S-VHS quality
Don Greenwood
are a waste of money; their top-rated VHS (Sony) gave better picture than
any S-VHS machine (they reviewed 1 Panasonic, 2 JVC models).
Does that sound reasonable, or does CU not know what they're doing? (they
didn't explain their testing procedures, not even what signal source or
type of tape they used).
Which S-VHS machines are worthwhile?
(My purpose is to have a VCR able to handle the resolution and quality of
the Digital8 camcorder I have, which the manual says should have S-video
connectors too.) Thanks for any experience and expertise you can share.
Mike Rehmus
to video and sound. I'm not certain where they go wrong but I have never
agreed with them. Maybe they are too conservative or something.
S-VHS is always better than VHS unless the VCR is broken. The resolution
and color purity are head and shoulders above low-band video like VHS and
8mm.
It even looks better when using a composite video input into a television.
Maybe they viewed it via the RF output or something. But even that usually
looks better unless the input has a bandwidth limiting filter to kill noise.
"Don Greenwood" <don-gr...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3D015049...@sympatico.ca...
Nobody_of_Consequence
I have an Jvc combo mini-dv/s-vhs deck,
The s-vhs records nearly as well as dv.
Of the vhs decks that I've seen, Sony's rank
near the bottom. Toshiba's record and play better at
lp, and Jvc's do a better job at sp. The top Jvc
s-vhs decks perform as well as most industrial
decks.
"Don Greenwood" <don-gr...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3D015049...@sympatico.ca...
Mike T
luminance (B&W) is recorded at much higher bandwidth. This will give a
picture that looks sharper, if the recording source has the detail.
So if you copy a vhs tape to a s-vhs recorder, it will still look like a
slightly poorer vhs tape. But if you record onto s-vhs from a high quality
source then it will look much better, if you TV set is capable of displaying
a sharper picture. The color detail will be the same as vhs, unless the
particular s-vhs tape recorder does a better job of recording-playback,
which many do.
CR is not very reliable in these types of things, because they try to make a
value judgement if the extra cost of s-vhs can be justified by the average
TV viewer.
A s-vhs recorder is not capable of retaining the full quality of DV format
video, mostly due to the low color bandwidth, but it much better than using
vhs. You also get the benefit of using the s-video connector on the s-vhs
recorder when playing either s-vhs or standard vhs tapes to your Tv set.
Mike T 40 years of video design stuff
--
Please reply to group, if you must reply direct then-
replace $ with s
"Don Greenwood" <don-gr...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3D015049...@sympatico.ca...
John S. Dyson
"Mike T" <mtallent@high$tream.net> wrote in message
news:XFeM8.359464$kb4.3...@news.easynews.com...
> The s-vhs records the color the exact same as the vhs does, but the
> luminance (B&W) is recorded at much higher bandwidth. This will give a
> picture that looks sharper, if the recording source has the detail.
>
> So if you copy a vhs tape to a s-vhs recorder, it will still look like a
> slightly poorer vhs tape. But if you record onto s-vhs from a high quality
> source then it will look much better, if you TV set is capable of displaying
> a sharper picture. The color detail will be the same as vhs, unless the
> particular s-vhs tape recorder does a better job of recording-playback,
> which many do.
>
> CR is not very reliable in these types of things, because they try to make a
> value judgement if the extra cost of s-vhs can be justified by the average
> TV viewer.
>
> A s-vhs recorder is not capable of retaining the full quality of DV format
> video, mostly due to the low color bandwidth, but it much better than using
> vhs. You also get the benefit of using the s-video connector on the s-vhs
> recorder when playing either s-vhs or standard vhs tapes to your Tv set.
>
> Mike T 40 years of video design stuff
>
performance of SVHS vs. VHS. The higher FM luma frequencies of SVHS
actually tends to improve color quality for two reasons: the FM subcarrier
sidebands tend to infiltrate the chroma region less, and the higher FM carrier
frequency
provides a better bias for the chroma recording (which must be linear.)
So, SVHS does tend to provide better color, but 'THEORETICALLY' the
bandwidth of the SVHS color is no better. The quality (noise and interference)
for the SVHS chroma tends to be better.
John
L. P. LePage
MASTER
tapes from the Premiere Time Line. This recorder is head and sholders above
ANY VHS
recorder that I have used. I also use it to generate VHS tapes as it makes
the BEST VHS tapes
of any of my VCRs. I'm sold on S-VHS.
that said - - I'm moving to DVD - - - better archival quality - - no tape
degradation.
DanO
Sony TRV2xx series Digital8 Camcorder will play your Hi8 tapes and digitize
them so you can capture them via a Firewire port on your computer. Get a
DVD burner and you'll be making DVD's with no future degradation in signal
quality. Plus you can send clips to friends and family via e-mail. If you
don't want to jump into the DVDRW fray, make VCD's or SVCD's that can be
played on your PC and many standalone DVD players.
VHS is dying. Over 50% of movies like Harry Potter were sold in DVD format.
VHS is losing ground quickly. I'm not saying it is a dead format (far from
it.) But I would not invest heavily in any more high-end VHS equipment.
Also, have you priced S-VHS blank media? When I looked into it they were
very pricey.
"Don Greenwood" <don-gr...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3D015049...@sympatico.ca...
WMAS 1960
this has already been said in which case I would confirm otherwise here is my
angle on your question.
It all depends on your use for the deck. If you are simply going to use at as
a player to play tapes, CU may be correct in that the quality of the S-VHS may
be a waste of your money. However, from what I have seen S-VHS machines are
available pretty inexpensive these days. I just bought two JVC HR-S5901Us for
under $200 each ($197). In fact my brother bought the same deck a week later
for $170. There are a couple other models that are even less expensive.
On the other hand, if you are using the deck for recording or dubbing, which is
my purpose, the S-VHS has more value with it's S-Video in and outputs. I
bought mine for duplication purposes to make VHS dubs of my miniDV
tapes(similar to your discribed need except sub Digital8) or from S-VHS and
S-VHS ET masters. The availability of the S-Video connections will help
improve the quality of your dubs. With S-Video you will get cleaner better and
more accurate colors, brightness and contrast than when using the RCA line
inputs and outputs.
Remember, Consumers Union is judging on the common uses by consumers and is
appearently overlooking the needs that some users might have to dub their
digital camcorder tapes for viewing on their home systems. The added
resolution and quality of the S-VHS is helpful. Like I said though. If you are
just using the machine to play tapes from Blockbuster than they are right in
that you probably don't need to spend the extra money.
WMAS 1960
have said.
I think VHS still has a few years, at least, left in it's life. That is, of
course, depending on your application for it. Much of my work is selling tapes
of amature sports to parents and players and coaches and producing videos like
the day in the life tape that I just finished of a kindergarten class. The
coaches just want to be able to see the play develop and evaluate the
performance of their players. I use a Canon XL-1 with a fast shutter so that
they get clear quality images and crisp motion so that they can see more
detail. The coaches also want the tape NOW which means I usually have
overnight to dub and deliver the tape back to the High School so that they can
critique the previous game. The coaches are also on a budget and are cost
conscious. Parents don't want to spend a lot either. They do value their
mementos but they are not appreciative on the cost and usually do not
understand the sometimes high cost. For them I try to provide the best
possible quality but have to keep conscious of the cost as I will clearly have
difficulty recouping that with the economy of scale and the little tolerance
and understanding for expensive tapes. With the k-grtn tape, I put in 100 hrs
and paid about $125 to produce the tape. I originally thought of $30 for a
45minute tape. The school was concerned about that so I dropped to $25. A few
parents were still concerned so I dropped to $20. I did sell 13 tapes to 16
parents and have received 1 extra order from a parent for the grandmother. But,
of course, I will never make up for the time I put in. I just can't see
parents wanting to pay $50 for one of these tapes or even more if I were to
author them on DVD. Incidentally, I did this project as a favor for a friend,
(the teacher) and to learn Final Cut Pro and as an experiment to see what can
be done and what needs to be done if I do more of these again. Therefore I did
get a bit more out of it than just money. I got the warm fuzzy feelings of all
the parents crying over the tape when they saw it and the kids laughing at
themselves. I got the FCP education which has a lot of value with future
projects. I also got the experience to know what is and is not doable in the
future.
VHS, then is still going to be valuable as long as the machines are still
marketed and as long as parents still have the machines. You are correct
that many people are getting DVDs and for movies and other commercial
productions VHS is quickly dying out. However, DVD recording by people like
myself is not reliable enough yet to cause any immediate threat to VHS. What
might play fine on your entertainment system may not play on your PC. Also
what you may be able to play on the DVD that you have may not be playable on
someone elses DVD player... The only way around this that I can see is to pay
an enormous price for more precise DVD mastering and have them reproduced by a
larger duplicator. With my economy of scale that is and will not be practical.
I have heard it would be cost prohibitive in relation to the market that I am
catering to. I can produce DVDs on my G4 but there is a chance that some
players will not play them correctly. Until the technology is perfected and
becomes more dependable I forsee that I will still be getting most of my orders
in VHS. That does not mean though that I am not going to pursue the DVD
capability. That is definately the future and anyone who does not keep up with
it will get passed by. I see some people already requesting the DVDs but many
are dissappointed when the disc they receive won't play right on their
machines. I am sure there will also be more requests in the future.
Especially considering the archivability, compared to VHS, of the DVDs. That
would really lend itself well to my stuff when a parent may want to take the
video I just produced and play it at their child's college graduation or
wedding 15 or 20 years from now. I look at this, though, not as a negative
but as a potential new future market in the future. By preserving my masters
the best I can, When DVD is more reliable I might then be able to sell new
copies to some of the parents that they can keep in their family libraries.
Who knows, by then there may even be another format that is even more archival.
As for S-VHS Tapes? I bought JVC Machines with S-VHS ET. These machines will
record S-VHS on a standard VHS tape. I have found that they work out pretty
well. Just make sure that you by higher grade tape. Cheaper tapes will not
benefit you much. I use FUJI FILM PRO tapes. These are the ones in the gold
box. I was told to use those or something better. Those tapes are about $2 or
$2.50 ea. You can probably get a good tape for under $5. S-VHS tapes are
still expensive. However they are not much worse than my miniDVs for $9.50 ea
for 1hr. At least the S-VHS tapes run 2 hrs for about $10. Last year I got an
order from a parent for some game tapes on S-VHS so they could have them edited
for a recruitment tape. That was before I got the Mac and FCP. I bought S-VHS
and billed the man $15 per game plus cost of tape($10ea).
r.crowley
> One comment about the difference (however small) between the color
> performance of SVHS vs. VHS. The higher FM luma frequencies of SVHS
> actually tends to improve color quality for two reasons: the FM
subcarrier
> sidebands tend to infiltrate the chroma region less, and the higher FM
carrier
> frequency
> provides a better bias for the chroma recording (which must be linear.)
>
> So, SVHS does tend to provide better color, but 'THEORETICALLY' the
> bandwidth of the SVHS color is no better. The quality (noise and
interference)
> for the SVHS chroma tends to be better.
The "FM luma frequencies" (assuming you mean the color-under hetrodyne
carrier frequency) of S-VHS is identical to regular-VHS. "Mike T" is
correct. Any percieved quality improvement is likely due to the
higher-bandwidth luminance component.
Don Greenwood
using the s-video port in (and out when I get a monitor with that connector).
Any particular models to seek or avoid? I've only seen JCV and Panasonic in
Canada with S-VHS models, priced at $280 to $300 Cdn with s-video connectors.
John S. Dyson
"r.crowley" <rcro...@xprt.net> wrote in message
news:ug4qu2c...@corp.supernews.com...
in frequency. There are benefits to the FM carrier (the luma) being higher
in frequency (up to 5.4MHz for the min freq), where the sidebands (mostly
due to the modulation rate) encroach less into the range centered on
629kHz (up to about 1.1MHz.)
Note that FM produces sidebands above and below the current modulated
carrier frequency. It is almost impossible to remove the mutual interference
between the FM luma frequencies and the downshifted (hetrodyned) chroma,
when there is soooo little margin between the VHS chroma and luma
frequency ranges.
The advantage of the higher FM luma frequencies extends to benefits for
the chroma also. Note that for a biased linear tape recording system to work
correctly at all, the tape has to be AC biased AT LEAST 3X the maximum
recording frequency for LINEAR operation (needed for the downshifted chroma.)
The prominent bias energy for VHS can drop below the 3X 1.1MHz needed
for ideal chroma behavior (which, the chroma is recorded linearly.) This
displacement of energy down below the 3X minimum for good linear chroma
recording will cause intermod and linearity effects.
The parametric effects of linear (in the sense of transfer function, not tape/head
movement), biased AC recording are well understood, but not by the public in
general. 5X the max linear recording frequency is MUCH better for the
needed high fidelity chroma performance, and this equivalent figure of 100kHz
minimum for high-end linear audio recording also applies.
SVHS provides a scheme whereby the needed 3+MHz (minimum) frequency of
AC bias energy is better implemented than by VHS.
John
WMAS 1960
your Digital8 onto S-VHS I would recommend that you should edit your tapes onto
another digital format. Then use the S-VHS and VHS for final dubs. I have a
Canon XL-1 which is miniDV. Right now I use a Sony Video Walkman that is
miniDV for "Log and Capture" of my clips onto a Mac G4 and Final Cut Pro. Then
when I finish my projects I "Print to Tape" the final production to a miniDV
Master. I then used that as a source into a small dubbing rack to make my
final copies that I sell to parents.
The dubbing rack consists of a good S-VHS machine that has a TBC in it so that
I can dub from S-VHS or VHS and make copies if I need to. It gives me the
flexibility to go from different formats(S-VHS with the 9800 or miniDV with the
Walkman) into the S-VHS machines. All I need to do is switch around a couple
cables. The S-VHS machine here is a JVC HR-S9800U. I then go into a 1x5
Distribution amp that has S-Video Connectors and Stereo Audio connections. From
the DA I am going into a couple of lesser quality consumer S-VHS machines. You
do not need as high a quality machine to record as you do when playing. At
least for the sake of dubbing. Remember the quality of your dubs will only be
as good as your source machine. The machines I am using for dubs are 2 JVC
HR-S5901Us. I bought 2 of them a couple weeks ago and one is acting up. The
other works fine. I am going to return the bad one and see what is wrong. It
could simply be that there is a minor adjustment or a need for a thourogh
cleaning. I have heard sometimes, during manufacture the heads can get
contaminated. I have always had good performance from JVC Machines.
Especially in the series that ranges from the 5000 series to the 9000 series.
I have had 5500U, 9600U, 9800U and now the two 5901Us. The line of machines
goes down to 3900 or lower but I have heard that the 3900 machines are crap. I
do not know about the 4900 that I have seen advertised or anything lower. With
the prices as they are, $180 to $200, US, My brother even got his for $170,
the 5901 is a good value. That is assuming the quality is consistant with my
good one and not bad one. As I expand this system I am looking toward adding
another 5901U if the one that I am going to return is only a minor incident and
maybe a SR-VS30U once I find more about it.
The above system that I have planned would put the SR-VS30U into the DA and out
to the 9800 and 3 5901Us. That would give me the capability of dubbing a
miniDV to 4 VHS/S-VHS copies or a S-VHS to 3 VHS/S-VHS copies. The
Distribution Amp (DA) that I have is a Studio 1 DAS-5.
www.studio1productions.com.
I hope this info helps you out.
John S. Dyson
"WMAS 1960" <wmas...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020608222219...@mb-bj.aol.com...
> I am a little unsure of what you are asking. If you are referring to editing
> your Digital8 onto S-VHS I would recommend that you should edit your tapes onto
> another digital format.
>
necessary. The quality of SVHS on reasonably priced decks is noisy compared
to DV, especially if your video originates on a DV (or Digital 8) format. You
can
often (not always) edit so that encode/decode cycles are avoided. The final copy
can be printed onto SVHS, DVD, or somesuch, and will be better than if VHS or
SVHS had ever touched the signal.
One frustrating thing is that there is probably little reason for a DV deck to
cost
much more than a $500 consumer SVHS deck, except for marketing. I guess that
alot of the volume for DV decks has been taken by computer based editing.
John
naden...@hotmail.com
<don-gr...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> This is all helpful. My use would primarily be for edited Digital8 videos,
> using the s-video port in (and out when I get a monitor with that
connector). > Any particular models to seek or avoid? I've only seen JCV
and Panasonic in > Canada with S-VHS models, priced at $280 to $300 Cdn
with s-video connectors.
I agree with the fellow who wrote about DVD vs VHS. I haven't had any
requests for DVD yet; I expect it will be 2 years away. If I have a
client who really needs DVD, I can always farm it out to someone who does
it. For me, its not worth getting into yet, for the reasons he stated:
unproven technology which still may change; compatability issues with all
DVD players, etc.
I use JVC S-VHS decks and have had no problems. The only Sony product I
really dislike is their vcr's, whether they be VHS or SVHS. For one
thing, I find Sony's menu on the vcr's to be a bit difficult. Little old
ladies will NEVER be a program one, that's for sure.
SVHS tapes can be as cheap as $4 if purchased in bulk. $5 to $8 is
typical. Best price I've found in a mainstream store is $6.50 for Maxell
120's.
Check B & H in New York for vcr's. It wasn't long ago they had some
special prices on JVC S-VHS decks. The lowest price I've seen on any has
been $130 US.
>
lhorwinkle
- Equipment is too expensive.
- DVDs are difficult to produce. Software is finicky.
- Compatibility is not yet assured. The DVD+/- war is still raging.
- And, for "dad" taking home movies ... there are NO camcorders
that handle DVD media. So you have to dub the tape over to DVD.
For most people, accustomed to point-and-shoot VHS, that's too
much bother.
I expected some of these problems to be largely solved by now.
But it looks like we'll have to wait another year.
"WMAS 1960" <wmas...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020608140154...@mb-fl.aol.com...
jdcarswell
> that handle DVD media. So you have to dub the tape over to DVD.
> For most people, accustomed to point-and-shoot VHS, that's too
> much bother.
>
> I expected some of these problems to be largely solved by now.
> But it looks like we'll have to wait another year.
>
selling at Future Shop for $1700 CDN or about $800 US. You can see it at:
http://www.hitachi.com/tv/browse/camcorders/dvd/dvd_index.shtml
Mike T
--
Please reply to group, if you must reply direct then-
replace $ with s
"John S. Dyson" <dy...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:26fM8.117$yK6....@news1.iquest.net...
Yes, that is true, but for most tests I have done over the years, the
improvement is very small and most time hardly noticable. Plus the noise
coring that is used in VHS and S-VHS removes most small video detail. And
then there is that chroma 1-H delay line that improves the chroma signal to
noise at the expense of chroma vertical resolution and a continual shift of
the chroma to the bottom of the picture with each generation, on most VCR's
:-(
Mike T
John S. Dyson
>
>
> --
> Please reply to group, if you must reply direct then-
> replace $ with s
> "John S. Dyson" <dy...@iquest.net> wrote in message
> news:26fM8.117$yK6....@news1.iquest.net...
> >
> > >
> > performance of SVHS vs. VHS. The higher FM luma frequencies of SVHS
> > actually tends to improve color quality for two reasons: the FM
> subcarrier
> > sidebands tend to infiltrate the chroma region less, and the higher FM
> carrier
> > frequency
> > provides a better bias for the chroma recording (which must be linear.)
> >
> > So, SVHS does tend to provide better color, but 'THEORETICALLY' the
> > bandwidth of the SVHS color is no better. The quality (noise and
> interference)
> > for the SVHS chroma tends to be better.
> >
> > John
>
>
> Yes, that is true, but for most tests I have done over the years, the
> improvement is very small and most time hardly noticable. Plus the noise
> coring that is used in VHS and S-VHS removes most small video detail. And
> then there is that chroma 1-H delay line that improves the chroma signal to
> noise at the expense of chroma vertical resolution and a continual shift of
> the chroma to the bottom of the picture with each generation, on most VCR's
> :-(
>
noise reduction by 3D filtering (time averaging.) This already happens in
the 3D comb (so as to avoid loading the HF Luma with excess chroma
spillover, and generally better seperation), but then the additional 3D post
filtering seems excessive. My perception of movement is probably quicker
than most people (e.g. cannot stand 50Hz flicker), but also the smear caused
by low end 3D comb and video NR is a little irritating to me. More than
one generation of the additional 3D filtering becomes quite obnoxious. The
consumer decks are apparently doing more than just frame averaging (e.g.
doing some motion compensation), but the amount of noise reduction need
by SVHS (VHS is worse) makes the magnitude of 'processing effects' too
strong for my taste (esp after the 1st generation.)
So, we have things like 1H filtering (and actually even more than that), but
also we have coring (a primitive, but sometimes quite effective method), but
also time averaging. Coring (on well designed systems) is replaced by
nonlinear compression/expansion, and the effect on the video is more
gentle, but does still cause edge-noise effects in the best case.
My own SVHS decks (I have two of 'em -- an SVHS and DVHS deck), seem
to do OKAY about the 1H filtering effects (I don't have to compensate for
that in a TBC, by shifting the chroma back), and the 'coring' effect on SVHS
seems pretty well controlled (they probably use nonlinear compression/expansion
nowadays), but the motion issues (smearing) cause the viewing (long term)
of an SVHS recording to be uncomfortable. The problem with the motion
artifacting is that it isn't JUST visible up close, but also across the room.
John
John S. Dyson
"Matti Haveri" <nos...@here.invalid> wrote in message
news:nospam-BF9887....@plaza.suomi.net...
>
> I was surprised** to find that there really wasn't much difference in
> video quality between VHS and SVHS decks. I picked the test clip rather
> casually and another test clip may have showed more difference. ...In a
> way I was happy that there wasn't much difference in quality since now I
> don't have to convert the 30+ hours of VHS to D8 tapes again... My old
> VHS deck may also be better than average VHS decks so YMMV.
>
This is definitely due to design choices, and not the fact that SVHS decks
have to be poorer. Some decks don't even have full width heads, and
this also impacts SNR.
>
> I was also told that all consumer analog VCRs and camcorders record
> video in separate Y (luminance) and C (chrominance) frequency bands.
> This is true regardless of whether or not the VCR includes Y/C (S-Video)
> inputs and outputs. Before the signals can be recorded, even the plain
> VHS VCR must separate composite video input signals into Y/C video.
>
Yes, that is true.
> However, in the case of a camcorder, the camera section provided a Y/C
> signal internally to the recorder section and it was recorded on tape as
> separate Y/C, therefore if you play it back with a VCR that has an
> S-Video output, the signal will have never been combined into a
> composite signal.
>
That is true also.
> >
> > In SVHS, the higher resolution was balanced by worse S/N, so you pays
> > your money & takes your choice...
>
Frankly, there is no real reason why an SVHS deck has to have worse LUMA noise
except for perhaps a few dB due to significantly wider bandwidth. SVHS can also
intrinsically provide better chroma performance, because of reasons that I
mentioned before.
I am NOT an SVHS fan, but much more know that SVHS can easily outperform
VHS for most purposes. All bets are off if the quality of the SVHS or VHS decks
used to compare are subpar.
Now, my first SVHS deck was VERY noisy (much worse than EDBeta), but SVHS
has grown up substantially. My own 'archival' copies of programs or old LD's
are done onto D9, and sometimes DV. I use SVHS only for compatibility reasons.
John
David Chien
http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/copy/copy.html to view actual video
captures between S-VHS, DV, VHS, VCD, etc.
S-VHS + TBC + DNR + S-Video connectors + SVHS ET (only if you're doing
SLP 6 hrs per tape) really, really is a world of difference - basically
VHS quality or closer to DVD quality here.
I'd pickup any model with S-VHS, SVHS ET and highly prefer TBC & DNR to
get rid of minor noise in your videos - pretty much anything JVC 7xxx
model # or higher.