Are these the same besides the riplock removal? Which is better for writing quality.
yes, they have the same write quality…
I’m a newbie to drive firmware flashing, but as far as I can tell it’s
109 fw = normal
A09 fw = no riploc, rips at 16x?
Buffalo fw = bitsetting on +r but 2x riplock?
Do I have this right? Would there be any reason to use the 109fw over A09?
My drive arrive within 12 hours!
Yes. I chose to Buffalo my 109, and un-riplock my old 106D. This works pretty well; you can rip fast via the 106D, and you can write +R media at high speed via the 109.
does the buffalo have the firmware improvements otherwise from the Pioneer 1.40 firmware (media support, etc) ?
If i’m just using dvd-r media though, there’s no point in using the buffalo for autobitsetting right?
The Buffalo does bitsetting of DVD+R media to make players think it’s a DVD-ROM, to get better compatibility with older players.
Otherwise, writing performance is, I think, the same as FW 1.40.
The Buffalo 8.40, as noted above, does not unlock the riplock AFAIK, so readin DVDs on the Buffalo’ed 109 may have limited speed. I do ripping on my un-riplocked Pioneer 106D now.
Waranty may be one, this is assuming that they can tell a drive was flashed with
another brand firmware.
Also assuming that you can flash back to a normal firmware before returning the drive under warranty.
I personally think they love their drive beign so versatile…