Pioneer 109/A09 Burn Scans (Results Only)



Pioneer 109 FW 8.50 Burned @ 8x, remember this is 4x media :slight_smile:


Another Fuji 8x scan, this time burned at 12x with Buffalo 8.50. Pretty good scans I would say considering overspeeding.


Seems to me like the result was marginally better when using the 1.50 firmware - but it’s close:)

Does anyone have a downloadlink to the Buffalo firmware? Unfortunately my Japanese is a bit rusty:)

What do I gain by using the Buffalo firmware instead of the Pioneer? Bitsetting? What is the DVD-rip speed when using the Buffalo firmware?


same as pioneer unfortunately. Up to 5x max for CSS discs. No one has modified a firmware for unlimited rip speed as the A09 firmware does that however with only being able to have one firmware on a drive at a time you have to choose what is more important, rip lock removed or bitsetting as you can’t have both. Neither firmware is RPC-1.


Scan of a Memorex (Ritek) DVD+R DL burned with the 109 using Buffalo FW 8.50. This is best burn by far I’ve ever gotten with this media.


Have you tried burning the same media with the 1.50 firmware? I have a few of these, and I’ve been waiting for some good firmware to burn them with.


Datawrite DVD-R 8x Optima Blue RITEKG05

This time burnt using 8.50 FW and at 4X

Nero Data DVD Multisession (4x)


Nice sticky for sure. Wondering however… are results posted here able to be expected if a user is using same drive + firmware + discs as the ones used in the posting of the scan shots? I ask because I have no other drive but my 109 so scanning for my own results is useless. I want to know if I will get the same scans if I meet the criteria above or is there still a possibility I will get different. I am basically using you previous posters as my eyes on this matter as I am blind in doing my own scans.



There’s never a guarantee that you will receive the same type of scans even if you’re using the same drive, w/the same firmware and even the same discs. Many variations such as the quality of the btach of discs you get can lead to large differences in quality. The drives could perform differently as well. This is really why I ended up getting the BenQ DW1620 as my backup burner, to be able to validate the quality of my burns with my Pioneer unit.


kinda makes this scan thread a waste then doesn’t it? People are going to see these scand expect the same yet you won’t. If everyone had to scan every disc they did to verify integrity regardless of being the same this thread would have so many pages they would never all be gone through.

I guess I will take it with a grain of salt and not put any emphasis on what I see here.

Thanks for your reponse.


hi guys

this is my first post - so please be gentle!!

I purchased some 'infiniti@ 16x discs today and tried a couple

I DO NOT rate these discs at all!!

stick with ritek G05 or CMC AE1 in future - can`t afford TY’s

would liked to of attached pics but can`t figure out how to!!

got a 2 (two) pioneer 109 v1.50 and a 108 v1.20


You have to take everything with a grain of salt when dealing with media. Best thing to do is to scan a couple of burns from your batch of media, then you can presume that the rest of the discs from the spindle will produce similar results. Plus it’s also good to scan discs when overspeeding; it will provide us Pioneer 109 users with some idea of what media is good to overspeed on our drives.


would liked to of attached pics but can`t figure out how to!!

Just click there:


Thanks tomkolle78 :iagree:

hopefully here are the results

picture is of 1 disk at 12X :confused:

16x pic did not save correctly - sorry!

hope these help



Pioneer drives are not really good for scans, because, the results are not useful. if you want correct scans, use a plextor or benq dvd-burner, or if you have, kprobe with a liteon dvd-rom.


kprobe with a liteon dvd-rom.

Liteon dvd-rom drives are also useless scanners you need to use a liteon dvd-rw



A DVD-ROM is not ok for scanning


I don´t think so.
Reason: a Burner has a far better error correction than a dvd-rom.
So, in my opinion, a reader shows the “worst case”, I try to make scans almost with my DVD-Rom at max speed - if the results are within the specs, I can be pretty sure that the DVD will play in all Stand-Alone-Players and in all Computers.

Here are 2 samples of scans, done with a LiteOn 16P9S at max speed, the first one is a Verbatim DVD-R 16x, burnt at 12x in a Pioneer 109 (1.50), the 2nd is a Verbatim DVD-R 16x, burnt at 16x in a NEC 3540A (1.W3):



A DVD-Rom shows other results than a writer, that´s right.

But I´m not sure about the error-correction. When I look at c´t the better error-correction has many times a DVD-Rom. Only a few DVD-writers (like Pioneer) offer a real good error-correction.

I hope you´re not one guy from the move2digital DVD-Rom-fanatics :wink: ?


Got me! :stuck_out_tongue:
Yes, I am an active member over there, BUT I am far away from beeing a fanatic, I think.
I always try to see both sides of the story, and what they are saying about using a Reader instead of a writer makes sense, vice versa what I´ve been reading here makes sense also.

About the scans:
The technik2movie-people are trying to make the scans in the “worst case scenario”, what means, trying to do the scans as fast as possible to feel safe, they (and me) don´t want to make the scans “look as good as possible” if you know what I mean.