Best VCR brand??
Kevin
What is the best VCR brand in terms of recording quality and
reliability??
Thanks!
sidenote:
I purchased a JVC VCR (HR-VP693U) but find it quite inadequate with
respect to picture recording quality. I also find it lacking in some
features
from another JVC VCR that I own that is 10 years older! And both
are entry-level models.
Mike Hartigan
> Hello,
>
> What is the best VCR brand in terms of recording quality and
> reliability??
When I finally tired of fighting with <$100 VCRs a few
years ago, I bought a $300 Sony and haven't looked back.
I don't know if this is the 'best' in it's class, but if
I'm forced to buy my next one blind (no time to do any
research), I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Sony.
Just my 2 cents.
Steve McDonald
Try a JVC S-VHS top of the line VCR model. The new HR-S9900U can
be found for $418. from Camera World. Last year's HR-S9800U is priced
at $360. there. I have made all my JVC S-VHS top models last at least 5
years, under heavy daily use for TV program recording and making
distribution copies of my own productions. Even on EP speed, the
picture quality has been excellent. If you save a few dollars by buying
VHS or low-end S-VHS models, their reduced performance and durability
won't give you nearly as much for your money. I use Fuji S-VHS tapes
and TDK EHG for VHS and ET recording. The Fuji pro H-471-S S-VHS tape
is the very best, although their cheaper consumer S-VHS tape is quite
good for the money.
Steve McDonald
Andrew Rossmann
bigroc...@webtv.net says...
I've had poor luck with high-end JVC's, and Sony. A '92 HR-S4700U lasted
over 5 years, but tended to damage the edge of tapes (I had it serviced,
but they couldn't duplicate or fix it). A '97 Sony lasted less than 1 year
(would abruptly lose power internally and lose all settings). A '98 HR-
S9500U lasted barely 2 years (part of the plastic control/guide rail on
the bottom broke, causing it to jam and not feed the tape). A now 1-year-
old HR-S3800U I bought as an emergency replacement for the 9500 still
works, but is no better than standard VHS.
My second VCR is a 7.5 year-old Toshiba M650 standard VHS. Still going
strong.
Both VCR's are used for heavy time-shifting (3-4 hours/day.)
Consumer Reports has Panasonic at the top for VCR reliability.
--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross
Pepe Duran
"Mike Hartigan" <mi...@hartigan.dot.com> wrote in message
news:3c6d49c1$0$1603$272e...@news.execpc.com...
Chris
news:H7jb8.30000$Zu6.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> JVC is far superior than SONY. IN MY OPINION
I've used a lot of really nice Sony electronics. I've also used a lot of JVC
electronics that are 99% as nice for 75% of the price.
Of course, with regards to consumer VCRs, JVC invented VHS.... better go
with the master instead of the student....
--
Chris
Remove "no" and "spam" to e-mail.
= =
"Pong is an RPG. You role-play and ping paddle. The squaresoft varient of
this is a blue haired ping pong paddle."
= =
Kevin
> Of course, with regards to consumer VCRs, JVC invented VHS.... better go
> with the master instead of the student....
Yeah, but just look at how Obi-Wan turned out... ;)
--
Kevin
Bob Kaplow
You'll change your mind if you ever need repair service. I've been in many
shops who have hourly repair rates clearly posted with a note underneath
that they are doubled for Sony products. And even in dealing direct with
Sony, I've never had a broken Sony product that any one could properly
repair. That includes 3 TVs, 2 CD players, and a VCR.
"I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed.
The U.S. government will lead the American people in and the
West in general into an unbearable hell and a choking life."
26-October, 2001: A day that will live in infamy
Support Freedom: http://www.indefenseoffreedom.org/
Bob Kaplow
> I've had poor luck with high-end JVC's, and Sony. A '92 HR-S4700U lasted
> Consumer Reports has Panasonic at the top for VCR reliability.
Panasonic and JVC are both divisions of Matsushita.
Bob Kaplow
> "Pepe Duran" <pepeUND...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:H7jb8.30000$Zu6.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> JVC is far superior than SONY. IN MY OPINION
>
> I've used a lot of really nice Sony electronics. I've also used a lot of JVC
> electronics that are 99% as nice for 75% of the price.
>
> Of course, with regards to consumer VCRs, JVC invented VHS.... better go
> with the master instead of the student....
JVC (part of Matsushita along with Panasonic and Quasar) and Sony
**JOINTLY** invented VHS. After Sony engineers looked at the resulting
product, they decided that what they already had was better. They were
right, but marketing won out over technology.
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers
"Steve McDonald" <bigroc...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6862-3C6...@storefull-2111.public.lawson.webtv.net...
This is OT but their is little, or no, difference between the quality of
tape inside the cassette holder. It does not make good economic sense for
the manufacturer to run two production lines when one will do the job. S-VHS
cassettes have an extra little hole on the underside and if you reproduce
that little hole on the standard VHS cassette it will function as S-VHS.
Turn the cassettes over with the opening flap at the top and the 3mm hole is
23mm up from the bottom and 3mm in from the left hand side. Reproduce that
little hole and your standard cassette will function as a S-VHS. Use a good
quality VHS tape and you will not be able to tell the difference but you
will save a lot of money.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots for Sincerely),
Auld Bob Peffers,
b...@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
Web Site, *The Eck's Files*
http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk/
Steve McDonald
It is not just a marketing ploy to label some tapes of the same
quality as VHS and others as S-VHS. True S-VHS tapes have a particle
coating that is finer-grained and more uniform, to match the shorter
wavelengths of the higher luminence carrier frequency. If you punch out
an S-VHS indicator hole on a VHS cassette, an S-VHS VCR will record on
it in that format, but there will be a weaker picture with increased
video noise. The purpose of having an S-VHS recorder for higher quality
will be defeated.
It's possible that some manufacturers may produce counterfeit S-VHS
tapes, that are nothing but VHS cassettes with S-VHS indicator holes and
labels. But since I use nothing but Fuji S-VHS tapes, I don't have this
problem. If I used a tape for S-VHS that didn't have the proper
fine-grained coating, I would notice it immediately.
The ET recording mode on some S-VHS VCRs uses a method that adds a
segment of
higher-frequency luminence information above the normal VHS carrier, but
it's not as high-frequency as that of regular S-VHS and doesn't result
in much added noise with good quality VHS tapes. A similar thing was
done some years ago, when 3/4" U-Matic had an extra segment of
higher-frequency signal added above the standard carrier and produced
U-Matic SP. This raised the horizontal resolution from 280 lines to 330
lines. The old U-Matic VCRs ignore this added segment and play back SP
recordings at standard resolution.
I've never had a standard VHS VCR. Does anyone know what happens
if you try to play back an S-VHS ET recording in one of them?
A non-ET S-VHS VCR will play back an ET recording made on another VCR
with fairly good results, but the picture won't be as clean nor have the
highest edge of sharpness as a true S-VHS recording.
Steve McDonald
Jeff Wildman
as the one VHS adopted, but that's where the similarity ended. There was no joint developement
venture between JVC and Sony. There was an attempt by all major manufacturers to agree on a
common home video standard, but it never happened.
Andrew Rossmann
bigroc...@webtv.net says...
An SVHS-ET recording appears to be no different than standard SVHS. As
far as I can tell, it's just SVHS with the ability to ignore the hole. It
MIGHT alter equalization/bias for the different tape, but I doubt it. The
only way to prove it would be to take a standard tape and record SVHS-ET
on it. Then run some tests to determine the quality. Then put a hole in
the cassette and try it as 'real' SVHS. Is the quality the same, worse,
better??
SVHS-ET will NOT play back properly in a standard VHS player unless it
has Quasi-SVHS Playback capability.
Derek Gee
"Bob Kaplow" <kapl...@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars> wrote in message
news:eiQxB5...@eisner.encompasserve.org...
> In article <MPG.16d74b69a...@netnews.att.net>, Andrew Rossmann
<andyross@no_junk.worldnet.att.net> writes:
> > I've had poor luck with high-end JVC's, and Sony. A '92 HR-S4700U
lasted
> <snip>
> > Consumer Reports has Panasonic at the top for VCR reliability.
>
> Panasonic and JVC are both divisions of Matsushita.
It doesn't matter that Panasonic and JVC are both divisions of Matsushita.
JVC is run fairly autonomously and builds its own machines. The JVC
machines ARE NOT as reliable as the Panasonics. In the Consumer Reports
list from the 2002 Buying Guide, JVC is about 3/4 of the way down. The top
five are:
1. Panasonic
2. Quasar
3. Sanyo
4. Sharp
5. Toshiba
I'd be inclined to look at only those manufacturers, or maybe the pro models
if I was really concerned about durability. The consumer machines are
almost all throwaways if they break out of warranty and you can't fix
yourself.
Derek Gee
Chris
news:a4khnq$8ha$3...@driftwood.ccs.carleton.ca...
(In a green, glowing, freaky sort of way...) "Use the force Sony, use the
force..."
Dave Haynie
<mi...@hartigan.dot.com> wrote:
>On 15 Feb 2002 08:21:31 -0800, Kevin said...
>> Hello,
>>
>> What is the best VCR brand in terms of recording quality and
>> reliability??
>When I finally tired of fighting with <$100 VCRs a few
>years ago, I bought a $300 Sony and haven't looked back.
Guess it depends on what you're looking for. If you're mastering tapes
on VHS, get a decent SuperVHS deck. I paid about $625 for my JVC
HR-S6900U back in 1994, and it's been working well ever since. The
current version of this high-spec "Prosumer" deck has a much lower
price, more advanced features. Some of the better prosumer decks also
have built-in TBCs, most have much more rugged mechanisms than your
$100 Wal-Mart special, etc.
>I don't know if this is the 'best' in it's class, but if
>I'm forced to buy my next one blind (no time to do any
>research), I wouldn't hesitate to buy another Sony.
If you're just looking for VHS-only for time-shifting (assuming you
can't afford a TiVo, which is infinitely better for that purpose) or
rentals (assuming you don't want DVD for some reason, which is
infinitely better for that purpose), you do generally get what you pay
for. The low end decks have very cheap mechanisms, some are mono-only,
or don't have video inputs (only RF), etc.
Dave Haynie | Chief Technology Officer, Merlancia Industries
dha...@jersey.net| "The weather is here, I wish you were beautiful" - J. Buffett
Neuman - Ruether
(Kevin) wrote:
>What is the best VCR brand in terms of recording quality and
>reliability??
There has been a good discussion above of SVHS and
deck-reliability, but I would also like to know what
are the best decks for VHS SP-mode stereo copying from
DV for distribution... I have a pretty decent Panasonic
VHS deck (about $350 several years ago), but copies made
on it, while fairly good, are noticeably inferior to ones
made by EK Media from the same Mini-DV originals...
David Ruether
rp...@cornell.edu
http://www.ferrario.com/ruether
Hey, check out www.visitithaca.com too...!
Leon Dang
> > > I've had poor luck with high-end JVC's, and Sony. A '92 HR-S4700U
> lasted
> <snip>
> > > Consumer Reports has Panasonic at the top for VCR reliability.
> >
> > Panasonic and JVC are both divisions of Matsushita.
>
> It doesn't matter that Panasonic and JVC are both divisions of Matsushita.
> JVC is run fairly autonomously and builds its own machines. The JVC
> machines ARE NOT as reliable as the Panasonics. In the Consumer Reports
> list from the 2002 Buying Guide, JVC is about 3/4 of the way down. The top
> five are:
>
> 1. Panasonic
> 2. Quasar
> 3. Sanyo
> 4. Sharp
> 5. Toshiba
>
> I'd be inclined to look at only those manufacturers, or maybe the pro models
> if I was really concerned about durability. The consumer machines are
> almost all throwaways if they break out of warranty and you can't fix
> yourself.
Consumer Reports isn't always right, and reliability of mechanical
products is one of the hardest to test. Basically it has a lot to do
with how people treat the products on a daily basis. It also depends
on heavily on the model.
VCRs of the 80s were built like tanks. I owned an Akai in those days,
and it ran without a glitch for nearly 15 years with only a minor
repair after it reached 10 years. It was built in Japan and it was
tough.
I now own a 6head JVC VCR that is used heavily and is nearing ten
years of age, built in Japan. It has not required serviced at all. The
image is still crisp, sound remains intact, recordings continue to fly
through like a breeze. There were only a couple of occassions where I
put in pretty old tapes that caused tape wind clog in the VCR - that
was easily cureable by lifting of the lid and feeding the tape out
(although I don't recommend this to the average person). But it is
running fine.
On the otherhand, I've seen Sanyo and Sharp products choke.
Personally, I've never agreed to any consumer report - cars
especially. Comon - how are you able to determine reliability based on
a short period and running the extremes on such products. Some
products are surely dodgy and you know right off.
Andrew Rossmann
zer...@ausi.com says...
> Consumer Reports isn't always right, and reliability of mechanical
> products is one of the hardest to test. Basically it has a lot to do
> with how people treat the products on a daily basis. It also depends
> on heavily on the model.
CR's reliability listings come from the annual questionaire they send to
subscribers, not short-term testing. This gives not only long term
numbers, but a very large database to work from.
Derek Gee
news:f902d5c.02021...@posting.google.com...
Leon,
I think you are misinformed about how Consumers Reports arrives at the
reliability rankings. They survey the readers of the magazine and
statistically determine which ones have problems. The short period testing
you are referring to is usability testing. Usability is much more dependant
on how
well the reviewers like on thing or another. Durability is not.
Regarding their automotive reliability rankings - I'm a car buff and I work
for a large automotive manufacturer. I monitor quality data from three
sources - JD Power, Consumer Reports, and the automaker's own internal
quality data. More often then not, all three sources agree!! With JD Power
data, you need to look at the long-term durability data, not the three
months in service data. I do this because people often ask me which model
they should buy, and I don't want to give them a bum steer. Also, I want to
avoid buying a problem vehicle for myself.
Derek Gee
Bob Kaplow
> I think you are misinformed about how Consumers Reports arrives at the
> reliability rankings. They survey the readers of the magazine and
> statistically determine which ones have problems. The short period testing
> you are referring to is usability testing. Usability is much more dependant
> on how
> well the reviewers like on thing or another. Durability is not.
>
> Regarding their automotive reliability rankings - I'm a car buff and I work
> for a large automotive manufacturer. I monitor quality data from three
> sources - JD Power, Consumer Reports, and the automaker's own internal
> quality data. More often then not, all three sources agree!! With JD Power
> data, you need to look at the long-term durability data, not the three
> months in service data. I do this because people often ask me which model
> they should buy, and I don't want to give them a bum steer. Also, I want to
> avoid buying a problem vehicle for myself.
The place CR falls flat on its face is when you get even barely over the
line of mainstream mass market products. Either they never even cover the
high end, or what they have to say isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
Ditto for most of the other mass market review sources.
CR doesn't even know that high end audio exists. Show me an issue that
discusses Krell electronics vs its competition. Or state of the art vacuum
tube preamps.
Ditto for cars. When is the last time CR reviewed Porsche vs Ferrari vs
Viper? How about a Rolls Royce? Nope. Nothing but Taurus vs Lumina. And
Honda vs Toyota.
Milton Kowinowski
a year. Their service contract if very short. Then 6 months later
that one broke. Now I have a walmart special and it's been working
without a hitch for almost a year. Sure the quality isn't as great as
others, but I don't record much. If I rent something, it's on DVD
Rog
should not be expected to provide either the quality or reliability of
an industrial or pro deck. The assumption may be that the poor
inherent quality associated with VHS does not require much more than a
pretty box and a fast-talking salesman.
If you are concerned with picture quality you should keep in mind that
if it's worth recording at all, it is worth using S-VHS. Don't waste
your money on consumer boxes. If you want a low-profile unit that
doesn't have a "pro" look, consider the Panasonic AG-1980, Sony
SLV-R1000 or SLC-R5UC, all of which have favorably commented on.
These have the additional benefit of internal TBC, allowing the
recording of Macrovision material, if that's a concern. The good news
is that there are plenty of pro recorders available now, since the
stations are all converting to digital.
--Rog
On 15 Feb 2002 08:21:31 -0800, kevin...@hotmail.com (Kevin) wrote: