GSA-H10 series

I am currently using both the 10N with JJ11 firmware and the 10L with LL11 firmware. Both of these drives use the same chipset and the only difference is the lightscribe feature if I am correct. If I back up a movie and use the same disk in both drives, I have noticed that the 10L takes approximately 15-20 seconds longer to write the DVD.I was wondering if someone knows if this is caused by the 10N running at UDMA4 with the Hitachi firmware and the 10L only running at UDMA2, or caused by some other reason. Any response would be greatly appreciated.

BTW, Not that the 20 seconds really matters. Just curious. They both burn beatifully with Verbatim +R

yeah, i guess that could be an explanation.
you can test this yourself, by flashing the H10L to JJ11 firmware. of course that will kill the LS capability of the drive, and as of now i know of no-one who has done (read: has been brave enough) to do this crossflash.

apart from the small difference in writing time, do you see any other difference between the two burners ? is there a difference in burn quality between them when you burn the same stuff same media ?

Did you set the 10L to booktype the disc when you burned it? I understand it takes a few more seconds to do booktyping. JJ11 does auto-booktyping in hardware so maybe that has something to do with it.

It could also have to do with different write strategies in the firmware. JJ11 seems to have different write strategies. Someone in this forum was commenting that DAXONAZ3 burns horribly with JL11 (which is nearly identical to LL11) but very nicely with JJ11.

Never though about the booktyping. Using Alexnoe’s auto bitset at startup for the H10L. That could definetly be what needs the extra few seconds.Both drives burn excellent with similar results, but sometimes the H10L is just a tad better. Thanks alot for your help.

it would be interesting if you tested this.
disable Alexnoe’s utility and burn a disc without changing booktype, i wonder if the difference will still be there.

that’s comforting to know (being an owner of a H10L :slight_smile: ).
welcome :slight_smile:

Well I just finished some testing on the 2 drives. First I ripped a move to the harddrive to eliminate any variables that may be encountered. I then burned the movie to the same disk in both drives and noted the write time. The 10N was still a bit faster. Next I disabled Alexnoe’s bitsetting on the 10L and burnt the same movie on the same disks again. Still no change in the write times. Then something got me thinking. Just out of curiosity I opened up my system to take a look.What I found was that the 10N was on its own controller while I forgot that the 10L was on another controller with a LiteOn 165H6S. I then moved the 10L to another controller by itself, since I have 4 seperate ones, and did some more tests. I then enabled bitsetting on the 10L and burnt the same movie again.Both the 10N and the 10L wrote the disk in the same exact time. I guess being together with another drive seems to have some effect on burn time. Problem solved!!!

BTW - When I get a chance I will hook up the 10N with the other drive to see if that affects that drive also.

thanks for the info.
interesting, i didn’t know being with another drive on the same IDE channel could have this effect…

Another interesting dilemma. Did some more tests on these 2 drives. Same movie, same disks. This time I moved the drives onto the 2 seperate raid conrollers on board.The H10L still maintained the same write time, while the H10N was 15 seconds faster. IMO, the 10N has the edge in write quality using CMC,MCC004 media. Here are the scans with the H10N first then the H10L second.

BTW. I always write this media at 16x.

No reason to burn any slower if you’re getting results like that!

Actually I have had better results than this scan with the H10N. Usually PIF totals are in high 30’s to low 40’s and PIE totals in the 6000-7000 range.Not going to complain though, I am very happy with both of these drives.Actually had a couple of 98 scores with this media.Let’s hope the media itself keeps the same quality.I know batches vary from one to the other. I have been pretty lucky so far with having 1 50pk. out of 800 disks that was not quite as well as the rest.

Just curious, are those MCC004 discs made by CMC or Prodisc? My 4163B really loves the CMC-made ones, but doesn’t quite get along with the ones from Prodisc. I wonder if the H10 drives are the same since they use a similar chipset and likely similar write strategies.

Always buy CMC made. Prefer to use DataLifePlus Hub Printables. Haven’t seen any Prodisc yet in the NorthEast US. The standard Verbatim non printable disks from CMC seem to have to much of a variation from batch to batch. Although I have never had any yet that gave undesirable burns. Maybe I am just lucky.

Also on another note, the last ones that you have seen the scans from, were just recently purchased from

About the slight difference in burn quality : it might be down to the different firmware. JJ11 is actually from Hitachi, while LL11 is from LG. The list of supported MIDs is different (LL11 actually has 5 more supported write strategies than JJ11) but there is evidence that the write strategies for media both support may actually be different. One of the users here found that burn quality with DAZONAZ3 media on JL11 (virtually identical to LL11) wasn’t that good. He got much better results when he switched to JJ11.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if there is a hitachi version of the H10L. Would love to have that firmware for this drive if there was.

Currently, nope. The Hitachi firmware we use for LG writers came from Buffalo or IO-Data in Japan. Currently, neither company seems to be selling a lightscribe version of their equivalent of the Hitachi GSA-H10N. For some reason, labelflash seems to be more popular there.

But I keep checking their pages, just in case they do introduce such a model.

Hitachi itself, does not seem to sell these drives directly nor provide firmware support.

Thank you for the info. I think the H10L would be an even better drive than it is now if there was Hitachi firmware like the 10N. I think that firmware gives just a little better result, but I am not willing to lose the lightscribe. Like some previous posts mentioning that one firmware gives better results on some medias than the other, I think I will keep both of these drives the way they are. That way I am sure to get good results on most media with one drive or the other.

Thanks again to everyone for their input and advice. :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :clap: :clap:

A less sophisticated comment or two.

I have owned only 3 Benq’s (822,1620,1650) and 2 Pioneers (106,111L) since I started using DVD media. I bought the LG GSA-H10L because my 3 day old Pioneer 111L had started to fail on burn after burn. I was desperate to finally confirm it was the drive so I picked up the H10L. Only because it was local, cheap and easy to return. (Sort of like my old dating life :bigsmile: )

I immediatly noticed the slowest ripping speeds I have ever seen, but that was soon (mostly) fixed by MSCE and a LL11 firmware update. It writes Verbatim DL beautifully and I am no longer convinced that BenQ and Pioneer make superior product in general.

Hopefully this drive lasts several months longer than the dw1650 (4 months)and 111L (3 days) that it has replaced.

Like all drives it does have it’s issues. Bitsetting was a pain but reading the FAQ’s makes a huge difference.

I have never owned a drive that didn’t have the buffer move some while writing DL. On my PC - at 6x using imgburn - I get no buffer ‘play’. Stays at 100% the whole burn… even shifting layers. And that’s the other nice thing. Usually there is a significant speed drop shifting layers (at least there was on the Pioneer - sometimes getting close to 1.X). NOt this drive. Burned at 6x and at layer shift only fell to 5.8x. Absolutely shocked me. This was not an isolated burn. I completed 5 DL writes yesterday that had backlogged on my PC. All the same. Excellent quality results on 4 of the 5.

SL TY 8x media did have the usual 88% - 96% movement and that was a little unexpected after watching how well it handled DL.

I’m keeping this drive and not replacing it with another 111L.

I’m not sure which version of MCSE you used, but there were apparently problems with which originally introduced riplock removal for the H10x series. Some types of riplock were not properly removed. Anyway, ala42 addressed the problem with a new release :