LG BH16NS40 vs Pioneer BDR-2209 - which to keep?

vbimport

#1

I’m not quite sure which of these two contemporary drives to keep, but am leaning toward the LG. The media I used is for the most part representative of what I’ll be using for the next few months, at least (maybe not for DVD+R though, as you’ll soon see…)

Here are some of my results. All trt done by burning drive, and all disc quality tests by iHBS112 PL06 in a separate PC. (Making separate placeholder posts now…)


#2

Fornet CD-R
97m26s07f

LG TRT

I specified 40x for the above burn, but the LG just stayed steady at 16x.
Contrast to the Pioneer:

Pioneer TRT

Read speed was quite poor though here. Very interesting difference in write strategies. I think I prefer the consistency of the LG, especially given the better read speed.

LG Disc Quality

Pioneer Disc Quality

Read speed is a bit better in the iHBS112, but still not nearly as good as for the LG burn. Quality appears to be somewhat better than the LG, but I’m not sure if it’s a statistically significant number.


#3

I tested these discs because I thought I had a bunch of them. Can’t find them right now, but I could have sworn I had another cakebox somewhere. They came out looking pretty good on both drives, I think, so I hope I find it…

LG TRT

Drive gave up trying to burn faster and defaulted back to 8x. Should it be considered a ‘conservative’ drive then? I’m still new to all this. Read speed looks solid.

I don’t have a TRT for the Pioneer burn. Either I deleted the file or never ran the test. In any case, the write speed can be found below in the DQ test.

LG Disc Quality

Pioneer Disc Quality

Both very good I think. Transfer rate on the iHBS112 is meh - could not detect read speed over 6x - but otherwise quality is pretty solid. The Pioneer wrote faster than the LG, but write speed looks kinda ‘jittery’ again, same as the CD-R earlier. Can it be considered a more ‘aggressive’ drive with this media?


#4

These burns were freaking horrendous with both. They’re from Sony-branded DVD+R that came without a spindle - put on sale by newegg for dirt cheap. But they look pretty worthless.
I have about a hundred of these still, but I guess I’ll give them away (any takers here?) or keep some of them ‘just in case’ because they’re just bloody awful.

LG TRT

Pioneer TRT

Again a more ‘consistent’ looking burn with the LG, FWIW.

LG Disc Quality

Pioneer Disc Quality

Pioneer does a lot worse with these, but both aren’t great. Both can only be read at 6x by the iHBS112.


#8

These are the first Taiyo Yuden discs I’ve ever bought. They were on sale at newegg for very little in a 25-pack. Expectations were too high; learned about the shortcomings of LTH soon after. Anyway, here’s what we’ve got:

LG TRT

Pioneer TRT

Specified these to burn at 6x as rated, but both only managed to get up to 3x. Same pattern shows - LG more consistent speed. Pioneer interestingly has a much quicker read speed with a ceiling at 8x and the drive spinning steadily slower once it reaches that plateau. LG keeps rpm the same throughout the entire read.

LG Disc Quality

Pioneer Disc Quality

Both of these are outside the suggested boundaries of what is considered ‘good’ BD-R burns from what I’ve read. But the Pioneer does a bit better in terms of both those numbers and read speed (though both can’t be read by the iHBS112 at more than 4x).


#9

These came as a freebie from Newegg (sensing a pattern here?) with the iHBS112 (an ASUS rebadge, actually, that I crossflashed). 25-pack; Rosewill-branded.

LG TRT

Pioneer TRT

Both burnt at 3x even though I specified 6x. Very similar though not identical results to the JVC media.

LG Disc Quality

Pioneer Disc Quality

Clear difference here between the LG and Pioneer in terms of quality, though I think both wouldn’t be considered good because of BIS. iHBS112 can only read them at 4x.


#10

I haven’t done tests with DVD+R DL yet. It looks like most of the time the LG ‘wins’, but I don’t really know how much stock should be put in these tests. The thread about testing seemed to cast some doubt on that.

Anyone?


#11

Most of the times, the Pioneer actually won. Only 3-2, and the quality of the media was very variable, so they might be just about equal. [Plus, on the one Sony-branded Moser Baer disc, it tried to write at 16x before falling back, and it looks like that disc was especially bad overall, so…]

Pioneer drives have always had an aggressive strategy where they would sacrifice speed for quality, and that is included in the fact that they frequently pause to check the burn quality (all the dips in the Pioneer write graphs).

For burns on certain types of BD media (and DVD-RAM burns), OptiDriveControl by default burns with defect management/automatic verification on. This made both drives effectively write the BD media at 3x (though they are actually writing at a much faster speed while taking time to do the extra verification as they write). [This is different from normal verify operations which happen after the entire disc is written.]


#12

Aha. Cool. Just to clarify, which were the wins for each? Also is there particular CD/DVD/BD that’s especially good at clarifying the strengths and weaknesses of each of these drives?

[QUOTE=Albert;2725560]
Pioneer drives have always had an aggressive strategy where they would sacrifice speed for quality, and that is included in the fact that they frequently pause to check the burn quality (all the dips in the Pioneer write graphs).[/quote]

Thanks for explaining just what the heck was happening there. The dips didn’t correspond with buffer issues or anything - I saved pngs of the creation process to check against - so I was wondering what was going on there. A good sign I suppose then!

[QUOTE=Albert;2725560]
For burns on certain types of BD media (and DVD-RAM burns), OptiDriveControl by default burns with defect management/automatic verification on. This made both drives effectively write the BD media at 3x (though they are actually writing at a much faster speed while taking time to do the extra verification as they write). [This is different from normal verify operations which happen after the entire disc is written.][/QUOTE]

Aha. OK then. I’ll keep that in mind. Is burning with defect management on generally recommended?

Thanks again for the prompt and detailed reply - I really appreciate it!


#13

None of the discs had uncorrectable errors, so that’s good. But talking about correctable errors:

Fornet CD-R: The Pioneer had the edge, with the lowest overall C1 count according to the scanning drive.

Ritek F16: Half and half; the Pioneer kept 16x and had the lowest PIF count, but the LG had the lowest jitter though it slowed down.

MBIPG101 R05: LG won, by deciding to go slow at the beginning, though as I mentioned, the Pioneer disc seemed to be poor regardless of the adjustments made by the drive.

JVC-AMS6L 001: Pioneer won. Lowest error count in each category, and had lower jitter.

PHILIPR04: LG won overall in just about every round.

So I guess it is actually more half and half, moderately evenly matched. Regardless, it’s hard to say which one outright wins, since each disc model is different from the next, and as you see, discs may burn better in one drive, and the next disc will be completely different.

Just gauge things based on the media you have at your hand. I’ve always seen people prefer Pioneer drives, just because they handle cruddy media a little bit better, but it seems that LG’s BD drives are still pretty darn decent.

–Edit: Oh, and people burn without defect management on all the time. It’s perfectly fine to leave it on or turn it off. If you find that your burns fail, try switching the option.

I’m not sure which software burns with defect management on by default for BD media, but DVD-RAM defect management is always on (whereas other types of DVD media don’t support it). All BD media should support it, but BD-RE (re-writable) discs probably benefit from it more, since re-writable media is fragile and degrades the more times you overwrite certain areas.


#14

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725556]I haven’t done tests with DVD+R DL yet. It looks like most of the time the LG ‘wins’, but I don’t really know how much stock should be put in these tests. The thread about testing seemed to cast some doubt on that.

Anyone?[/QUOTE]

I’m afraid that you just can’t draw any valid conclusion based on your results. Most of the time you’re actually comparing ‘apples with pears’ so to speak:

  • for the Fornet CD-R, you’re comparing a 16x LG burn with a 32x Pioneer burn…
  • for the Ritek F16 DVD+R, you’re comparing a de facto 8x LG burn with a 16x Pioneer burn…
  • for the MBIPG101 R05 DVD+R, you’re comparing an 8x LG burn with a 12x Pioneer burn…
  • for the BD-R burns, both media you’re using is is known for its poor quality and its quality variability, not to mention that the TY one is LTH media which anyone caring about their data should avoid at all costs … speaking by quality, your (CD and) DVD media is equally on the lower end of the quality scale, which always makes meaningful quality comparisons a bit more tricky … particularly when drawing conclusions based on a limited sample set …

The bigger problem in my book is that your CD and DVD burns are all biased against the Pioneer drive from the start, given that all LG burns were done at (significantly) lower speeds than the Pioneer ones. Higher burn speeds generally lead to poorer burn results, particularly for lower quality media… so this is not what I would call a fair/valid comparison.

If you want to make some more meaningful/valid comparisons then you’ll have to use the same burn speed for both drives. A comparison can only be meaningful if you compare like with like …

Frankly, based on my experience with both drives (I almost exclusively burn BD-R discs nowadays, so my conclusions are only based on this type of media) if you compare like with like, I would be very surprised if the LG can beat the Pioneer, even though the BDR-209M burn quality is in my experience not as good as its 207M/208M predecessors … my BH16NS40 only seems to be able to beat my Pioneer drives on BD-R media based on the CMCMAG BA5 MIDs, which it seems to like much more than the Pioneer drives. For all the other media I tried, my Pioneer drives generally beat the LG hands down…


#15

[QUOTE=Albert;2725595]None of the discs had uncorrectable errors, so that’s good. But talking about correctable errors:

Fornet CD-R: The Pioneer had the edge, with the lowest overall C1 count according to the scanning drive.

Ritek F16: Half and half; the Pioneer kept 16x and had the lowest PIF count, but the LG had the lowest jitter though it slowed down.

MBIPG101 R05: LG won, by deciding to go slow at the beginning, though as I mentioned, the Pioneer disc seemed to be poor regardless of the adjustments made by the drive.

JVC-AMS6L 001: Pioneer won. Lowest error count in each category, and had lower jitter.

PHILIPR04: LG won overall in just about every round.

So I guess it is actually more half and half, moderately evenly matched. Regardless, it’s hard to say which one outright wins, since each disc model is different from the next, and as you see, discs may burn better in one drive, and the next disc will be completely different.

Just gauge things based on the media you have at your hand. I’ve always seen people prefer Pioneer drives, just because they handle cruddy media a little bit better, but it seems that LG’s BD drives are still pretty darn decent.

–Edit: Oh, and people burn without defect management on all the time. It’s perfectly fine to leave it on or turn it off. If you find that your burns fail, try switching the option.

I’m not sure which software burns with defect management on by default for BD media, but DVD-RAM defect management is always on (whereas other types of DVD media don’t support it). All BD media should support it, but BD-RE (re-writable) discs probably benefit from it more, since re-writable media is fragile and degrades the more times you overwrite certain areas.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for all the clarifications; they’re really helpful!

[QUOTE=cvs;2725597]I’m afraid that you just can’t draw any valid conclusion based on your results. Most of the time you’re actually comparing ‘apples with pears’ so to speak:

  • for the Fornet CD-R, you’re comparing a 16x LG burn with a 32x Pioneer burn…
  • for the Ritek F16 DVD+R, you’re comparing a de facto 8x LG burn with a 16x Pioneer burn…
  • for the MBIPG101 R05 DVD+R, you’re comparing an 8x LG burn with a 12x Pioneer burn…
  • for the BD-R burns, both media you’re using is is known for its poor quality and its quality variability, not to mention that the TY one is LTH media which anyone caring about their data should avoid at all costs … speaking by quality, your (CD and) DVD media is equally on the lower end of the quality scale, which always makes meaningful quality comparisons a bit more tricky … particularly when drawing conclusions based on a limited sample set …

The bigger problem in my book is that your CD and DVD burns are all biased against the Pioneer drive from the start, given that all LG burns were done at (significantly) lower speeds than the Pioneer ones. Higher burn speeds generally lead to poorer burn results, particularly for lower quality media… so this is not what I would call a fair/valid comparison.

If you want to make some more meaningful/valid comparisons then you’ll have to use the same burn speed for both drives. A comparison can only be meaningful if you compare like with like …

[/quote]
This is not on purpose. I set the same speeds when burning for each but then the drives, I assume, did their best with what they had. I can try to do it all again with a speed ceiling based the slower of the two drives for each kind of media, if that’ll help.
I understand that my media is cheap, but it’s what I’ll have to work with for the time being (except for the Sonys, those I’ll probably just get rid of; I have CD-Rs and DVD+R DLs that I haven’t touched quite yet either - not sure how good either of them are). Also I acknowledged that the TYs are LTH - I didn’t know the difference when I bought them, but learned soon after :slight_smile:

Frankly, based on my experience with both drives (I almost exclusively burn BD-R discs nowadays, so my conclusions are only based on this type of media) if you compare like with like, I would be very surprised if the LG can beat the Pioneer, even though the BDR-209M burn quality is in my experience not as good as its 207M/208M predecessors … my BH16NS40 only seems to be able to beat my Pioneer drives on BD-R media based on the CMCMAG BA5 MIDs, which it seems to like much more than the Pioneer drives. For all the other media I tried, my Pioneer drives generally beat the LG hands down…

Thanks for your input! Is it worth trying to hunt down one of the older drives? I’m still within the return windows for both of these. Other than that, is there any media that you’d recommend in particular for the Pioneer? (I mean, besides like, super expensive imported Panasonics or something.)


#16

From the thread it looks like INFOMER30 is alright for the Pioneer (except for your scans, cvs). So I’ll try to find some of that for BD. Not sure how old the other discs in the thread are and how hard they are to find, and didn’t look at the LG thread again yet.

One thing the LG beats the Pioneer on is ripping BD, which it does in a third of the time (20 minutes vs an hour) with equivalent settings in eac3to.


#17

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725617]
Thanks for your input! Is it worth trying to hunt down one of the older drives? I’m still within the return windows for both of these. Other than that, is there any media that you’d recommend in particular for the Pioneer? (I mean, besides like, super expensive imported Panasonics or something.)[/QUOTE]

I would definitely recommend going for a BDR-S08XLT if you can find one (they can be updated to firmware 1.30 while the BDR-208M ones cannot because Pioneer hasn’t released an update for them yet). It is a very good drive that’s for sure.

As for recommended media, the 6x BD-R Verbatim CMCMAGBA5-000 media would be a good choice for both the Pioneer drives and for LG drives. Verbatim Datalife 43804, 43811, 43812 are all reported to use the CMCMAG BA5 MID and are generally fairly affordable as well.

6x Sony BD-R media if you can find it decently priced should be also a good choice (I haven’t tried it with my 209 but works very well with the 208).

INFOMER30 should also be OK, even though the result I got was nowhere as pretty as what the 208 produces, it is still a pretty decent burn overall…

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725617]This is not on purpose. I set the same speeds when burning for each but then the drives, I assume, did their best with what they had. I can try to do it all again with a speed ceiling based the slower of the two drives for each kind of media, if that’ll help.[/QUOTE]

A ‘proper’ like with like comparison would be quite interesting and useful I would think, if you have the time, media and the patience to do it…


#18

Thanks again; I’ll be on the lookout. So far it seems to be an expensive proposition (cheapest option is to import from here). The other ‘208’ model you mentioned can be had for $40 cheaper - is it a big enough difference.

Just to make sure I understood btw: there doesn’t seem to be a way to shut off defect management in OptiDriveControl, right? So I’ll have to actually assemble some data and burn it with ImgBurn or some other software?


#19

Also - is there any kind of ‘riplock’ with the Pioneer that the LG doesn’t have, that could be disabled? Sorry for pelting you with questions, but I figure it’s better to just come out with them than to forget about it


#20

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725672] So I’ll have to actually assemble some data and burn it with ImgBurn or some other software?[/QUOTE]

Well I’ve at least found the answer to that.


#21

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725672]

Just to make sure I understood btw: there doesn’t seem to be a way to shut off defect management in OptiDriveControl, right? So I’ll have to actually assemble some data and burn it with ImgBurn or some other software?[/QUOTE]

You can shut off defect management in ODC. There’s an option to Enable Streaming [Options > Write Options > Streaming], which makes sure the drive effectively writes without in-burn verification. This will force the BD burns to be normal, full speed.


#22

[QUOTE=Albert;2725680]You can shut off defect management in ODC. There’s an option to Enable Streaming [Options > Write Options > Streaming], which makes sure the drive effectively writes without in-burn verification. This will force the BD burns to be normal, full speed.[/QUOTE]

Ugh. Thanks. Yeesh, couldn’t they just agree on a standard set of terms, instead of three different names for the same thing?


#23

[QUOTE=bilditup1;2725672]Thanks again; I’ll be on the lookout. So far it seems to be an expensive proposition (cheapest option is to import from here). The other ‘208’ model you mentioned can be had for $40 cheaper - is it a big enough difference.
[/QUOTE]

You can get a 208M, 208EBK or 2208 model if you can find one much cheaper, the only downside is that for the time being Pioneer hasn’t released the 1.30 firmware update for drives with this particular kernel. Not a big issue as they still burn very well with the factory 1.10 firmware… On the aesthetic side they don’t come with the posh bezel typical to S08 drives but obviously that has nothing to do with burn quality which is what matters… the only differences between all these drives are at firmware level (and very small ones at that) and they all share identical hardware.