> > > Try dd with various blocksizes instead.
> >
> > no that's not pipes
>
> Either, I misunderstand you or you misunderstood me. I meant something
> like this:

understood and that's why i say this. dd with 64k works fine.

>
>   dd if=file bs=4k|cdrecord -dummy ...
>
> For me that's 2-4x faster (depending on the blocksize) than
>
>   cat file|cdrecord -dummy ...
>
> I don't see why these aren't pipes. I would also suggest to use -waiti
> for cdrecord. The fifosize shouldn't be too large either because then
> cdrecord seems to spend more CPU with filling the fifo than writing to
> the burner.
>
> --
> Christian
>