Pioneer BDR-206DBK Optical Drive - Anyone else use it?

[rkofcal]

This drive is frustrating me to no end.

I've gone through several of my Blu-Ray movies to make back-ups. In 100% of my cases, the read speed gets pegged to exactly 9.0 MBps (2.0x), on the large files. This is a new drive and came with firmware version 1.06.

This is the case with makemkv and several other alternatives (bytecopy, anydvd). It seems fairly likely that the drive is self limiting. My ancient LG drive averages the same task in roughly 1/2 the time in all cases. I also tried setting "Fast and noisy" options, doesn't help. Running with windows over vmware, doesn't help.

Ignoring the fact that I get a SCSI error with the DASPI 1.3 extension enabled (which seems benign), can one conclude that this drive is a very poor choice for backing up one's collection?

Looking through various forums it appears that my experience is shared by others, but it's not at all clear if anyone is not experiencing the same thing. Furthermore, it also appears that this drive is OEM'd by half the optical drive suppliers and so they should be getting similar results. I am tempted to return this and try out the LG BH12LS38. But now I am wondering if Sony (licenses Blu-Ray format?) is forcing this sort of feature on all new drives.

Does anyone have knowledge on the subject? Has anyone instrumented the LG BH12LS38?

[DaveQ]

I'm using the same drive, with 1.05 firmware. It works fine, and is not limited to 2X read rate. I've been using it for months this way. Had I not read about your issues with it, I would have recommended it to anybody. Fast, reliable.

Dave

[kevoone]

UPDATE May 2013: I gave up on the 206 and recently replaced it with a $69.00 LG Black 14X BD-R 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R 5X DVD-RAM 12X BD-ROM 4MB Cache SATA BDXL Blu-ray Burner, Bare Drive, 3D Play Back (WH14NS40) - OEM From Newegg http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6827136250

It is faster, i'm getting between 5 and 8 x rip rate. It fits in my OWC enclosure that housed the Pioneer. Wish I did it sooner. Avoid the Pioneer 206.



I use mine externally with my mac. I have no problems. I'm pleased with the purchase.

[DaveQ]

Followup to my December 2011 comment.

About a month ago I began having problems with the Pioneer drive. It was still under warranty, so I sent it to the original vendor for testing/replacement. This process was going to take a while, so in the mean time I bought an LG 14X Blu-ray burner (model WH14NS40) on sale at newegg.com for $59. And was shocked at how much faster it is for reading/ripping than the Pioneer.

As I said back in December, my Pioneer was never artificially limited to a 2X rip rate. It varied from disc to disc, anywhere from 2.2X on the low end to 4.1X at the fastest. I thought that was fast. But the new LG rips anywhere from 3.5X at the low end to 8.0X at the high end, and the vast majority of the time it's averaging more than 6X. That makes a big difference in time compared with the Pioneer, which I would guess averaged around 3.2X - 3.5X most of the time.

Now that I have the Pioneer back, I really only use it for burning. Strangely enough, it actually burns faster than the LG, despite ripping much more slowly. *Shrug.*

Hopefully this information will be useful to somebody.

Dave

[BlackDragon24]

Followup to my December 2011 comment.

About a month ago I began having problems with the Pioneer drive. It was still under warranty, so I sent it to the original vendor for testing/replacement. This process was going to take a while, so in the mean time I bought an LG 14X Blu-ray burner (model WH14NS40) on sale at newegg.com for $59. And was shocked at how much faster it is for reading/ripping than the Pioneer.

As I said back in December, my Pioneer was never artificially limited to a 2X rip rate. It varied from disc to disc, anywhere from 2.2X on the low end to 4.1X at the fastest. I thought that was fast. But the new LG rips anywhere from 3.5X at the low end to 8.0X at the high end, and the vast majority of the time it's averaging more than 6X. That makes a big difference in time compared with the Pioneer, which I would guess averaged around 3.2X - 3.5X most of the time.

Now that I have the Pioneer back, I really only use it for burning. Strangely enough, it actually burns faster than the LG, despite ripping much more slowly. *Shrug.*

Hopefully this information will be useful to somebody.

Dave

This information is very useful. I have the Pioneer drive and see EXACTLY the same type of ripping speeds (2.2-4.1x) you are seeing. For $59, the LG drive looks to be a worthwhile purchase considering it is ripping 2-3x faster. For those of us doing a lot of backing up, it will pay for itself in time saved in about 10 discs or so I'd day.

Thanks again.

[joe42]

so in the mean time I bought an LG 14X Blu-ray burner (model WH14NS40) on sale at newegg.com for $59. And was shocked at how much faster it is for reading/ripping than the Pioneer.

As I said back in December, my Pioneer was never artificially limited to a 2X rip rate. It varied from disc to disc, anywhere from 2.2X on the low end to 4.1X at the fastest. I thought that was fast. But the new LG rips anywhere from 3.5X at the low end to 8.0X at the high end, and the vast majority of the time it's averaging more than 6X.

Did you need to patch the WH14NS40 firmware to remove riplock? Or did the drive ship without riplock? (With the speeds you mentioned, riplock is either disabled or not present)

[DaveQ]

Did you need to patch the WH14NS40 firmware to remove riplock? Or did the drive ship without riplock? (With the speeds you mentioned, riplock is either disabled or not present)

Unmodified from the way it shipped.

Dave

[DaveQ]

After using the new drive (LG WH14NS40) for a couple months, I have an update.

It's been great so far. In September I reported that it rips Blu-ray discs at up to 8.0X with MakeMKV. It turns out that it can, with some discs, rip even faster than that. While the overall speed varies from disc to disc, and from the beginning of a disc to the end of a disc, on a couple occasions I've noticed it ripping at more than 10X.

I can't pin down what factors make one disc rip faster than another. But the slowest rip I've seen is around 4-5X overall, and most still average 6X or faster. FWIW, mine is connected via Firewire 800 as the second device in a two-device chain. Based on real-world throughput, it's quite unlikely this drive could rip at 10X via USB 2.0 or Firewire 400. So for the fastest speeds, it should be mounted internally (SATA) or externally via eSATA, Firewire 800, or USB 3.0.

I've seen a couple of comments online about this model being more sensitive to disc errors (scratches, etc) than other blu-ray rippers. Having used it to rip a good chunk of my collection over the past two months, I've only found this to be true for one disc. My copy of Star Trek (2009), which my kids have handled quite a bit, would not successfully rip in the LG drive, producing a SCSI read error message when the rip was about halfway done, even after careful inspection and cleaning of the disc. But the same disc ripped without error using a Samsung SE-406 portable blu-ray reader.

I had two other discs that produced read errors in the LG drive, but those discs were also unreadable in the Samsung drive AND the Pioneer drive.

HTH,
Dave

[GG007]

I have the BD205 in an OWC enclosure and while it worked great for the first year of use. It has grown stedily worse over time with failing to read the latest movie releases. Keeps failing with SCSI errors.

I bought a $50.00 Samsung portable drive to compare against and this inexpensive unit reads all the the same discs that the Pioneer repeatedly fails on. I have since taken the Pioneer out of service and it now resides in a storage closet. A total waste of close to $300.00! Probably needs a firmware update, but there is no way to do this with a Mac.

Now that I have the Samsung, I have moved on, but I will never again spend more than $60.00 on an external Blu-ray drive and NO PIONEER AGAIN ...EVER!

[DaveQ]

I have since taken the Pioneer out of service and it now resides in a storage closet. A total waste of close to $300.00! Probably needs a firmware update, but there is no way to do this with a Mac.

It's unlikely to need a firmware update. Far more likely is that it's malfunctioning, and requires repair. That will (eventually) happen to your Samsung portable as well, though it's impossible to predict when. It depends somewhat on the design of the drive, but also on how much it's used, how well it was originally adjusted at the factory, and random environmental factors (ambient temperature, dust, random bumps, etc).

All that said, I too have a Samsung portable. It's convenient and (lacking a power adapter) much more portable than a larger drive. But it's considerably slower than the Pioneer, and WAY slower than the newer LG I have.

Most of that $300 you spent on the OWC was not for the drive itself, but for the flexible, high-performance OWC Mercury Pro case. You might want to consider buying a bare drive from Newegg for under $60 and putting it into the OWC case. It will give you a huge boost in ripping performance and will prevent most of that $300 expenditure from going to waste. This is exactly what I did -- I got the bare LG drive mentioned previously from Newegg for around $59 and eventually installed it in the same OWC Mercury case that the Pioneer had been in. Works great, and as mentioned in previous posts, will rip a blu-ray anywhere from 5X to more than 10X speeds.

Dave

[jhpadilla]

I have the 208D and experience the exact same problem (in fact I posted in this same forum but in the General section)... 2x rip...

But the strangest thing is I also own the Pioneer BDR-205 and the rip times are faaar faster!!! at least 4x...

I think Pioneer is applying some form of riplock we do not yet know about... Anyways, that's my 2 cents