated down to -1, so no one would have to actually read it once it's accomplished its purpose.

      It seems like adding editable comments would just make the trolling worse, as every person would constantly edit their posts to incorporate everyone else's points and discredit anyone who responds to them disparagingly.

      Again, this is what I would love about it. If someone presented a single coherent post incorporating all the others, I'd much rather read that then a 15 post reply chain arguing the point.

      /. is already too competitive as far as karma goes, this would just make it moreso, it seems.

      I don't think most people care about karma so much as they care about getting their posts recognized. Personally the only reason I don't post as an Anonymous Coward is that if I do so I can't keep track of when someone reply's to my posts.

    12. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      http://www.everything2.com/ I find their system far from perfect in other respects, but once you get used to the idea, I think the editable comments system is far superior.

      Everything2 isn't a discussion/news site, though. It's more like a non-strictly-factual dictionary or encyclopedia. (I also find the site to be pretty useless, but that's another story.)

      Whats the point of having a reply if it doesn't address points covered in the parent?

      The point is to stop someone else from spreading untrue crap. Whether it's through responding to them (and hoping your response gets read), or having them change their original comment, it still accomplishes that goal. It's quite likely the reply would get moderated down to -1, so no one would have to actually read it once it's accomplished its purpose.

      And that's exactly what editable comments would result in - more untrue crap. How can allowing people to change what they said "keep people from spreading untrue crap"? If anything, altering the record of what was said, when, reduces the veracity of a thread, not increases it. One would imagine that if someone said something honestly, from their heart, they wouldn't HAVE to edit it, except for spelling errors. The people who will are ones trying to change the flow of discourse, or make others look badly/themselves look good.

      It seems to me that if you make a statement, you should stand by it, or recant/correct it- NOT delete your original statement and all record of it, then replace it with something else. Which is what an editable comments system would allow for.

      The bottom line is, in a threaded/nested view, it would just be frustrating to try and read something like that. I like reading the comments in close to chronological order, and if comments at the top were ACTUALLY more recent then what are ostensibly supposed to be responses to the top comments, it seems like it'd be headache inducing.

      I can also see it encouraging people to "frist post" some nonsense, just so they can copy and paste from later, more popular posts. Their frist post is higher up, so it will get read more.

      Now, if they TOTALLY changed the comments system, maybe. But wouldn't that be a totally different website? And this comment system works relatively well. I have no problems understanding it and finding info I want while filter out the garbage. If it was made to be really complicated, I don't think it would be that much better...

      And really, I don't see how it's that hard to post a correction reply to one of your comments if you realize you made a mistake. Isn't that easier than devising some new comments system?

      The only way this would work is if you got rid of the karma system (among other things), because it's too easy to use editable comments to artificially lower someone else's karma.

      It also seems you have a lot of faith in users to change their comments if they are wrong. I think this is unlikely. I'd bet most people who comment don't even go back and read the responses to them (though the new message options may be changing this). I also doubt most users would change their comment if proved wrong. More likely, they'll just change there comments to make themselves look smarter/anyone responding to them look stupid.

      I also feel there is value in a thread where:

      1. I post a unfounded opinion.
      2. You refute it.
      3. I add an arguement to my opinion, perhaps with a fact.
      4. You post more well-founded facts than my facts.
      5. Someone else verifies those facts.
      6. I either stop responding, or, in an ideal world, agree that I was wrong.

      With editable comments, you'd end up with:

      1. My edited, opinion with verified facts.
      2. You refute an opinion which no longer appears in the parent.
      3. I edit this comment to mention that's already stated in my first comment.
      4. You post more well-founded facts than my facts, but they are now present in my parent comment.
      5. Someone else verifies those facts, but this verification is now present in the parent comment.

      That just seems confusing to me, and hard to read. What's the reason for having the responses beyond my edited comment, since I summed them up and claimed the other people's opinions as my own? You could just have them fall off, but then you open up an avenue for people to delete/hide actually good and useful comments.

      You could say it doesn't matter, since all the salient points are inside the parent (even though the good points are not my own), BUT- part of a site like this is finding people who's opinion you trust. The karma system tries to do this, as does the friend/foe system. If people can change their comments, absorbing the best comments of others, it seems like you can no longer really tell who is insightful and trustworthy. The people who post earlier and can copy/paste well instead seem to have the best opinions... Which would then lead to the people who's opinions were usurped responding "hey you just stole that comment from me!" and so forth...

      Again, this is what I would love about it. If someone presented a single coherent post incorporating all the others, I'd much rather read that then a 15 post reply chain arguing the point.

      You seem to have a lot of faith in the userbase. In an ideal world everyone will act nice and simply try to present the facts in the best manner. But in reality, there are trolls. And trolls will try to find ways to use any system to annoy other people and make slashdot (or any site) hard to read and less fun for others.

      And besides, isn't that what happens when posts are archived? The threading is removed and all the garbage posts are stripped out? Or when you view a post at +4/+5?

    13. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by ixx · · Score: 1

      How about marking an edited comment as edited. And put a link to the original version.

    14. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Now, if they TOTALLY changed the comments system, maybe. But wouldn't that be a totally different website?

      I guess that's what it comes down to. I totally think editable comments would be possible, and in some respects it would be preferable (at least for me). But so many other things would change and evolve, that the site really wouldn't be "slashdot" any more. It's unfortunate that slashdot and its users don't fully embrace open content, or someone could just try it and see.

      And this comment system works relatively well.

      Fairly well. Better than any other news comment system I know of. But that doesn't mean it couldn't be improved.

      And really, I don't see how it's that hard to post a correction reply to one of your comments if you realize you made a mistake. Isn't that easier than devising some new comments system?

      It is, somewhat, but it also leads to people making circular arguments.

    15. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      Do we really want a message board to function like CVS?

      It seems overly complicated to me. What's wrong with just responding to your own post with a correction? Simple, easy.

    16. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      It is, somewhat, but it also leads to people making circular arguments.

      See, that's the the thing- I think your system would be more circular. Because you could go back and add things into the debate at an earlier point- which then changes the percieved meaning of comments further along the chain, whose authors then feel the need to alter their words, which makes the original author change his, which then makes the responders change theirs... and so on and so on, ad infinitum.

      I think your system would maybe work if, say, each user was allowed to only post once in a story and the posts weren't threaded, they were simply listed by order of moderation (or perhaps chronologically, or another arbitrary order, but not threaded - so you couldn't respond to a response).

      If the whole experience of the website was for people to fine tune their comments until they reached the perfect summation of their (and others) views. But as you say, it wouldn't really be slashdot anymore. It sounds like a interesting site idea, but better suited, I think, for philosophical debate than "news for nerds".

    17. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by Atrahasis · · Score: 1

      It all seems a bit 1984 to me.
      Why not add a memory hole button while you are at it?
      Was it eurasia or eastasia? I never can remember.
      The only way to do this (if indeed it needs to be done) would be to allow editing of a post only if no-one has replied to it, and for a marker to be placed on the post that it has changed. Or you could just use the preview button.

      --

      Games Workshop Petition

    18. Re:RAM Disk, not Hard Drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that isn't a problem because they don't burn too fast.. mediaform's CD duplicators are powered by 166mhz Cyrix proccessors =D.. they just use one adaptec 2940 for each row of 4 burners and a propriatery interface..

  2. Well at a glance.. by jonistron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    [(max bandwidth to drive)*(n disks)]/[(max bandwidth cd-r drive)*(n cdr's)] > 1

  3. Plextor Replex Tower by haplo21112 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Plextor Replex tower would be a much better way to go...it and its software are made for this sort of thing and are reasonablely cheap...about the same cost as what you are suggesting, after a quick calculation in my head..

    --
    Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
  4. Nero can do it by jpt.d · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nero can burn with more than one recorder at once.

    I have never used it personally for that, nor do I know the scope of its support.

    --
    What we see depends on mainly what we look for. -- John Lubbock Now search for that bug slave!
    1. Re:Nero can do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that funny?

      Dipshit moderators.

  5. RAM prices started going up... by itwerx · · Score: 1

    ...a month or so ago, where ya been?

    1. Re:RAM prices started going up... by Zack · · Score: 1

      It's still not "expensive". When prices go up from "dirt cheap" they can still be "cheap".

    2. Re:RAM prices started going up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically they've gone up from 'dirt cheap' to 'cheap' and have settled on a 'reasonable' price ratio. Still a gig of RAM can be had for less than the price difference between a high-end SCSI and a low end IDE drive. Considering that the cheapest of 'new' SCSI 15k drives are $250 and the cheapest gig of ram is only $180. While the cheapest IDE drive is probably somewhere in the $50-$70 range for a resaonably new model.
      While you're not 'saving' money, that SCSI controller can control twice the SCSI CD-RW drives with no HD interface to suck up bandwith.
      Just keep in mind the power supply I'd consider at least a 460 watt if you're runing 7 burners in the same box since each can use as many as 30-50 watts peak. Considering that most commodity grade '300-350 watt' power supplies only provide 220-235 watts to the system this means you have to pick a decent power supply for that many optical drives.

  6. Umm, depends. by polymath69 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Factors are going to include the speed of the drives holding the .iso images, the number of CD burners per SCSI bus, and the speed that you are trying to burn the disks at (eg. 4x). The idea of using a RAM disk to eliminate the hard drive variable has some merit, but unless you've got a gig of RAM or so, you'll only be able to burn one image at a time onto those multiple disks.

    But here's an unrelated thought. You say these CDs are to contain 30 minute mono lectures. A CD will hold 60 minutes easily. Why not put two lectures per CD and save on your overhead in loading and unloading the disks?

    You could take it even further by recording one lecture in the left audio channel, and another in the right, to fit four lectures per disk. It might be worth considering.

    --

    --
    I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    1. Re:Umm, depends. by jonistron · · Score: 1

      Couldn't you mount the iso in RAM as a filesystem so all could access the same iso?

    2. Re:Umm, depends. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You wouldn't want to mount the ISO as a filesystem (I assume you're talking about using a loopback device), because then you'd need to recreate it for each CD you want to burn - that would be pointless. You could mount the ISO in a 700MB ramdisk if you wanted, but that shouldn't be necessary. You just need a large software buffer. I use cdrecord with a 32MB fifo, creating ISO images on the fly, and that buffer never drops below 85%. That buffer would be ridiculously large if you're just burning an image directly off the hard drive - you could probably get away with an 8MB buffer for each drive (each drive still has an internal buffer on top of that), meaning you'd only need 80MB to burn 10 CDs at once.

    3. Re:Umm, depends. by polymath69 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The AC is right; it wouldn't make sense to mount the ISO itself, as it's the image that's of use to the burner.

      But here's an even better idea. Skip the ramdisk. Instead, create a bunch of named pipes like np1..np10. Then start up a bunch of cdrecord instances, each reading from one of the named pipes. They should all block until they fill their input buffers.

      Next, use tee to copy the ISO image from the hard disk into each of the pipes.

      $ tee np1 np2 np3 np4 np5 np6 np7 np8 np9 < file.iso > np10

      That reads the ISO from the disk only once, and so should have the same performance advantages as setting it up in a tremendously large RAM disk (the contents of which might get swapped out anyway.)

      Note that the final named pipe was redirected to, rather than named as an argument to tee. That avoids the need to write an extra copy out to /dev/null.

      Will it work? You'd have to try it...

      --

      --
      I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
    4. Re:Umm, depends. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be cool if you could get it to work, but what happens if one of the cdrecord processes dies (i.e. one of the writers makes a coaster, and the process exits)? Would writing to the pipe block, and cause all the other processes to buffer underrun?

    5. Re:Umm, depends. by polymath69 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I think that would depend on the implementation details of tee. It's certainly a valid question. As I said, I don't know whether this would work. Some programs are picky about reading their input from pipes, but in my experience cdrecord is fairly flexible that way.

      And named pipes, unfortunately, have their own quirks; but generally, if you set up the reading process(es) before the writing process(es), results are gemerally good.

      --

      --
      I don't want to rule the world... I just want to be in charge of mayonnaise.
  7. PCI bus is your bottleneck... by stienman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only bottleneck you have then is your PCI bus.

    You'll probably be fine with the 10 drives and one HD as long as:
    1) You use a ramdisk
    2) You make sure each burner has at least 2MB of buffer

    With the 2MB buffer, fast scsi, ram disk and DMA you should run into no problems even with 24 or 32 speed burners. You'd be better off, of course, with a faster/wider PCI bus.

    Integrate a robotic loading/unloading system, and 24x drives - you'll get 10 cds every two minutes. Your class of fifty can get their CD on the way out the door. It may be more cost effective to get twice as many drives that run at half the speed.

    -Adam

    1. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by Hadlock · · Score: 2, Informative

      I definatly wouldn't suggest the x86 archhetechture. in that case, with no cost problems, and at a university, you might be able to a) buy an old sun workstation from another department, or b) permenantly "borrow" one from the local research department...

      as i recall, the sun and sgi workstations have really wide pci busses, which was what people on a recent macslash thread were debatinng why apple still has a long way to go to dethrone the two big S's in terms of personal rendering stations.

      for a home solution, or at a eshop of sorts, an old sparc station or the likes might be out of the question, but if you're going to hack together somthing, just drop an old S motherboard, 10-20 cd burners, and a powersupply into a metal box, and let er' burn.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by hamjudo · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Don't make this too hard. The PCI bus on a cheap motherboard is 32bits at 33Mhz, or a peak bandwidth of 132Mbytes/second. A 1X CD-ROM is 44.1Khz * 2 channels * 16 bits (2 bytes) or 176Kbytes/second. If the PCI bus were perfect, it could drive a single 748X CD writer, or ten 74X CDWriters. It's not perfect, but you'll easily get more than half of the max bandwidth (assuming modern PCI cards). Since 32X is the fastest CDwriter available today, you can easily drive 10 of them with quite a margin.

      If they're new CDwriters, they'll have protection against making coasters, so the penalty for running too many CDwriters, is they'll slow down.

      If you're good with metal working tools, you can make a double wide case that can hold 10 drives. Plug a bunch of IDE controller cards into the PCI bus. Note: IDE cables are limited to 18 inches. So you have to do a little design work, before you start cutting metal.

      If you're not into metal working, just take a few cheap PC's, max them out with CDwriters and network them with 100base-T ethernet cards. A little glue, and it will be like one big machine. This design can be expanded to hundreds of drives.

      I'm assuming student labor, so you won't need a robot disk changer.

    3. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by modecx · · Score: 1

      I should think that any PC motherboard with a 64bit/66Mhz PCI bus could handle that task quite handily. The feature of SGIs and Suns that they may have been referring to is the backplane, or the main memory bus. PCs are just now catching up to technology that has been used in SGIs and Suns for a bvery long time. Also, the SCSI controllers on both manufacture's computers are usually provided by a mainstream company (Adaptec comes to mind, especially for SGI equipment). And those devices typically interface over a regular 'ol PCI bus. Sun is an excpetion, as some of their equipment uses a PCI bus that isn't quite PCI. IIRC, they further overclock the bus/pump more bits thru it to make it faster than standard; also requiring special drivers from your OEM. So, if you could find a PC server motherboard with a few 64bit/66Mhz PCI slots, and PCI-SCSI controllers to do the job, it becomes more of an issue of working the software. As another poster noted, there are many great CD duplicator towers around, that can hook up to a computer or network, or operate stand-alone. If I needed a quick and cheap (time wise) solution, I'd go for that. If I needed to make alot of cds, I might look into making a custom burning machine with a robotic loader (who really wants to flip CDs all the time?). But it would have to be more economical than letting another company handle it.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    4. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by modecx · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the terrible formatting. Eh.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    5. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, never new so many computer Illiterates could respond to such an easy question... Specially the one's who are even more clueless about PCI... most don't even know how to spell PCI.... LOL

      All you need is a SCSI drive and bunch of SCSI CD-R burners @ any speed... They can be cheap... and on a single SCSI you can put upto 16 devices or even more... and this doesnot need any PCI interaction as long as you HDD is also a SCSI 8GB drive...

      You can buy a Adaptec 2940 used for about $50 and put all your drives on them...

      Been there done that... you can burn as many CDs as you want... If you wanna go all out you should get a D/C (dual channel) SCSI and put yer HDD on one and ALL your CD-ROMS on the other ( this is fer the fools who would say "hey, but ...")

      That's all

    6. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by Scooby+Snacks · · Score: 1
      ...32X is the fastest CDwriter available today...

      Not to be pedantic or anything, but you can get a 40X drive for USD $209.

      --

      --
      Runnin' around, robbin' banks all whacked on the Scooby Snacks...
    7. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by whistler-z · · Score: 1

      Since 32X is the fastest CDwriter available today . . .

      Just wanted to mention the fact that Plextor actually recently released a 40x CD-RW drive, info on which can be found here.

    8. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      How do you connect your SCSI drives to the computer? Throuch a PCI card?

    9. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by hamjudo · · Score: 2
      Cool. Fortunately, that's not fast enough to change the conclusion. Even if it really was that fast. The Plextor web page says: capable of burning a CD in just over three minutes.. The back of my envelope says that works out to an average of 25X.

      The "burnproof" technology makes it so that nothing catastrophic will happen when the PCI bus bandwidth is saturated.

    10. Re:PCI bus is your bottleneck... by ideut · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand. The data doesn't need to leave the SCSI bus.

      --

      --

  8. Let the students burn... by martyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let the students burn the CDs themselves. Just set up a server (ala napster), tell the students to download the lectures. Then, if the students actually want to burn them to CD, they're free to do so (set upa FAQ, if need be).

    1. Re:Let the students burn... by lotas · · Score: 1

      What if the students dont have computers. i know it sounds stupid but in my college, my class of 18 students studying networking and software systems including computer programming and other computer tools, about 8 people have computers and of them 6 are good computers. the other 10 use the college. So what do you do then?

      --
      Lotas T Smartman www.lotas-smartman.net
    2. Re:Let the students burn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bite the bullet and *gasp* print the lectures out on paper in the school's computer lab?

    3. Re:Let the students burn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they don't have computers what the hell will they do with a CD anyway? They will just have to take notes like normal people do.

    4. Re:Let the students burn... by fliplap · · Score: 1

      If they don't have computers what the hell will they do with a CD anyway? They will just have to take notes like normal people do.

      um, he's burning audio. I know its a really recent development, but you can find portable CD players. I know i know, its hard to believe that they're even cheaper than those portable mp3 players. I've even heard about people putting CD players in thier cars!

    5. Re:Let the students burn... by Atrahasis · · Score: 1

      Not much use, for say, a linguistics lecture where you're trying to learn to hear sounds that no westerner has ever been required to make. Try writing down a glottal stop or a pharyngeal fricative, and they're nothing compared to what aboriginal and African languages can throw at you.

      --

      Games Workshop Petition

    6. Re:Let the students burn... by t · · Score: 1
      Speaking of which... wouldn't it then be cheaper to buy every student a cheap mp3 player and setup a couple of computers for dl'ing the lectures?

      Yes this reply is 6 days later. I'm bored.

      t.

  9. Why CDs? by Jerf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why CDs? 30 minutes of mono audio, encoded in 32Kb/s MP3, is (30 * 60 * 32 / 8) = 7200 KB (with the last "/ 8" to get us to kiloBYTES instead of kiloBITS). There are MUCH better codecs then MP3 for this at this bitrate, I just use MP3 as a convenient and easily obtained example. Record the lecture, convert to (lossily-compressed-audio-format-of-your-choice), and load it on the web.

    At the end of the semester, give each student ONE CD with the entire course on it!

    Nowadays, if your student can use a CD, they can play an MP3. And even a 7MB download is doable over a modem connection. (And you might cut that down to perhaps 1 or 2 MB or less by using a codec designed to do voice-only, but you'll probably have to pay for it.)

    1. Re:Why CDs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the end of the semester

      Perhaps they don't want to wait until the end.

      Being able to review last week's session is useful.

    2. Re:Why CDs? by Jerf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "and load it on the web." The CD at the end of the course is a bonus. The rest of my point concerns getting the file size down to the point where this is feasible, even for modem users.

      The fact that creating all of these CDs is difficult suggests that a different approach is probably called for; no matter HOW little is spent on this duplication scheme, the money is probably better spent elsewhere. Work smarter, not harder.

    3. Re:Why CDs? by Suppafly · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      first off, you don't know what type of audience he's shooting for with these cds, second off, he never said it was mono audio or even audio in the first place.. Most college profs are big on using powerpoint and such combined with audio and video, in which case, a cdr would be the ideal choice, and is probably why said prof is looking at having someone make him a huge cd replicating box.

    4. Re:Why CDs? by (startx) · · Score: 2, Informative

      re-read the question. go ahead, I'll wait. done? good. He did say ~30 minutes of mono audio. now go sit in the corner with the pointy cap.

    5. Re:Why CDs? by TrickyRick · · Score: 1


      Actually for 30 minute lectures why not audio cassettes.

    6. Re:Why CDs? by MrZaius · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's been my experience that most college students don't keep tape decks. It's a kinda silly thing to still have around, if you're too young to have a huge tape collection.

    7. Re:Why CDs? by ahfoo · · Score: 1

      Shit, just have the notes put into a multimedia format with Macromedia(TM). We can put in all kinds of cool illustrations the prof could never properly display in class with Flash(TM) animations and an on-line glossary, easy indexing and navigation and a search feature so students can quickly review materials they've covered earlier but not can't recall clearly in the context of later chapers. We'll have Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) to cut down on cheating and we'll use visual and audio clues in the test questions to give everyone a chance to show off their special abilities.
      I actually love doing educational media, I just wish Macromedia would consent to a Linux runtime. It's a serious question I'm asking. What's the hold up? The hold up is nobody has figured out how it's going to be paid for. But the classroom as it exists today is seriously archaic. Schools should be more like big libraries/cafes with lots of media equipment for individually tailored coursework and more on-campus housing and legalized drugs and a whole lot more acceptance of casual sexuality. Profs would still exist, but they'd be like counselors and spend a lot more time having sex with their students and less time trying to hide it. I think everybody will be happier once we get some real reforms going. The parents, hey they can go back to school too!
      Is this AhFoo dude fucking around? Well, remember that the original western schools were all about queer older dudes fucking young boys and telling them about the ways of the world and math and how to argue with a lisp. You can dislike it, but you're arguing against the evidence to dispute it. We could do something back to the roots like that, but with a hetero twist! Americanize the Greek tradition with lots of digitized coursework and a true liberal agenda.
      And as for legalizing drugs on campuses, well Harvard had to close down when they ran out of beer in the early years. Students wouldn't attend if they weren't buzzed. Makes sense to me. Let's bring the fun back to education. then we can justify having everyone work in education when nano makes all the conventional industries obsolete.

  10. Don't mean to be a contrarian but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why does he need to burn his lectures for mass distribution? If it's some sort of ego thing then it would be easier to post the lectures on a server and let the students decide if it's worth the bandwidth.

  11. Plenty. Is there a pile of Kenny G. . . by human+bean · · Score: 3, Funny
    That I can light off? :)

    --

    *whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"

  12. don't use a RAM disk by MSG · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First, I have to say that I agree with the comments already posted suggesting that you just compress the audio and make it available for download. It's much more efficient. Especially when semester end comes and students want to review data from several lectures, not swapping disks frequently will be more convenient.

    I'd mod them up if I didn't have to say that RAM disks are a bad idea. If you simply add the RAM to the system, then the OS can cache the data in the most efficient manner possible. As long as you have the RAM to cache the image, the OS shouldn't be reading it from the drive constantly. Using a RAM disk is actually harmful to system performance, because the OS may not be able to cache disk sectors that are frequently needed. Statically allocating the RAM only works if you have more information about disk use than your OS, which you almost certainly do not.

    1. Re:don't use a RAM disk by jonistron · · Score: 1

      uh, no... You dont need drive sector info because you are not on a drive. Its just data.

    2. Re:don't use a RAM disk by SecretAsianMan · · Score: 2

      Using a RAM disk is actually harmful to system performance, because the OS may not be able to cache disk sectors that are frequently needed.

      The ramdisk and the OS's caches are both living in the same memory store; the cache won't be much faster, if any at all, and that only by the OS maybe having a less complicated way to get at the data. Thus, any improvement gained by duplicating ramdisk virtual sectors in a cache would be marginal. Ideally, the OS shouldn't cache any of it; the entire ramdisk is the freaking cache. The ramdisk idea is smart.

      --

      Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.

    3. Re:don't use a RAM disk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are so fucking retarded.

  13. I don't know... by cabalamat2 · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... but I'd like to burn all existing copies of Windows XP and Office XP, plus all copies of their source code. That'd make a nice bonfire.

    Perhaps Bill Gates could be the Guy.

    1. Re:I don't know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very original thought. on topic too.

  14. What's the bottleneck? by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 3, Informative
    If all the CDs are burning at once, you have to do one read and many writes. Speed of the hard disk is not a factor. Speed of the bus and drive interfaces might be.

    If a CD holds 660 MB and holds 1 hour of audio, that's a data rate of 11 MB/minute. Burning at 24x, that's 264 MB/minute. Bandwidth of a 64-bit wide PCI bus at 66 MHz is 528 MB/second, some 120 times the requirement of the single CD drive. It would appear that one could burn 10 or 20 CDs at a time at 24x and have plenty of bus bandwidth left over (so long as you were burning in parallel).

    I'm not qualified to judge the architectural features which might create other bottlenecks, but neither the hard drive nor the machine bus appear to be a difficulty.

    --
    Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
    1. Re:What's the bottleneck? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your sig is the most fucking pompous thing ever.

    2. Re:What's the bottleneck? by Petrol · · Score: 1

      Yeah it is... but look at his score.

      --
      ...and that's the end of our show. Donk!
  15. Practical problems. by billcopc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Burning multiple discs at once does sound nice at first, but there is one thing you seem to have overlooked : bus contention. No matter how many hyperfast SCSI cards you put in there, they will all share the same PCI bus and they will all compete over whose data stream is most important. This leads to reduced total throughput and greatly increased latency.

    One thing you could try instead is to just use a bunch of older P2-300's with IDE burners and stream the audio files from a fast NFS or SMB server. Burning at 8x requires about 1400 KB/sec, so good ole 100base-T could serve 4-5 clients without a hiccup. Throw in 3-4 nics and you could have yourself a burner-cluster for very cheap.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Practical problems. by morbid · · Score: 0

      You can eliminate PCI bus contention issues by hanging several drives off of a fast wide SCSI card e.g. U160. it works very well for hard disk striping.

      --
      I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
    2. Re:Practical problems. by larien · · Score: 2
      Um, that's not going to work. Your choices are:
      • One system running all the data over one PCI bus to some SCSI burners or
      • Several systems each having one burner and one server pushing all the data over one PCI bus to a NIC
      In short, the data is still going over one PCI bus (on the NFS server), so PCI bus is still a bottleneck and you've just wasted time/money/simplicity on this solution.

      The only way round this is to have a server class system as the NFS server; assuming you have one of these, it's probably already working as an NFS server and will probably not be available to be dedicated to working as a server for your burner-cluster. If it's not dedicated, you have contention for scarce resources (the PCI bus, CPU, memory, network bandwidth) which will likely result in coasters.

  16. Key points highlighted by autocracy · · Score: 4, Informative
    • Buy enough RAM to hold the entire image of whatever you're burning - but don't make a RAM disk to store it in. The OS will do just fine caching it (my twin 18 gig SCSI drives that I got on the cheap evidence this - my computer barely reaches for them after the first hour of uptime. REALLY fast!).
    • SCSI burners wanted. This might even come out costing less because of the fact that an IDE card can only take 4 devices, while you'll be able to push several times that on SCSI. IDE will suffice for the HD if you're only burning one image at a time though.
    • Avoid theoretical numbers. Worst case scenario all the way. Assume that even if you start all your burners at the same time, they'll have drifted by the end of the cycle. And as you do more and more reloads, I can see the timings differing. This won't affect reads of the image (it'll be cached), but writes will hurt. Get a SCSI card and wide enough PCI bus (shoot for 64/66) to take it. Sure, theoretical measurements say you'll hack it with a 32/33, but keep in mind that others things run on that bus besides just what you plug into the slots - and that's assuming 100% efficiency.
    • SCSI stressed again. Bus mastering will help your CPU SSSSOOOO much. And yeah, I can't vouch it'd be that great on the ide -> scsi deal - but it's cached in RAM and RAM -> SCSI will help the proc.
    • Hardware you'll want: 1 Gig of RAM (why skimp? A full CD is 700 meaning that you'll probably buy 768 (multiple of 256 - derr!), so shoot for the gig to play with. Any CPU P-III or better will do, maybe even a P-II. I'd just go pick myself up a decent Athlon though. As for the Mobo - Dual Athlon model. No, you won't use that second proc, but you will use the onboard Ultra160. If you can get one with dual channels - bonus! This is because you'll be capable of handling 30 drives.
    Consideration: You'll have to have something to change out the discs. Set up with 10 drives, you should be able to EASILY do this for ~$2000. It's up to you to figure out way to change the discs automatically, though! And good luk on the case :)
    --
    SIG: HUP
    1. Re:Key points highlighted by cloudmaster · · Score: 2

      Actually, the dual procs would be good if you were dealing with an IDE source drive - it'd help out with interrupt handling. Either way, SCSI is the only way to fly here for the burners.

  17. Do what 613.org does... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I suppose that - for a particular course -
    several CD-ROM's will need to be burned,
    i.e. with a relatively small number of min-
    utes of audio stored on each one...

    Well, 613.org uses RealAudio technologies
    to squeeze (from memory:) hundreds of hours
    of seminar lectures onto ONE disk.

    So, if you're not already doing that (i.e.
    combine all the lectures onto one disk),
    I'd suggest something similar for your project.

    Let us know what you ultimately decide to do.

  18. Just an almost-ot reminder by Streuner · · Score: 0

    Just don't forget to cool this thing properly in case you build it yourself. Such devices tend to create vast amounts of heat.

    --
    I have no karma and I must post.
  19. agreement with the mp3 encoding idea by Cheeze · · Score: 1

    look, if you're going to be burning copies of your kenny G cd and then selling them to little kids in china, you would be better spending your time encoding them to mp3 and then telling them about how you bought an expensive 10-cd burner and built it all yourself, but now you just burn your one cd a year for the lectures. just about everything sold now as a consumer cd player also understand mp3s as well. it would be an interesting project to set it up and script it. i would like to see the load when it was 100% busy. but other than a novelty i can't believe you would need one of those unless you were making tons of $$$ to do it which means it's probably illegal also.

    --
    Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
  20. HA! How many CDs can you burn? by AtariDatacenter · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somehow, I had linked that in my mind with the *previous* Ask Slashdot story. Fahrenheit 451, indeed! More like Fahrenheit 200 for these chunks of plastic.

  21. IANASP but.. by Perdo · · Score: 2

    (I Am Not A Software Pirate)

    Nero will burn 10 identical disks at a time. Plextors's 40x burner costs $215. So for about $3,000 you can burn 200 disks an hour. Don't put your ATA raid motherboard/ATA controller carded monster in a case. Pulling 10 disks out of trays stacked in a tower after they have all ejected simultaniously is a pain in the butt.

    --

    If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    1. Re:IANASP but.. by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 2
      Pulling 10 disks out of trays stacked in a tower after they have all ejected simultaniously is a pain in the butt.


      That's what slot-in drives are for. :-)

  22. How many? How about all of them? by wrinkledshirt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just need to build the bonfire big enough.

    Heck, I'll even show you how it's done. Lemme just grab my sister's Backstreet Boys collection...

    --

    --------
    Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...

  23. More information Needed ... IDE DRIVES? by fwc · · Score: 5, Informative
    There's a lot of information missing from the posters query.

    First of all, if these MUST be in standard CD-audio format, then the answer to the question about how many disks you can burn of 30 minutes of audio in a given time can be calculated by dividing 30 minutes by the speed of the reader (say 15x), and then adding a minute or two for lead-in lead-out, toc, loading, etc. In this case, a 15x drive should be able to burn a 30 min CD in about 3-4 mins. A single drive should be able to turn out around 15-20 an hour.

    The poster did say he wanted to do this on the cheap. The bandwidth bottleneck in a PC environment will most likely be the PCI bus. Even with two IDE drives on an IDE chain, you should be able to keep up with the burning at 15x (150MB/min per drive). If I was going to do this on the cheap, I'd get me a used Pentium-II/Celeron class machine, or possibly a higher end pentium machine, get 4 IDE chains in it, and load it up with 6 CDR drives. Total cost should be under $1000, assuming you use linux or freebsd or similar. ($600 for drives, $50 for controller card, $350 for used machine). You may need to add a little for memory expansion, as I think the idea of a Ramdisk (300Megish) would be good, but memory is cheap (512 total MB should be sufficient). If you need more drives, add another machine. If you find that the machine can't keep up with this many, drop one or two and put them on a second machine.

    If these are for delivery to students which aren't at the lecture, or for review, perhaps the best thing would be to not focus on bulk duplication, but instead to figure out an on-demand system. What I mean is that if a student WANTS the lecture, then they can visit a computer at a specific location, select the date of the lecture, insert media and wait 5 mins for it to spit it out. That would be *Really* cheap (linux box w/CDR and suitably sized hard drive).

  24. not pedalogically sound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just throwing lectures on a CD is not a pedalogically sound way of doing web/technology-supported teaching. It's been shown that students respond very poorly to lectures on a computer or video tape. He should think about revising his web-supported teaching by designing web pages that ILLUSTRATE the concepts he's teaching instead of just being lazy and recording his lectures onto CD.

  25. Do the math! by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 3, Interesting
    He doesn't want to do this once, he wants to do it many times a year, for each of the professor's lectures. If he had "orders over 500" then buying in bulk would make sense; but if he only needs 30-50 copies of each lecture (my guess) then he doesn't want to make them one at a time (but ten at at time would be OK) and he doesn't want/need to buy 500 from a service. If he's making 30 copies of 20 lectures that's 600 CDs, not 50, so it's more like $4/CD if the equipment costs him $2000. But your way would cost $0.89x500=$445/batch (not the $125 you claimed -- your math is flawed somewhere) x 20 batches = $8900 (plus throwing away 9000+ unneeded CDs). Clearly the $2000 homemade box is cheaper for this application, and if he needs more than 30 copies of each lecture it's even cheaper.

    Of course, another way around this would be to put CD burners on 10 existing PCs in a lab somewhere. Not as convenient, but workable and cheaper (assuming they can get time to use that lab :-)

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    1. Re:Do the math! by joshsisk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You said:

      your way would cost $0.89x500=$445/batch (not the $125 you claimed -- your math is flawed somewhere)

      I said:

      If he's building a system for $2000+ to make 50 cds when he could just pay $125 bucks instead, he's crazy.

      I think your reading is flawed somewhere, I specifically wrote FIFTY, not 500. (The 500 number, which you took from elsewhere in my comment, was an example of the pricing curve of CD-R services. Note the first paragraph where I say you can get 30-50 made for $2.50 each.)

      Again, it still seems cheaper to just get the CDs made as you need them. You pay $125 for each batch (assumming a batch of 50), never have to worry about bad burns, don't have to have someone spend their time "scripting a frontend" or any of that business. Also, you never have to worry about your hardware going bad, or anything really.

      . If he's making 30 copies of 20 lectures that's 600 CDs, not 50, so it's more like $4/CD if the equipment costs him $2000.

      And furnacecd (and others, I assume) will make cd-r batches as small as ONE cd-r for $2.50 each, with the price dropping the more you make. If your way gets the price down to $4 a CD, it's still cheaper to use a service- $2.50 each at the most. Of course, over several years, using your own equipment will become cheaper- but that's not including time for maintenence, replacing hardware if it becomes needed, setup and actually doing the work.

      It also means an investment of hardware and capitol for something they might decide wasn't the best way of distributing the lectures in the first place. If, after one $125 outlay through a service, they realized that the students didn't even use the CDs, they could just not make another batch. No $2000 and all the time wasted.

      I'd recommend getting the first batch made through a service for this reason even if they plan to build the equipment. That way they can see if the students even want this. I can easily see the professor asking for a show of hands "who listened to my lectures on the cd?" and only one or two students raising their hand.

      Another thing to consider is the space taken for this equipment, and the hassle of requisitioning the hardware. I have worked in the University environment, and in my experience you can do small funding outlays (under $500) with little or no problem... But have to do proposals and seek bids for more expensive items.

      Incidentally, I agree with others on here that the best way to distribute lectures is via the web- why even bother making CDs in the first place? Just let them download them, or listen in the library/their home pc.

    2. Re:Do the math! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incidentally, I agree with others on here that the best way to distribute lectures is via the web- why even bother making CDs in the first place? Just let them download them, or listen in the library/their home pc.

      Or just put the ISO up at some accessible place in a lab or someplace, and off-load the labor onto the students.

      I'd also be curious how the (audio?) lectures are encoded. Something like a Real streaming media encoder and spewing content at 40Kbps might be a better use of budget than shovelware CDROM buring box. CD quality audio (or MP3) sounds like massive overkill for this application.

  26. burn-o-rama by mosch · · Score: 2

    use a memory filesystem to store the image, get a machine with 64-bit PCI, and a nice fast 64-bit U160 SCSI controller, and you should be able to do a lot. if you want to know how much alot is, do the math.

  27. I know it's anti-'geek', but... by Jonny+290 · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    You're not going to save money by doing it yourself. Let me rephrase that.

    You will spend less money by having them professionally duped, and you won't have a fucking beast of a computer left sitting there.

    "No problem," you say. "I can just dupe CD's for other people." Nope. You're not going to turn a profit for quite a while, and the other houses are sure to have lower prices than you.

    Even though you might get your prices lower, as a musician, i'd much rather go with a pro house with DEDICATED equipment than some hack mucking about with a bunch of consumer-level burners and SCSI cards duct-taped into his HP minitower.

    (i know, hyperbole, but you get the drift.)

    --
    Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
    1. Re:I know it's anti-'geek', but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is just speculation, but doesn't price for pro duplication depend on largely on quantities? I mean, say the prof wants a relatively small number of copies of each lecture day, say, 30 or so of each lecture, then I would imagine it would cost more to go to a pro duplication facility in the long run. However, if he wanted HUNDREDS of ONE lecture, then I'm guessing it would be financially advantageous to go pro, right? Wrong? Also, I was under the impression that maybe flexibility was more important than having the duplicator pay for itself.

  28. windows by Suppafly · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is a problem that lends itself really easily to a windows/ commercial software solution. Discjuggler by padus has support for up to 250 burners or something huge like that.. So you could get win2k a gig of ram or so and 10+ scsi burners and be good to go.

    1. Re:windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with cdrecord? You can batch start enough burning jobs to saturate the poor PCI bus from one single shell file (even in Win32 if you insist :-) ). At least that's what I'd use is I didn't go for a dedicated solution ("burntower" or plant).

    2. Re:windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suppafly? I know SupaFly is short for Super Fly. Is Suppafly short for Supper Fly?

  29. Disk Changer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the creation of the disks isn't time sensative, you might want to consider some sort of CDRW coupled to a disk changer, so that you don't have to sit there the entire time waiting for it to spit out disks. At 6x write speed 30 minutes of audio is written in 5 minutes, so that would be about 4 hours for fifty copies. Not too bad if you don't have to sit there feeding the drives.

  30. Add-in IDE Controllers by slaker · · Score: 2
    Add-in PCI IDE controllers such as the various Promise adaptor that are out there have very, very spotty support for ATAPI devices. Big, burly hardware IDE RAID controllers (eg 3Ware) don't work with ATAPI at all. This is an application to which SCSI is well suited. Not to say you couldn't make it work, but that you're in for a bit harder job. Incidently, one of my desktop machines (well, actually it's a giant tower) has five Yamaha 4x CD-R drives in it, all on a single Adaptec 2940UW. The machine isn't even that fast (Duron 850MHz) but manages just fine for my CD-duping needs.

    Visit StorageForum. We like new people!

    --
    -- I wanna decide who lives and who dies - Crow T. Robot, MST3K
  31. For software: by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 2

    DiscJuggler. No question about it. The pricing isn't too bad, and the software works great. It is good for both mastering and duplication, with good support for multiple drives.

    --
    ± 29 dB
  32. Alternatives to what you want. by Linuxathome · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Are you just burning audio or are you also including powerpoint slides or images? I'm also a student, and the lectures we have (1 hour lectures at a time) are recorded as wav files and then encoded as mp3 files at a 16K bitrate (trust me, I've listened to them and they work fine for lecture audio) and at that bitrate, the techs managed to squeeze 1 hour in 5 MB's (well, they also squeezed the sample rate down during recording too). That's the size of a regular music track at 192K bitrate, 44.1KHz samplerate--in other words, just the perfect size to publish online and download. Add less than 1 MB for the powerpoint file and you have enough info for most of the students to skip class and just listen to audio while flipping through the slides at home. Let me emphasize again that this is already implemented at my medical school and lots of students skip class due to this feature. ;-)

    Ok, my question is: why spend the money on CD duplicators? I think it's more worthwhile to spend it on a computer station with all necessary drives for all available media that the students use. You can even turn it into a webserver if it has fast internet access. That way, all the lectures will be on this station and the students would only need to go to it and pop in their zip disk, jaz disk, cd-r or even better, a cd-rw, and then be able to copy what lectures they want. So, I think rather than spend your time trying to build the cd-duplicator, spend your time on writing the software/program that is running on the station that will allow the student to easily choose what they want and then instantly hit the "Burn" or "Copy" button and copy it to their media. In my view, this station is a much better use of your time.

    Actually, if you wanted to make it a truly killer app, then instead of copying the mp3's and the powerpoint files separately, have them integrated with, say, a macromedia program that the students can run independently (without the need of either a mp3 player or even powerpoint) and it'll automatically play the audio and show the slides cued to the audio (no need for the students to guess which slide the prof is on).

    But then again, I could be totally offtopic and your reasons behind building this cd-copying system far outweighs my suggestion. Anyway, these are just my thoughts.

    --
    Linux at home
  33. commercial cd replicatiors are very inexpensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In quantities of approx 500-1000 the commercial replicators will be much cheaper than any half-assed home built solution.

  34. Hear! Hear! A cost effective solution. by kninja · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I agree with martyb. Use the CD burners already in place in the computer labs. Lots of kids drop lectures, don't attend, ignore lecture notes and read the books, etc. Any CD you gave them would end up as a coaster the following saturday night.

    If the students really want to learn the material, and they feel that this CD would help them, then they should go to the lab, download an .ISO, put in a CD and burn it, with all of the instructions on a web page with a link to the ISO. They then provide their own media and time to learn, and they learn how to burn CDs too.

    I know at my school, we have probably 30 Plextor 16x CD burners in the lab, and I have seen them used once and I am in the lab often.

    My advice, save time money and headache by making a nice ISO and a nice webpage and letting the students loose. If they can't follow well written instructions after asking a few questions (or burning a few coasters), then they shouldn't be in college.

  35. CD Tower and Nero by Kheldarstl · · Score: 2, Informative

    worked fine for us, the CD tower had 5 Plextor SCSI CDRW drives (Can't remember the model #'s offhand) external scsi connectors to an adaptec scsi card in a PC next to it, placed cd to be copied in the CDROM drive of the PC and up to five blanks in the tower, used Nero 5 software, Disk Juggler if I remember correctly would also work, I'll see if I can dig up more detailed specs if you need them. The PC was a Windows NT 4.0 Machine, with very little loaded onto it.

    Keith

  36. multi CDRs by anthares · · Score: 2, Insightful

    DiscJuggler - Unlimited Recorder Version Full version supporting up to 32 CD-R/RW drives. Based on this CDR software you can connect up to 32 CDRs. http://www.padus.com/downloads/full.php

  37. Use caution when burning CD's by selectspec · · Score: 3, Funny

    Remember what happened to those Texas College students burning those logs? Don't build your CD burning pile too high. Stay clear when you ignite it. Be careful! Children's Barney CDs tend to ignite quickly. Don't burn only Brittney Spears. Don't leave out your David Hasslehoff and Shatner CD's. Be creative with your bad artists.

    --

    Someone you trust is one of us.

  38. don't make it so difficult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    30 minutes of mono audio on, let's say, MP3. So you're looking at probably 10mb.

    Get a $100 32x cdr which will burn a full 650mb cd in about 3 minutes. At this rate, you could finish about a disk every 2 minutes (counting labeling, insertion, exchange time).

    In three hours, you could produce enough discs for a 90 person class. Certainly, for the ease/cost/time involved, someone can manage to spare 3 hours per year burning the cds?

    You also don't need anything fancy then, either. A 1ghz AMD, half gig of ram and a 7200rpm ide drive is fine.

  39. 4X SCSI are you in the stone age or what? by ahfoo · · Score: 1

    I burned out my first pair of four speed SCSI almost three years ago. I've gone from 8X to 12X to 16X to 20X to 24X and I understand I'll be looking at 40X coming down the pipe soon.
    As for the original poster, just get two 20 speed IDEs with the no burn feature and plenty of RAM and you can easily crank out 500 a week just popping in disks whenever you happen to have the time. And I don't know about your neighborhood, but these folks saying it's ONLY two bucks for a "pro" service are insane. I've seen discs that come back from these places on orders of over ten thousand and guess what, they use CDRs too, duh! They may be silver, but you can look at the disk and clearly see they're burnt, not stamped. Silver CDRs are old hat. You can get red and purple and orange ones too. There's no way I pay more than 15Cents for silver blanks in quantities of 100 and I've had zero coasters in the last two years in which I've burnt at least three thousand CDs. Two bucks! What, are you some kinda wise guy? Get the fuck outta here. Anybody who would write that clearly doesn't no shit about running a small time media operation. Yeah, so this guy said cost isn't the biggest concern, so that means he should throw away the money to sharks who will do the "intensive labor" of swappping CDs for ten or twenty times the price of the media? Give me a break. And silkscreening, try a sticker for an exra penny a piece for a grand total of 16Cents for a product that looks identical to a "pro" job. if you want decent silkscreening from those mofos, they charge you an arm and a leg and I've shopped those suckers many times before I gave up and did it myself.
    Now, there's just no reason not to. With any of the new IDE's, if you do happen to have some buffer underrruns it won't matter because all the new IDEs are BURN PROOF. 4X SCSI, jeez check out what's on the market before making a suggestion like that.

    1. Re:4X SCSI are you in the stone age or what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason im even writin this is to tell you how much of a troll you are, in case yer head is so far up your ass u just cant tell. And you can keep your .15$ sh!t cdrs. If youve wasted money on lets count this, 7 and coming down the line, 8, cd burners. In less than 3 years. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA. I bet the burners came free with the cd huh? There needs to be a way to put a face to a name on here so bats can be broken.

  40. Go Robotic by PhunkyOne · · Score: 0

    I have a 1 to 3 standalone burner for doing almost this exact same thing. We have to give documentation disks to professors like once a week for a month or two out of the year. With only 3 burners switching disks is a pain in the butt, I surely can't imagine 10 or more.
    You should really look into some robotic solutions. Think about it, you get your big fancy system burn your ten cds and don't have time or forget for 10 mins to load the next ten for ten minutes you've just whacked 10 minutes of burn time. Heck I am pretty sure you can get an expandable robotic unit for a couple grand maybe a bit more. There is definately something to be said about dropping a spindle of 50 disks on the loader and letting it fly all by itself. My $0.02

  41. [OT] comment editing by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

    Even better -- why not disallow comment editing if the post has already been either (a) moderated, or (b) replied to? And disallow commenting or moderating a comment while it's marked "edit in progress"? (Bound the latter state by a fairly short timeout -- say, 1 or 2 minutes -- and if the timeout is exceeded, convert the edit to a followup.)

    There are race conditions, but those too can be solved. A reply that was started relative to the original (while a parallel edit gets made) would get attached to the original, not the edited version. (The window in which this could happen should be fairly small, since once you click on "Edit Post", it should block replies.) Once the edited version is committed, the original and any followups that arrived in the short editing window are buried behind a "[See original (%d followups)]" link.

    Moderations applied to a comment that gets edited while it's being edited remain attached to the original. Again, the window here is small -- if the post is marked as "edit in progress" when the mod points are being applied, the moderation can instead just be dropped and ignored. The timing windows only arise due to concurrency issues when you have multiple servers and stuff.

    --Joe
    --
    Program Intellivision!
  42. My workstation / CD duper by Potent · · Score: 1

    I use my home brew workstation for CD duplication. It is an Athlon 1.4 w/ 512MB DDR RAM, on board Adaptec U160 SCSI, 7200 RPM IBM Ultrastar drive (U160, 4MB cache), 4 Plextor Plexwriter 8X/20X CD-R drives and a Plextor Ultraplex 40Max CD. I run Red Hat 7.2 and simply use cdrecord to run all four writers at once. Works like a charm!

    You don't need nearly that much power to do the same thing, though. Before I upgraded to an Athlon, I ran a P3-500 system feeding the same 4 writers with an Initio UW SCSI card and a much slower UW SCSI hard disk. It was still solid enough to ignore and continue doing whatever other tasks you have to do while it writes 4 CD-Rs. CPU utilization was less than 4% on the 500 and about 1% on the Athlon.

    Linux, SCSI and lots of RAM are key here. :)
    --

    --
    Out of order? Fuck! Even in the future nothing works! - Dark Helmet (Rick Moranis) "Spaceballs"