Using HIFI VCR for recording.
Sanjay Radia
worthwhile getting a HIFI model with recording levels.
I have a Nakamichi Cassette deck and was wondering if a HIFI VCR would be
signifcantly better for recording live shows or CDs.
Has anyone had any experience with using HIFI VCRs for recording audio?
I can get a HIFI VCR without recording levels for about $400 and and was
wondering if it is worthwhile paying $200-$300 extra to get a HIFI with
recording levels
(Sony has the chepest HIFI with recordinglevel for $500. But I have had
reliability problems with Sony products in the past.
Most of the other HIFI VCRs do not allow the user to set the record level
till you go for the $600-$700 and up models.)
thanks
sanjay
Al Shing
>I have a Nakamichi Cassette deck and was wondering if a HIFI VCR would be
>signifcantly better for recording live shows or CDs.
>Has anyone had any experience with using HIFI VCRs for recording audio?
I tried this when I first got a Beta Hi-Fi VCR, and found that I got a lot
of drop outs in the audio signal. Could have been that the gain was set
too high, but Beta Hi-Fi is apparently impossible unless you have a video
signal as well. If the video tuner is receiving nothing but white noise,
the Hi-Fi signal will be unstable or non-existant. Therefore, instead of
recording only an audio signal with no video input, it is best to treat the
recording as a "simulcast" of whatever random program is on the currently
tuned TV station, with the sound obtained from the stereo audio jacks instead
of from the program.
I haven't tried this with my VHS Hi-Fi, but since the Hi-Fi signal is recorded
separately from the video signal, I suspect that this will not be a problem.
>I can get a HIFI VCR without recording levels for about $400 and and was
>wondering if it is worthwhile paying $200-$300 extra to get a HIFI with
>recording levels
I have always found that if I compromise on a feature because of price, I
spend the entire time I own a product wishing I had that feature. Thus,
since you want the feature, I would say it is worthwhile just for your own
peace of mind.
However, all of my Hi-Fi VCR's, both Beta and VHS, have adjustable recording
levels, and I find that I use it all the time, because of the differences
in input levels among various input devices.
>(Sony has the chepest HIFI with recordinglevel for $500. But I have had
>reliability problems with Sony products in the past.
>Most of the other HIFI VCRs do not allow the user to set the record level
>till you go for the $600-$700 and up models.)
>
Of course, at this price level, you have to decide if it isn't worthwhile
paying another $100 or so to get S-VHS.
>thanks
>sanjay
--
Al Shing (ash...@cac.washington.edu)
Richard Frey
^S^QWell, I have a JVC-630U, which I use extensively for taping CDs, and I've
noticed that a) automatic level control compromises the quality of the sound
somewhat, and b) I usually use my level inputs to keep the sound from pushing
into the reds too much. Hope this helps.
Richard Shapiro
>I tried this when I first got a Beta Hi-Fi VCR, and found that I got a lot
>of drop outs in the audio signal. Could have been that the gain was set
>too high, but Beta Hi-Fi is apparently impossible unless you have a video
>signal as well. If the video tuner is receiving nothing but white noise,
>the Hi-Fi signal will be unstable or non-existant.
This must be a problem that's specific to some Beta vcrs. I regularly
use mine for audio-only HiFi recording, and I've never encountered
this problem. I *have* noticed it on audio-only Beta HiFi tapes made
on other machines, at least when played back on mine.
>Of course, at this price level, you have to decide if it isn't worthwhile
>paying another $100 or so to get S-VHS.
Is S-VHS suppose to perform better as an audio-only tape recorder?
I've never heard that claim made.
Goldberg
about "Using Your VCR as an Audio Recorder." Both have manual level
control for the hifi channels. Linear audio is a single auto-leveled
channel.
I have found a handy way to do this. I feed the audio from my CD player
into the VCR's audio. I hook up my camcorder and feed its video output
to the deck's s-video input. I aim the camera at the CD player's digital
display, which shows timing, track number, and a 10-character mnemonic
title of the disc. It makes it very easy to use the tape for editing
background audio into my video productions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Mark Goldberg (gold...@dtoa3.dt.navy.mil) |
| David Taylor Research Center |
| Annapolis, Maryland "Everyone is entitled to my opinion." |
Goldberg
>>Of course, at this price level, you have to decide if it isn't worthwhile
>>paying another $100 or so to get S-VHS.
>
>Is S-VHS suppose to perform better as an audio-only tape recorder?
>I've never heard that claim made.
For audio-only recording, there's no advantage to using SVHS because
hifi recording is identical with VHS and SVHS machines. However, if
investing in a new VCR, there may be a point to getting SVHS for its
better picture and dubbing performance. This should be a serious consideration
if you are into video in an ambitious way.
Ko-Yang Wang
>>too high, but Beta Hi-Fi is apparently impossible unless you have a video
>>signal as well. If the video tuner is receiving nothing but white noise,
>>the Hi-Fi signal will be unstable or non-existant.
>This must be a problem that's specific to some Beta vcrs. I regularly
>use mine for audio-only HiFi recording, and I've never encountered
>this problem. I *have* noticed it on audio-only Beta HiFi tapes made
>on other machines, at least when played back on mine.
>Is S-VHS suppose to perform better as an audio-only tape recorder?
>I've never heard that claim made.
On my Sony SLHF60R, there is a audio only switch, I made a few audio
only recording when I purchased the unit (5 years ago) and didn't have
any problems (although I didn't like the idea of rewinding the tape
back and forth to find the music segment I want to hear).
When I 'watched' the audio only tape, the screen is in light blue. It
seems to me that Sony provide a steady signal when you hit the audio
only button.
If you didn't use the audio only switch and didn't connect anything to
video, I guess there would be some problems.
Ko-Yang
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ko-Yang Wang (317)494-9991 --- ----- __`__ k...@cs.purdue.edu
Dept of Computer Sciences _|_ ()| --- Parallel & Distributed Processing
Purdue University | | --- Computing About Physical Objects
West Lafayette, IN 47907 ----- \| ( ) Research Associate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John David Miller
the simple conclusion: if you want an audio recorder, buy an audio
recorder. With the top-of-the-line Denon DRM-800 (20-21Khz) available
for less than $500, it's pretty hard to justify buying an expensive
HI-FI VCR to use just for stero mastering, only to get inferior results.
I DO own a HI-FI VCR (Nec) and I greatly appreciate the HI-FI aspect
when watching rental movies with great soundtracks or effects.
However, many times I'm forced to turn off HI-FI and use the linear
stereo tracks because of drop-outs. I've also noticed an occasional
60Hz buzzing on speach or other transients. Not what I'd want in my
stereo master tape.
BTW, I use a Sony 75ES DAT for my stereo master deck (mixing down from
Tascam 8-channel multi-track and MIDI instuments) and the Denon DRM-800
for making cassettes for friends.
-- jdm
--
John David Miller j...@gss.com
Graphic Software Systems uunet!gssc!jdm
9590 S.W. Gemini Dr. (503) 641-2200 (voice)
Beaverton, OR 97005-7161 (503) 643-8642 (FAX)
Greg Calkin
>I am going to be buying a VCR very soon and was wondering if it is
>worthwhile getting a HIFI model with recording levels.
>
>I have a Nakamichi Cassette deck and was wondering if a HIFI VCR would be
>signifcantly better for recording live shows or CDs.
>Has anyone had any experience with using HIFI VCRs for recording audio?
In NZ, the market is different but the rules are probably the same.
If you are serious about the audio quality, audition based on that.
My HIFI VCR has been used quite heavily as a grand scale tape deck for
the stereo because
1) great for parties - record the total music and hide the breakable things
like records. Just play a video or two, noone can change the music and
you can use music videos if you want.
2) remote control, tape markers, 3 hour play, good sound quality.
The level indicators are useful IF you have the time and energy to stuff
around to get the level right. We gave up and adjusted the volume knob,
except where we were trying to record something excessively loud.
Otherwise, get a few stereo / hifi videos and a few test videos and audition
from an acoustic point of view.
--
Greg Calkin, Systems Engineer and all round nice person (gr...@tcnz.co.nz)
Thomas Cook N.Z. Limited, PO Box 24, Auckland CPO, New Zealand, Ph (09)-793920
Disclaimer : Nothing I say has any relevance to anyone elses opinions.
Marty Lefkowitz
> In article <67...@milton.u.washington.edu> ash...@milton.u.washington.edu (Al Shing) writes:
> >I tried this when I first got a Beta Hi-Fi VCR, and found that I got a lot
> >of drop outs in the audio signal. Could have been that the gain was set
I was just reading consumer reports (ok I was in the doctor's office
and I was board), not that I usually believe them on anything but
garage door openers and kitchen equipment, but they did have an
article on VCR tapes. Among other things it said that in the early
days of VCRs they had a quality problem with the tapes. I've actually
heard about this problem from a few people using video technology at
the time. This could have been your problem.
The other interesting thing they said is that they eventually got the
quality up there, saturated "matured" the market and broke out into
specialty tapes (eg gold, platnum-gold, super, super duper hi fi,
etc). What they said is that these tapes are just a marketing ploy to
help the sales/production chain make a greater profet. There really
is no difference between the cheap tapes and the good tapes nowadays.
They did say Maxell was the exception, but they didn't say why.
I seem to remember something about how the transport is made and what
materials the tape rests on to make the difference between a hifi tape
and a normal tape. Is that not true, or do these guy's once again
show their K-Mart ingenuity in attacking products.
David A. Roth
I have a JVC S-VHS which I use for a mix down audio deck. It has a
switch for for it to be used as an audio deck. I don't use the automatic
recording level feature which can be disabled. I have had very good results.
David
Al Shing
#
#>Of course, at this price level, you have to decide if it isn't worthwhile
#>paying another $100 or so to get S-VHS.
#
#Is S-VHS suppose to perform better as an audio-only tape recorder?
#I've never heard that claim made.
No, the comment was aimed at comparing price and features of VCR's. The usage
of a VCR for recording audio only tapes is one usage of it, but I would
assume the user would also use it as a VCR, in which case one should look
at the video features as well.
If the original poster wants an audio only recorder, he should buy an audio
only recorder, such as a DAT.
--
Al Shing (ash...@cac.washington.edu)
Ray Shwake
>This must be a problem that's specific to some Beta vcrs. I regularly
>use mine for audio-only HiFi recording, and I've never encountered
>this problem. I *have* noticed it on audio-only Beta HiFi tapes made
>on other machines, at least when played back on mine.
Well, it's certainly not a problem with Sony's Super Beta SL-HF400.
I simply set the INPUT_SELET switch to LINE/PCM and proceded to test-
record from a CD player then under evaluation. Super reproduction. Lucky
for me, because the player went back. For the next few years, until the
"right" player came out, I enjoyed my Beta Hi-Fi recording of three CD's.
Al Shing
>I thought about this and experimented for a long time before coming to
>the simple conclusion: if you want an audio recorder, buy an audio
>recorder. With the top-of-the-line Denon DRM-800 (20-21Khz) available
>for less than $500, it's pretty hard to justify buying an expensive
>HI-FI VCR to use just for stero mastering, only to get inferior results.
>
I agree with you 1000%, but there are some times when it would be nice to
be able to record more than 45 minutes of music on a timed basis, and when
you are unable to be around to flip the tape. For example, when recording
a radio program, I set the VCR to record off the FM tuner at the specific
time, and then copy the results to an audio cassette at a more convenient
time, and editing out the commercials while I'm at it.
I wouldn't use it to copy CD's for playback. Although it would be nice to
be able to record 5 or 6 CD's for continuous playback at a party, a better
way is to get a carousel CD player. This is more flexible anyway, because
you can program it to play a mix of songs off different CD's, instead of
simply playing one CD after another. Also, you don't have to spend hours
recording the CD's.
--
Al Shing (ash...@cac.washington.edu)
William Alves
>the simple conclusion: if you want an audio recorder, buy an audio
>recorder. With the top-of-the-line Denon DRM-800 (20-21Khz) available
>for less than $500, it's pretty hard to justify buying an expensive
>HI-FI VCR to use just for stero mastering, only to get inferior results.
>
the advantage of longer recording times available compared to cassettes,
especially in EP mode. This means that it can be set to record an entire
opera, say, being broadcast on the radio while he is away. Another finds
it more convenient for mastering than open-reel tape, better sounding than
cassettes, and less expensive than various digital formats. In addition,
I have used it for recording 3-channel applications, for example, a click
track on the linear track, and taped accompaniment on the hifi tracks.
But I agree in that the audio quality, which has been hyped as approaching
16-bit digital systems, is not all that great. Oh, it's better than a
good cassette machine, but no way to my ears does it approach DAT, an F-1,
or even a good clean 1/4" machine at 15 ips. I suspect this may not be a
fault of the medium, but the output amps and other auxiliary circuitry in
the VCRs I've tried. I would be very surprised if a company put high quality
audio amps into a consumer VCR.
Bill Alves
Vidiot
<>I have a Nakamichi Cassette deck and was wondering if a HIFI VCR would be
<>signifcantly better for recording live shows or CDs.
<>Has anyone had any experience with using HIFI VCRs for recording audio?
<
<I tried this when I first got a Beta Hi-Fi VCR, and found that I got a lot
<of drop outs in the audio signal. Could have been that the gain was set
<too high, but Beta Hi-Fi is apparently impossible unless you have a video
<signal as well. If the video tuner is receiving nothing but white noise,
<the Hi-Fi signal will be unstable or non-existant. Therefore, instead of
<recording only an audio signal with no video input, it is best to treat the
<recording as a "simulcast" of whatever random program is on the currently
<tuned TV station, with the sound obtained from the stereo audio jacks instead
<of from the program.
Do not use a TV/cable station as a video source, as they are subject to sync
losses, due to some problem or another. When that happens, you will have a
glitch in you tape at that point. Instead, use a video camera's output,
leaving the len's cap on.
<I haven't tried this with my VHS Hi-Fi, but since the Hi-Fi signal is recorded
<separately from the video signal, I suspect that this will not be a problem.
They may be recorded separately, but both signals rely upon video timing.
Newer VHS decks will generate the necessary video timing pulses to record
an audio only signal, when the input switch is set to AUX, or LINE input.
<>I can get a HIFI VCR without recording levels for about $400 and and was
<>wondering if it is worthwhile paying $200-$300 extra to get a HIFI with
<>recording levels
Recording levels are a must. Newer get a desktop Hi-Fi unit without them.
--
harvard\ att!nicmad\ spool.cs.wisc.edu!astroatc!vidiot!brown
Vidiot ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown
rutgers/ decvax!nicmad/ INET:<@spool.cs.wisc.edu,@astroatc:brown@vidiot>
David A. Roth
In article <11...@chaph.usc.edu>, al...@aludra.usc.edu (William Alves) writes:
[...]
|> I know several people who use Hi-fi VHS for recording audio. One likes
|> the advantage of longer recording times available compared to cassettes,
|> especially in EP mode. This means that it can be set to record an entire
|> opera, say, being broadcast on the radio while he is away. Another finds
|> it more convenient for mastering than open-reel tape, better sounding than
|> cassettes, and less expensive than various digital formats. In addition,
|> I have used it for recording 3-channel applications, for example, a click
|> track on the linear track, and taped accompaniment on the hifi tracks.
Does your Hi-Fi VCR have seperate inputs and outputs for the hifi and linear tracks? What model and brand do you have?
I have a JVC S-VHS and if you know of a way to do the above I would love to hear about it!
David
...att!cbnmva!david
David E A Wilson
>They may be recorded separately, but both signals rely upon video timing.
>Newer VHS decks will generate the necessary video timing pulses to record
>an audio only signal, when the input switch is set to AUX, or LINE input.
My Sharp has the interesting trick that if you record from the AV jacks and
do NOT supply a video signal it drops from SP into LP mode and records audio
only. We discovered that these LP audio tapes (up to 8 hours) can even be
played back on SP only VCR's (at least hi-fi ones - haven't tried a mono one
yet).
>Recording levels are a must. Newer get a desktop Hi-Fi unit without them.
I agree.
David Wilson da...@cs.uow.edu.au
Vidiot
<
<I was just reading consumer reports (ok I was in the doctor's office
^^^^^
You must have felt pretty stiff :-)
Vidiot
<br...@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
<>They may be recorded separately, but both signals rely upon video timing.
<>Newer VHS decks will generate the necessary video timing pulses to record
<>an audio only signal, when the input switch is set to AUX, or LINE input.
<
<My Sharp has the interesting trick that if you record from the AV jacks and
<do NOT supply a video signal it drops from SP into LP mode and records audio
<only. We discovered that these LP audio tapes (up to 8 hours) can even be
<played back on SP only VCR's (at least hi-fi ones - haven't tried a mono one
<yet).
First off, LP mode can't give 8 hours of recording, with today's tape lengths.
Only EP/SLP mode can give you that.
Secondly, a tape recorded in LP or EP mode cannot be played back in SP mode,
period. An EP tape tracked at SP would provide audio at three-times the rate.
An SP only machine will attempt to play the tape at the speed it knows, which
will be three-times faster than EP mode, since it can't slow the tape speed
down.
Something is amiss here. All the of the data needs to be rechecked.
Besides, I wouldn't want a VCR that was programmed to switch to EP mode when
the video signal was missing. Poor judgement on the manufacturer's part.
David E A Wilson
>In article <1990Aug31.0...@cs.uow.edu.au> da...@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) writes:
><My Sharp has the interesting trick that if you record from the AV jacks and
><do NOT supply a video signal it drops from SP into LP mode and records audio
><only. We discovered that these LP audio tapes (up to 8 hours) can even be
><played back on SP only VCR's (at least hi-fi ones - haven't tried a mono one
><yet).
>First off, LP mode can't give 8 hours of recording, with today's tape lengths.
>Only EP/SLP mode can give you that.
Here in Australia, we use PAL not NTSC and LP is 1/2 SP speed. We do not have
EP.
>Secondly, a tape recorded in LP or EP mode cannot be played back in SP mode,
>period. An EP tape tracked at SP would provide audio at three-times the rate.
>An SP only machine will attempt to play the tape at the speed it knows, which
>will be three-times faster than EP mode, since it can't slow the tape speed
>down.
I can assure you it did work. I recorded an audio only LP speed tape on my
machine and took it to a friend's place. He has an NEC which cannot record/play
LP (at least there are no indicators for this on the display and the manual
fails to mention it). It played the audio fine. I guess that the speed of the
tape on playback is determined by the frame pulses on the tape and the player
just kept slowing down until the pulses arrived at the correct rate.
>Something is amiss here. All the of the data needs to be rechecked.
It may just be the difference between PAL & NTSC formats.
>Besides, I wouldn't want a VCR that was programmed to switch to EP mode when
>the video signal was missing. Poor judgement on the manufacturer's part.
Agreed, if you wanted to leave the video in lead attached all the time, it
could be a problem. I just use the video out to the TV and the audio in/out
to the tape sockets on my amp.
David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong da...@cs.uow.edu.au
Michael Paddon
> I can get a HIFI VCR without recording levels for about $400 and and was
> wondering if it is worthwhile paying $200-$300 extra to get a HIFI with
> recording levels
The Panasonic F65 has recording levels and half speed Hi-Fi. It retails
in Australia for around $700-$800 which is right down the bottom end
of the Hi-Fi VCR market. From what you've said, it sounds like it would
be priced around US$500.
Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| | EasyNet: meo78b::paddon |
| | Internet: pad...@meo78b.enet.dec.com |
| Michael Paddon | ACSnet: m...@ubeaut.oz.au |
| | ACSnet: m...@munnari.oz.au |
| | Voice: +61 3 895 9392 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
David Tholen
>br...@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
>
>>First off, LP mode can't give 8 hours of recording, with today's tape lengths.
>>Only EP/SLP mode can give you that.
>
> Here in Australia, we use PAL not NTSC and LP is 1/2 SP speed. We do not have
> EP.
I recently returned from a trip to Europe where I was a little surprised to see
videotapes for sale with lengths of 180 minutes at SP and 360 minutes at LP.
No mention of 540 minutes at EP, so I concluded that the tapes were really the
same length as those in the U.S. and that the European LP speed corresponded to
the U.S. EP speed, but the European SP speed was between the U.S. SP and LP
speeds.
Upon my return, I checked some lengths for T-120 tapes and found most of them
to be 246 meters. In Europe, these 180 minute tapes had lengths of around
255 meters, as I recall, so they are indeed virtually the same length. Thus
I can confirm that the LP speed on PAL-format tapes nearly equals the EP speed
on NTSC-format tapes, and that the SP speed on PAL-format tapes falls between
the SP and LP speeds on NTSC-format tapes.
It would be interesting to compare video quality, because the top speed for
PAL-format tapes is slower than the top speed for NTSC-format tapes. At 625
lines 25 times a second (AC power in Europe is 50 Hz) for PAL and 525 lines
30 times a second for NTSC, the horizontal frequencies are virtually the same
(15625 Hz and 15750 Hz, respectively). If the horizontal resolution is
comparable (330 lines for broadcast NTSC, 240 for regular VHS, about 400 for
Super VHS), then the bandwidth requirements would also be comparable (3.8 MHz
for regular VHS up to 6.3 MHz for Super VHS). But less tape is used by PAL
VHS machines running at SP, so I would guess that the signal-to-noise ratio
suffers, but there are so many other variables that I can't be sure. Consult
an expert if you'd like more detail.
Juri Munkki
>It would be interesting to compare video quality, because the top speed for
>PAL-format tapes is slower than the top speed for NTSC-format tapes. At 625
>lines 25 times a second (AC power in Europe is 50 Hz) for PAL and 525 lines
>30 times a second for NTSC, the horizontal frequencies are virtually the same
>(15625 Hz and 15750 Hz, respectively). If the horizontal resolution is
>comparable (330 lines for broadcast NTSC, 240 for regular VHS, about 400 for
>Super VHS), then the bandwidth requirements would also be comparable (3.8 MHz
>for regular VHS up to 6.3 MHz for Super VHS). But less tape is used by PAL
>VHS machines running at SP, so I would guess that the signal-to-noise ratio
>suffers, but there are so many other variables that I can't be sure. Consult
>an expert if you'd like more detail.
I'm not an expert, but PAL VHS is really awful. All other systems that
I have seen have been far superior to VHS. The only reason I have VHS is
that it has really good HiFi (my vcr has a NICAM sound tuner. NICAM is
a digital stereo audio broadcasting standard)
PAL 8mm is far superior to PAL VHS. One of the reasons is that 8mm SP tape
speed is higher in PAL than NTSC. A 120 minute NTSC tape allows only 90
minutes of recording in PAL. If 8mm NTSC is slightly better than VHS NTSC,
8mm PAL is significantly better than the awful VHS PAL.
___________________________________________________________________________
/ Juri Munkki / Helsinki University of Technology / Wind / HP S /
/ jmu...@hut.fi / Computing Center Macintosh Support / Surf / 48 X /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bill Vermillion
>PAL-format tapes is slower than the top speed for NTSC-format tapes.
Speed in and of itself, doesn't affect the video quality. It is the head
configurations that do that. Narrower heads for slower tape speed to
increase the density gives a poorer signal to noise ratio. The speed of
the tape to the head is actually faster on a slow speed recording, but the
difference are so minute it makes no differnce. Where speed change vs
quality shows up is in the linear audio track.
--
Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill
: bi...@bilver.UUCP
Vidiot
<br...@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
<
<>First off, LP mode can't give 8 hours of recording, with today's tape lengths.
<>Only EP/SLP mode can give you that.
<
<Here in Australia, we use PAL not NTSC and LP is 1/2 SP speed. We do not have
<EP.
Oops, missed the Ozzie return address. PAL VHS machine SP mode is actually
between the NTSC SP and LP modes, whereas a NTSC T-120 = PAL E-180. To get
8 hours of recordings, a NTSC T-160 = PAL E-240. Double that for LP speeds.
<>Secondly, a tape recorded in LP or EP mode cannot be played back in SP mode,
<>period. An EP tape tracked at SP would provide audio at three-times the rate.
<>An SP only machine will attempt to play the tape at the speed it knows, which
<>will be three-times faster than EP mode, since it can't slow the tape speed
<>down.
<
<I can assure you it did work. I recorded an audio only LP speed tape on my
<machine and took it to a friend's place. He has an NEC which cannot record/play
<LP (at least there are no indicators for this on the display and the manual
<fails to mention it). It played the audio fine. I guess that the speed of the
<tape on playback is determined by the frame pulses on the tape and the player
<just kept slowing down until the pulses arrived at the correct rate.
Have you tried playing a tape recorded with video as well as audio? Can
you play it back OK? You are correct in that the VCR's servo circuits had
to slow down the tape speed, which is determined by the control track pulses.
The fact that it slowed down that much is surprising, as most SP only machines
have a narrow range and will cause a lousy picture and no Hi-Fi sound.
Run the test with a real video recording, to see what the machine will do.
Maybe it won't record a LP tape, but maybe they left in the electronics to
play it.
<>Something is amiss here. All the of the data needs to be rechecked.
<
<It may just be the difference between PAL & NTSC formats.
I doubt it. It is a manufacturing decision to have it do what it does.
Vidiot
<to be 246 meters. In Europe, these 180 minute tapes had lengths of around
<255 meters, as I recall, so they are indeed virtually the same length. Thus
<I can confirm that the LP speed on PAL-format tapes nearly equals the EP speed
<on NTSC-format tapes, and that the SP speed on PAL-format tapes falls between
<the SP and LP speeds on NTSC-format tapes.
PAL LP is between NTSC LP and EP. You are right that PAL SP falls between
NTSC SP and LP.
Andrew Lindh
I use Hi-FI systems for audio recording only also. I have noticed a few
things in the past messages, here is my $.02
Most Beta Hi-Fi systems do not need a video signal or a switch
to record audio only (ex. SL-HF900)
Most VHS Hi-Fi systems must have a good video signal or a switch
that you change (ex. Realistic Model 41)
Some do not need a video signal (ex. JVC HR-S20U)
Some tapes and VCR's will give you dropout noise or head switching
noise that makes audio only recording useless. But most systems
can provide long times and OK sound, or short times and very good
sound. Use SP (2hrs) or BII (3Hrs) (or BI) for the best sound.
--
Andrew Lindh, a student at the University of Hartford -- Computer Science
INTERNET: li...@uhasun.hartford.edu | NOTE: All views here are MINE!!!
BITNET: li...@hartford.bitnet | Not the school's or those of anyone else!
UUCP: li...@uhasun.uucp | ---- When will I graduate??? "SYNFU!"
Andrew Lindh
I don't know about VHS but for Beta here are the times
As we all know VHS tapes are rated by TIME not LENGTH.
Beta tapes are by LENGTH not TIME. So a T-120 NTSC may be a T-180 PAL
Tape: L-750...750 Feet and about 222 Meters as stated on the box
(note: this is funny...Sony used FEET for tape models)
(but 750 feet comes out to be 228 Meters...but the tape measures to 223 meters)
Speed: Beta II All times are in minutes (NTSC 2cm/sec PAL 1.85cm/sec)
For Beta I divide by 2. for Beta III multiply by 1.5
Tape: NTSC Time PAL/SECAM Time
L-125 30 30 (should be 32 in PAL)
L-250 60 65
L-370 N/A in the US 95 (It would be 90 minutes in NTSC)
L-500 120 130
L-750 180 195
L-830 200 215
I caculated the PAL speed to be about 1.85cm/sec....is this right?
can some one look it up in their manual?
180 minutes * 60 seconds * 2 cm/sec = 216 Meters
195 minutes * 60 seconds * 1.85 cm/sec = 216 Meters
Every tape will give you more time than what it is rated for.
Because the tape is 223 Meters you can get 185 NTSC minutes on it
or 200 PAL minutes.....or 3 hours 20 minutes, which is the time
on the next NTSC tape length L-830 (it's like getting 80 feet free)
If you use Beta III in PAL you could get 5.5 hours MAX.
(But I don't think PAL/SECAM Betas have any speed other than Beta II)
I thought all you video people might like to see some real numbers.
VHS NTSC is 3.335cm/sec SP 1.667cm/sec LP 1.111cm/sec EP
Which would put a T-120 at 240 Meters But the box says 246m/807ft.
807 feet is 246 meters. but it sould be 123 minutes in NTSC SP.
Following the same drop in speed as beta a NTSC T-120 would become
a PAL T-130....not a T-180.....BUT the PAL VHS system may
have dropped the SP speed more than Beta dropped its speed.
To trun a NTSC T-120 into a PAL T-180 the SP tape speed would
have to be 2.28cm/sec and to get 8 hours you would need a tape speed
of 0.854cm/sec which would leave a picture I would not want to watch.
A NTSC T-180 may get 8 hours on a PAL LP system.....
Some one should check tapes and manuals for tape length (feet/time)
and Tape speed (cm/sec)
Vidiot
<
<Speed in and of itself, doesn't affect the video quality. It is the head
<configurations that do that. Narrower heads for slower tape speed to
<increase the density gives a poorer signal to noise ratio. The speed of
<the tape to the head is actually faster on a slow speed recording, but the
<difference are so minute it makes no differnce. Where speed change vs
<quality shows up is in the linear audio track.
Not true, speed in and of itself does make a difference in the quality.
Unfortunately I don't have the exact details as to why. But, the proof is
in the viewing. You can take a top-of-the-line two-head machine, ie, the
heads are cut for EP speed, and make both a SP and an EP recording and you
will see that the EP video quality is poorer than the SP video quality.
Unfortunately the JVC technical reference manual for one of the VCRs that
I have only gives SP specs, so I don't know the differences between SP and
EP. Someone did post the information once, explain why EP is so poor.
ele...@canterbury.ac.nz
> This is brought on from the message that said PAL VHS LP had 8 hours.
> I don't know about VHS but for Beta here are the times
> As we all know VHS tapes are rated by TIME not LENGTH.
> Beta tapes are by LENGTH not TIME. So a T-120 NTSC may be a T-180 PAL
NTSC tapes are not used at all (I believe they work, but as you have said,
don't have the same length). PAL/SECAM VHS tapes are cut to time lengths
like the NTSC ones.
We have E-180 tapes - they are 258m long. We also have E-240 tapes. They
play at normal speed for 4 hours or half speed for 8 hours, so I assume
they are around 344m. I can check one at home if you like...
DAve
David E A Wilson
>Oops, missed the Ozzie return address. PAL VHS machine SP mode is actually
>between the NTSC SP and LP modes, whereas a NTSC T-120 = PAL E-180. To get
>8 hours of recordings, a NTSC T-160 = PAL E-240. Double that for LP speeds.
E-180 = 3 hours SP, 6 hours LP E-240 = 4 hours SP, 8 hours LP
23.39 mm/sec SP, 11.695 mm/sec LP
>Have you tried playing a tape recorded with video as well as audio? Can
>you play it back OK? You are correct in that the VCR's servo circuits had
>to slow down the tape speed, which is determined by the control track pulses.
My VCR wont record LP video but we tried it with another machine which can
record LP video & audio (unfortunately only mono linear - not hifi). According
to my collegue, the sound was fine but the video was monochrome and streaky -
rather like playing an NTSC signal into a PAL monitor.
--
Geoffrey Scott Puterbaugh
issue of "The Perfect Vision" (winter 86/87): Philip
Greenspun, "The Truth About Hi-Fi Video Tapes and Video
Technology." Listening panels of experienced audiophiles,
psychophysics researchers, and naive listeners. The
competition was between a Nakamichi Dragon (cassette)
and four or five HiFi VCRs. The results of the test
were surprising: *everyone* found the Dragon to be the
clear winner. HiFi video decks obtain their "great
dynamic range" with a cheap compander chip. A good
cassette or reel-to-reel tape deck could also put in the
same cheap compander chip and get a signal/noise ratio
of over 100 db. But they don't and won't: the chip
destroys the music.
This has nothing to do with analog/digital. All these
systems are Analog Audio Tape recording devices.
The VHS/Beta "hi-fi" marketing campaign focused on
the dynamic range ("almost as good as CDs!") and neglected
to point out that video recorders *for audio* are
audibly inferior to cassette decks, not to mention
reel-to-reel -- or even DATs.
Another problem is those flying heads. Everyone who
has rented a videotape formerly rented 40-50 times
knows how much life expectancy these tapes have.
The oxide just flys off the videotapes.
Best regards,
Geoff Puterbaugh
Brendan Jones
> The VHS/Beta "hi-fi" marketing campaign focused on
> the dynamic range ("almost as good as CDs!") and neglected
> to point out that video recorders *for audio* are
> audibly inferior to cassette decks, not to mention
> reel-to-reel -- or even DATs.
In my practical experience, having recorded many CD tracks onto my hi-fi VCR,
is that the sound quality, in direct comparsion to the CD source, is *very*
good. Not quite as good as the original (I don't expect it to be) but a
darn side better than my ordinary cassette deck or reel to reel. Also, you
might have a cheap compander chip in your deck, but that's not universal.
Tape hiss from a hi-fi recorded track is inaudible. To check this, push your
recording level controls on your VCR down to minus infinity and record
anything (ie you're effectively recording silence). Then play the VCR tape
back through your high-end hi-fi system and listen to the hiss. THERE ISN'T
ANY!!
Don't try to tell me that a VCR with a head to tape speed for audio of over
4 metres per second is going to give a better SNR than compact cassette at
44 mm/s or reel to reel at 125 mm/s.
--
Brendan Jones | ACSnet: bre...@otc.otca.oz | "Me and
R&D Contractor | UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan | my baby
Services R&D | Phone: (02)2873128 Fax: (02)2873299 | in '69"
|||| OTC || | Snail: GPO Box 7000 Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA | Bryan Adams