Old RCA CED Video Disk Player

185 views
Skip to first unread message

Keith Delong

unread,
Apr 8, 1990, 9:39:56 PM4/8/90
to
I saw this old Video Disk player made by RCA that had a CED logo on it.
It was real cheap. What are the differences between this Laser Disk
player and the Newer Style?

Thanks!

Keith
del...@frith.msu.edu

c.e.malloy..iii

unread,
Apr 9, 1990, 8:26:57 AM4/9/90
to
In an article Keith Delong writes:
>I saw this old Video Disk player made by RCA that had a CED logo on it.
>It was real cheap. What are the differences between this Laser Disk
>player and the Newer Style?


READ THIS:

WARNING: CED PLAYERS CANNOT READ LASER DISCS!!!

CED is not LD. Back about 10 years ago, RCA released a movie disk
format called C.E.D. (I have forgotten exactly what it stood for,
so I'll not try.) This format is NOTHING like Laser Disc. RCA
introduced it to compete with the then slowly growing Laser Disc
market. It was cheeper. While Laser Players cost around $1,000,
The CED players cost around $300. Software cost about the same
for both formats. But, they are functionally different. While
a Laser Disc uses a laser to read the encoded information (hence
the name ;-), CED uses a needle riding in a groove to read it.

The CED player is probably very cheep because no one is producing
any software for it. And without software, it's not worth the cost
of turning it on.


Think of it this way:

Video Audio Work Alike
----- -----------------
CED Record
LV Compact Disc
VHS Cassette Tape
BETA Cassette Tape *
SVHS Digital Audio Tape

I Hope that this helps.

Clancy Malloy
att!ihlpf!cem

* Maybe Beta should equal 8-Tracks since is seems to be ending up
as a dead format. But, since 'Beta > VHS' and '8-track < Cassette'
for quality not quanity, I could not bring myself to do that.

Ken A. Nishimura

unread,
Apr 9, 1990, 3:29:01 PM4/9/90
to
In article <14...@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> fr...@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (c.e.malloy..iii,ih,) writes:

>Think of it this way:
>
>Video Audio Work Alike
>----- -----------------
>CED Record
>LV Compact Disc
>VHS Cassette Tape
>BETA Cassette Tape *
>SVHS Digital Audio Tape
>
>

>* Maybe Beta should equal 8-Tracks since is seems to be ending up
> as a dead format. But, since 'Beta > VHS' and '8-track < Cassette'
> for quality not quanity, I could not bring myself to do that.

I have to object to equating SVHS with DAT. SVHS, although
it does have better luminance resolution still suffers from many
of the problems of VHS, most notably chroma problems. In this
respect, regular Beta is still better. Perhaps a better
analogy would be

VHS = Type I Cassette
BETA = Type II Cassette
S-VHS = Shoddy Type IV Cassette
ED-Beta = Type IV Cassette
D-1 and D-2 = DAT

This sort of equates luma bandwidth with audio frequency response...

-ken

Bob Niland

unread,
Apr 9, 1990, 10:55:07 AM4/9/90
to
re: > I saw this old Video Disk player made by RCA that had a CED logo on it.

> It was real cheap. What are the differences between this Laser Disk

^^^^^^^^^^


> player and the Newer Style?

CED (Capacitive Electronic Disc) is not a "laser disk". CED uses a
grooved disk and a stylus (which detects the metal pit holes via capacitance).

CED players cannot play LDs, and vice versa. CED players and disks have not
been made for years. The player you are contemplating is "real cheap"
because you will some difficulty finding anything to play on it.

Bob Niland Internet:r...@hpfcrjn.FC.HP.COM UUCP:[hpfcse|hplabs]!hpfcla!rjn

Bill Vermillion

unread,
Apr 10, 1990, 12:58:20 AM4/10/90
to
In article <14...@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> fr...@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (c.e.malloy..iii,ih,) writes:
>In an article Keith Delong writes:
>>I saw this old Video Disk player made by RCA that had a CED logo on it.
>>It was real cheap. What are the differences between this Laser Disk
>>player and the Newer Style?
>
>
>READ THIS:
>
>WARNING: CED PLAYERS CANNOT READ LASER DISCS!!!
>
Okay - let's not re-write history. A few points need clarify.

>CED is not LD. Back about 10 years ago, RCA released a movie disk
>format called C.E.D. (I have forgotten exactly what it stood for,
>so I'll not try.)

After the CED logo on all the discs it says "Capacitance Electronic Disk
System"

> This format is NOTHING like Laser Disc. RCA
>introduced it to compete with the then slowly growing Laser Disc
>market. It was cheeper. While Laser Players cost around $1,000,
>The CED players cost around $300.

The first manual RCA system CEJ-100's were $500 - and the lasers were about
$800. When SJ400's came out they were down to about $450.

> Software cost about the same
>for both formats.

While the very first discs for laser players (when only Maganavox had them)
there were a couple of titles listed a $9.95 and a few at $14.95 - but they
really never made it to the market. CED disks were typically $10 cheaper than
LD's. And when the CED was pulled from the marketplace laser disk prices went
up. The competition was good. At one time RCA had almost 1400 titles in
print (with one local store having over 800 titles on display), and Pioneer
only had 1/2 that many.


>But, they are functionally different. While
>a Laser Disc uses a laser to read the encoded information (hence
>the name ;-), CED uses a needle riding in a groove to read it.

One of the great misunderstandings about the CED's is around this point. The
"needle" stylus rides in a groove. The information is is recorded in pits
beneath the groove and varies the capacitance in the pickup. The groove was
nothing more than a way to guide the stylus. It is NOT at all similar to
LP's. The stylus would move in the track, an angle change in the stylus
carrying mechanism was sensed, and a motor would move the arm. Very similar
to tangetial arm phono pickups.

The plus side of using the groove to guide is that you had to only have an
information track, and the physical groove replaced a servo track. The other
capacitance system, the JVC VHD system, used a flat disk (no grooves). Two
capacitance tracks were underneath the surface of the disk. One to guide the
"sled" as it it was called, the other picked up the information. JVC was able
to get 1 hour per side on 10" disks. While it enjoyed success in Japan it was
never introduced here. I saw a JVC demo of the unit about 1980 or so.

>The CED player is probably very cheep because no one is producing
>any software for it. And without software, it's not worth the cost
>of turning it on.

Lot's of places still have OLD stock on discs. Typical price is $5.00 per.
Just like anything discontinued.

>
>
>Think of it this way:
>
>Video Audio Work Alike
>----- -----------------
>CED Record

No! Totally different storage mechanisms.

>LV Compact Disc
Similar. Both are laser read, but LV is analog CD is digital

>VHS Cassette Tape
>BETA Cassette Tape *
>SVHS Digital Audio Tape

Don't agree at all!

As I said - let's not re-write history. Of the 6 video disc formats that have
been produced it was just luck and persitance that the current one took off.

I always felt the Thompson format would have been the best for convenience.
It was a transmissive laser, and the information was recorded beneath the
surface. You could play either side of the disc just by refocusing the laser
and you never turned the disc over.

The Baird format was too early and too crude, but the idea was there (Late
1920's).

The Teldec format was used as a video jukebox in the late 70's.

The CED format we discussed above.

The current Phillips/Sony laser format we all know about.

The JVC VHD had a unique aspect in that it encoded the video signal with no
regard to final output. The discs were universal. By that I mean you could
take the same disk and play it on an NTSC system and it would play NTCS. Put
it on a PAL system it would play PAL. The output was determined by the player
and not the disc. At least that was the design. It had great potential for
AV work too. You had a choice of 4 channels and they could be split any way
you wanted from 4 audio and no vidoe, through 3 audio and 1 video, through 3
video and 1 audio. Great multi-media potential. But that part never made it
past the show demos. The pictures were great at the demo I saw. Same show
also had JVC's attempt at a digital tape recorder. 45 minutes in one dirction
with linear heads on a tape in Phillips cassette format. That WAS a hand
built prototype.


--
Bill Vermillion - UUCP: uunet!tarpit!bilver!bill
: bi...@bilver.UUCP

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages