Sony VCRs are rated the worst by Consumer Report
Jirong Gu
worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
Dana Rodakis
(Jirong Gu) wrote:
Since when does Consumer Reports have any idea what they're talking
about? All Sony equipment is a little more expensive than everyone else.
But, each piece of equipment is that much better in performance than
everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
KV-32XBR36) and 2 Sony VCRs (SL-HF400, SLV-R1000). Their performance is
top notch and I have never had trouble with any of them.
Bill Vermillion
That's just one model of a machine made by a company who has
produced virtually every video tape format that ever existed
except for such things as the "Time Machine" format (I never
remember what that was called), the V-cord, Technicolor 1/4",
and 2" quad.
Some machines that Sony makes - particularly in the pro end are
the best in the business. Without them TV would be very dull
:-)
Their R-5 - discontinued last year - was one of the finest
S-VHS units made for the consumer market - surpassed only by
industrial units that cost hundreds to thousands more.
--
Bill Vermillion - bi...@bilver.oau.org | bill.ve...@oau.org
John F. Machtinger
: In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
: (Jirong Gu) wrote:
: > In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
: > worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
: > catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
: Since when does Consumer Reports have any idea what they're talking
: about?
Trust me--I have the Sony SLV-770. The picture is very poor.
CU knows its stuff on this particular model. If you like good quality
video, don't buy that model.
--
__________________________________________________________________
jm...@netcom.com John F Machtinger Gun Law Press
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Drude
>everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
>KV-32XBR36) and 2 Sony VCRs (SL-HF400, SLV-R1000). Their performance is
>top notch and I have never had trouble with any of them.
mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
They rated the Sony SLV-770HF lower than just about every other stereo
deck they looked at. (Mitsubishi HS-u550 and Panasonic PV-4462 were
rated the highest.) They also rated the Sony SLV-420 near the bottom
for mono decks (Panasonic PV-4414 rated the best).
Anyway, I have found that Sony has become all-too-willing to slap their
name on just about everything anymore. Yes...Sony still makes the
best pro gear in the world. They also make some of the best PROsumer
stuff out there. But there is lots of low-end models with Sony labels
on them too. You cannot just assume that the Sony name makes it good.
I think there was a time, years ago, that you could depend on their
name alone, but those days are past.
Robert Wald
>In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
>(Jirong Gu) wrote:
>> In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>> worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>> catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
>Since when does Consumer Reports have any idea what they're talking
>about? All Sony equipment is a little more expensive than everyone else.
>But, each piece of equipment is that much better in performance than
>everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
I looked at the 770 after trying out the JVC-618, and for $30 more
or so, it was much better. Better picture, better designed, better motor.
1 or 2 less features, but the ones it had were implmented better.
I totally disagree with CR's report, and don't see how they came to that
conclusion. In fact, in my eyes it made CU look bad, not Sony.
And it's not like I'm a big Sony fan or enjoy paying more, but
it was worth it. I don't see how Sony could have dropped
that much in one year, and suspect a bad batch that CU looked at
(CU owns CR). But even so, I would expect them to double check, when
last year's review was so much different. THe same VCR series came
out first!
Totally separate question: My old Fisher VCR had 'one touch recording',
like most, but it let you delay the start time. Do they have a patent
on that? I ask because neither the JVC or Sony could delay the OTR,
and it is such a useful feature.
-Rob
Gregory Peter Dwight Siemens
: Dana Rodakis <dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com> writes:
:
: >everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
: >KV-32XBR36) and 2 Sony VCRs (SL-HF400, SLV-R1000). Their performance is
: >top notch and I have never had trouble with any of them.
:
: Consumer Reports did not look at the SLV-R1000. They looked at sub-$500
: mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
:
: They rated the Sony SLV-770HF lower than just about every other stereo
: deck they looked at. (Mitsubishi HS-u550 and Panasonic PV-4462 were
: rated the highest.) They also rated the Sony SLV-420 near the bottom
: for mono decks (Panasonic PV-4414 rated the best).
I agree the ones (SLV-7xx) I tested had a quite abit worse
picture than the toshiba M-760. Which incidentally, to harp on a point,
was nothing to write home about. My Magnavox VR9262 beat 'em both
(tracking adjusted) to my eyes.
: Anyway, I have found that Sony has become all-too-willing to slap their
: name on just about everything anymore. Yes...Sony still makes the
: best pro gear in the world. They also make some of the best PROsumer
: stuff out there. But there is lots of low-end models with Sony labels
: on them too. You cannot just assume that the Sony name makes it good.
: I think there was a time, years ago, that you could depend on their
: name alone, but those days are past.
Yup! Brand blindness is rampant in this group.
Greg...
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point
than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness
of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality." George Bernard Shaw
Robert Wald
>Dana Rodakis (dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com) wrote:
>: In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
>: (Jirong Gu) wrote:
>: > In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>: > worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>: > catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
> Trust me--I have the Sony SLV-770. The picture is very poor.
>CU knows its stuff on this particular model. If you like good quality
>video, don't buy that model.
Maybe it has been fixed? Mine is just fine.
-Rob
W. Warren Fernandez
: Dana Rodakis <dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com> writes:
:
: >everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
: >KV-32XBR36) and 2 Sony VCRs (SL-HF400, SLV-R1000). Their performance is
: >top notch and I have never had trouble with any of them.
:
: Consumer Reports did not look at the SLV-R1000. They looked at sub-$500
: mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
The SLV-R1000 is a consumer deck, by the way. Your above comment implies
it is prosumer, which is incorrect. And while I'm on the subject, I would
add that this deck is nowhere near as good as its predecessor, the
SLV-R5. I am very unimpressed with current Sony consumer VHS/SVHS products.
: They rated the Sony SLV-770HF lower than just about every other stereo
: deck they looked at. (Mitsubishi HS-u550 and Panasonic PV-4462 were
: rated the highest.) They also rated the Sony SLV-420 near the bottom
: for mono decks (Panasonic PV-4414 rated the best).
:
: Anyway, I have found that Sony has become all-too-willing to slap their
: name on just about everything anymore. Yes...Sony still makes the
: best pro gear in the world. They also make some of the best PROsumer
: stuff out there. But there is lots of low-end models with Sony labels
: on them too. You cannot just assume that the Sony name makes it good.
: I think there was a time, years ago, that you could depend on their
: name alone, but those days are past.
--
Warren Fernandez
war...@eecs.umich.edu
VGAi http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~warrenf/vgai.html
_
S H A R O N |O| a p p l e
| |
s h a r o n |_| A P P L E
Virtual Idol
F. Scott Porter
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: Sony VCRs are rated the worst by Consumer Report
> Date: 14 Mar 1995 12:19:20 -0500
> From: r...@panix.com (Robert Wald)
> Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
> Newsgroups: rec.video
> References: 1 , 2
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> In <dgra-12039...@4261.innet.com> dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com (Dana
Rodakis) writes:
>
> >In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
> >(Jirong Gu) wrote:
>
> >> In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
> >> worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
> >> catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
>
> >Since when does Consumer Reports have any idea what they're talking
> >about? All Sony equipment is a little more expensive than everyone else.
> >But, each piece of equipment is that much better in performance than
> >everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
>
> I looked at the 770 after trying out the JVC-618, and for $30 more
> or so, it was much better. Better picture, better designed, better motor.
> 1 or 2 less features, but the ones it had were implmented better.
> I totally disagree with CR's report, and don't see how they came to that
> conclusion. In fact, in my eyes it made CU look bad, not Sony.
> And it's not like I'm a big Sony fan or enjoy paying more, but
> it was worth it. I don't see how Sony could have dropped
> that much in one year, and suspect a bad batch that CU looked at
> (CU owns CR). But even so, I would expect them to double check, when
> last year's review was so much different. THe same VCR series came
> out first!
>
was very surprised that the 770 took such a nose dive in quality over
the previous years best (the 700). They bought 2 more of the same model
from separate sources to make sure that they hadn't gotten a bad sample.
All three units were consistently poor in their eyes.
Now I don't agree with all the reviews that CU performs you can't fault
them here for not double checking. Read the article if you want to
comment!
-- Scott.
(por...@ssd0.nrl.navy.mil)
Robert Wald
>In <dgra-12039...@4261.innet.com> dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com (Dana Rodakis) writes:
>>In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
>>(Jirong Gu) wrote:
>>> In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>>> worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>>> catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
>(CU owns CR). But even so, I would expect them to double check, when
>last year's review was so much different. THe same VCR series came
>out first!
Someone pointed out that they did recheck. I didn't see
that part of the article (reading quickly in Circuit City).
I still disagree, I just understand it less :-)
>-Rob
Mike Palmer
I don't know if this was just a bad batch of Sony HF770's or what, but I was
real surprised by CR's findings. What ticked me off about CR is once again,
they don't say what the problem was! Just, "we tried two other samples and
they were all bad!"
I've said it before & I'll say it again - Consumer reports should stick to
Vacuum cleaners & Food Processors and leave the high tech stuff to magazines
that can explain good & bad points of high tech equipment.
Manu people will infer that ALL HF770's are bad, and extend that to all
SONY VCR's are bad. I've got the Sony HF920 which is probably closely
related to the 770, in fact I think the only difference is the 920 has
flying erase heads. My (and several other netter's) 920 produces an
excellent picture. In fact one of the video mag's found the 920's picture
one of the best VHS pictures they'd seen!
Scott Chisholm
writes:
>Consumer Reports did not look at the SLV-R1000. They looked at sub-$500
>mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
Yeah but they were compared to other CONSUMER decks. Besides, aren't most
of us consumers (I know I consume)?
Michael T Durham
issue rated the Sony SLV-770HF as a "Premium Best Buy" while Consumer
REPORTS rated the same model dead last in their March 1995 issue. One
key difference between the two magazines is that Consumers DIGEST
accepts advertising while Consumer REPORTS does not. As a consumer, who
do you believe?
Mike Kai-Kan Yang
: The SLV-R1000 is a consumer deck, by the way. Your above comment implies
: it is prosumer, which is incorrect. And while I'm on the subject, I would
: add that this deck is nowhere near as good as its predecessor, the
: SLV-R5. I am very unimpressed with current Sony consumer VHS/SVHS products.
Just to add to this point, I am very disappointed with their
current offering on BETA line as well. The SLHF-2000 which I bought last
year was no where nearly as good as your SLHF-400 or its twin model
SL-700 which I bought back in 1987. I just cannot belive that Sony is
actually digressing as time goes on.
--
Mike Yang
University of British Columbia
Robert Wald
Usually, CR, but not if I disagree too often. And I wouldn't be
too jaded about CD.
However, I played with my VCR some last night. I still have to check
more, but a closer inspection showed questionable video quality on
ordinary tapes (still much better than the JVC 618, especially ergonomically).
My GE deck (4 heads, but no stereo) has a better picture (but
no clock in front for some odd reason).
You don't find this out until you read the JVC manual closely, but
it can't jog in reverse. Just 1 of many complaints.
Why don't VCR's have a lithium backup for their clocks??
-Rob
Todd Robinson
My Sony (585?) has a limited clock battery backup. Purchased it new and
has not had any problems. Choose it because I got a great deal. Otherwise,
I hate having to press that stupid ENTER button when changing channels!
=TR=
____________________________________________________________________________
trob...@spd.dsccc.com
{sig under construction, Merge Left}
John Becker
What did they say about JVC? If they ranked them high, it will confirm my
suspicion that in recent years Consumer Reports has gone way downhill. They may
do a good job of evaluating washers and dryers, but I wouldn't put much stock in
their opinion of hi-tech electronics.
BTW, I own both Sony and JVC VCRs, and I'd rate Sony much higher anyday. The
JVCs are great when they work, but their reliability stinks.
I bought tires for 2 cars based on Consumer Reports high ratings, and I was
greatly disappointed by the performance of both sets.
John
F. Scott Porter
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: Sony VCRs are rated the worst by Consumer
Report
> From: bec...@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (John Becker)
> Organization: Motorola CCRD
> Newsgroups: rec.video
> References: 1
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
The JVC HR-VP612U placed 2nd to dead last in a field of 16. The
top three in order were the Mitsubishi HS-U550, the Panasonic
PV-4462 and the Samsung VR8903. It is a decent article, you
should check it out.
I just bought a Misubishi U650 and so far it is a great machine.
I'm thoroughly pleased with it.
-- Scott.
Larry Micohn
As a former electronics retailer, my experience with Consumer Reports
has been they would only review products if the distributing company
would make a "donation" to Consumers' Union, so how do we know their
bias in rating a product doesn't extend to the size of that
"donation"? What it comes down to is bring your own tape to the store
and trust your own eyes.
LarryM
Mike Palmer
>LarryM
That sounds like "electronics retailer" fokelore! If I remember correctly
the maximum contribution accepted form any one company or individual is $500.
I seriously doubt Consumer Reports would risk their reputation for $500.
U59...@uicvm.uic.edu
>
>In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>,
>Jirong Gu <eab...@rigel.uci.edu> wrote:
>>In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>>worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>>catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
>
>What did they say about JVC? If they ranked them high, it will confirm my
>suspicion that in recent years Consumer Reports has gone way downhill. They
>stock in their opinion of hi-tech electronics.
Remember, Consumer Reports rates only one or two models out of the many
available from each manufacturer. You can't interpolate from their
ratings to different models from the same manufacturer. I have been
burned many times attempting just that. Just because you have a Sony
vcr with a different model number from the ones rated by Consumer
Reports that you are pleased with, that does not mean Consumer Reports
screwed up on the models they rated.
Many people have noted in this and other Usenet groups that the
quality of much Japanese consumer electronics seems to have
deteriorated over the last few years. Several have attributed the
problem to the attempts of Japanese manufacturers to maintain their
price points in the US despite the falling value of the US dollar
versus the Japanese yen. Normally, Japanese manufacturers would have
to increase their prices to compensate for lower valued US dollars.
Instead, they have largely opted to preserve price points and market
share, by reducing the quality and features of their products. I
observed this phenomenon when I purchased a Panasonic flat-screen TV
based on the high rating in Consumer Reports last year. The precise
model that had been rated was no longer available, so I bought the
model that replaced it. When I got it home, I found that some of the
features of the rated model were absent from the one I purchased.
I called Panasonic US to inquire about the absence, and was told that
no current Panasonic models had those features. (The feature I missed
most was the ability to store different sets of adjustments for each
video input).
>BTW, I own both Sony and JVC VCRs, and I'd rate Sony much higher anyday. The
>JVCs are great when they work, but their reliability stinks.
Consumer Reports do not factor reliability into their product ratings.
Instead, they report separately the repair records of earlier models
of the items under review to provide guidance in what to expect from
each manufacturer. It isn't practical to report reliability of the
items under review, as that would require long term testing and delay
publication. Publication of ratings is already delayed so long that
many of the items have been replaced by newer models by the time the
ratings are published.
- Alan Hinds
Ted Drude
>>Consumer Reports did not look at the SLV-R1000. They looked at sub-$500
>>mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
it is priced between what I would consider consumer decks (under $500)
and the prosumer line ($1500+). With a list price close to $1000,
it is at the high end of the consumer line...and delivers prosumer
performance.
It's not as well built (internally), but it has lots of features that
would only appeal to someone who wants to use it for video editing
or desktop video.
Ted Drude
>In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>,
>Jirong Gu <eab...@rigel.uci.edu> wrote:
>>In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>>worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>>catagory. Even worse, Sony VCRs are highest priced.
>
>What did they say about JVC? If they ranked them high, it will confirm my
after the Sony SLV-770HF).
They rated the JVC HR-VP412U as slightly worse than average for a
mono VHS deck.
Michael J. Fenech
<md...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>I find it very interesting that Consumers DIGEST in their December 1994
>issue rated the Sony SLV-770HF as a "Premium Best Buy" while Consumer
>REPORTS rated the same model dead last in their March 1995 issue.
I have always put Consumer Reports dead last on my list of references when
purchasing electronic equipment (or anything for that matter). I like to
get out and research my own purchases and let my own eyes, ears and brain
be the judge.
Michael J. Fenech
mfe...@hookup.net
Glenn Kiso
: In article <eabg083.2...@rigel.uci.edu>, eab...@rigel.uci.edu
: (Jirong Gu) wrote:
I second that motion... Consumer reports, though they may be a useful guide
on other home appliances and so forth (I hope), I don't even trust their
"Stereo" or "Video" recommendations. They seem to go for "specifications"
which usually isn't the best indication of performance and definitely not
for sound. Just my two cents worth
Dakota Drifter
Walkman, Home stereo CD changer, etc. I have had ZERO problems with them.
One thing I can tell you about Consumer Reports, they give their top ratings
to cheap stuff. I always research the various manufacturers of the particular
item I'm interested in buying, and Sony is always in the running. There's an old
saying... 'You get what you pay for'. It's usually true. While the products
endorsed by CR are supposedly of good quality, they are usually cheaper in price.
It seems that when I do buy something, it is almost always contrary to what
CR advises. I've never regretted a purchase yet, except for the subscription to CR.
Edward Rice
LM> Michael T Durham <md...@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:
LM>
> I find it very interesting that Consumers DIGEST in their December 1994
> issue rated the Sony SLV-770HF as a "Premium Best Buy" while Consumer
> REPORTS rated the same model dead last in their March 1995 issue. One
> key difference between the two magazines is that Consumers DIGEST
> accepts advertising while Consumer REPORTS does not. As a consumer, who
> do you believe?
>
LM> As a former electronics retailer, my experience with Consumer Reports
LM> has been they would only review products if the distributing company
LM> would make a "donation" to Consumers' Union, so how do we know their
LM> bias in rating a product doesn't extend to the size of that
LM> "donation"? What it comes down to is bring your own tape to the store
LM> and trust your own eyes.
You may be confusing Consumer Reports from Consumers Union -- neither of which
will accept ANY contribution or advertising from ANY commercial firm at all --
with Consumers Digest, whose rules are different and which does take
advertising. You might want to check on that, and post which one you really
intend to refer to after checking. Consumer Reports buys -- anonymously --
every single product they review, on the open market.
David C.W. Chiu
Ted Drude <tedd...@delphi.com> wrote:
>While the SLV-R1000 does not interface with Sony's SVHS editing systems,
>it is priced between what I would consider consumer decks (under $500)
>and the prosumer line ($1500+). With a list price close to $1000,
>it is at the high end of the consumer line...and delivers prosumer
>performance.
If you don't mind, please to share the information as to where SLVR1000
can be had for under $500. Most places local wanted upward of $800 for it.
Greg L. Kimnach
>That sounds like "electronics retailer" fokelore! If I remember correctly
>the maximum contribution accepted form any one company or individual is $500.
>I seriously doubt Consumer Reports would risk their reputation for $500.
yeah, but what is their reputation? heck, the last betamax reviewed (and got
their highest recommendation) was the sl-hf900. then came the 1000...ignored.
ed beta...ignored.
they are supposed to be _consumer_ rports, not mass market reports.
Greg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"ED Beta is simply the best consumer videotape format available."
--Video Magazine (Nov.1992, p. 30)
"Manufacturers may have a point when they perceive the U.S. consumer
electronics market as unsophisticated." --VideoMaker (March 1993, p. 88)
I opted for Betamax, the world for VHS. I for Amiga, the world for IBM clones.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JEFF HUM
>Dana Rodakis <dg...@qmgate.eci-esyst.com> wrote:
>>everyone, making it worth it. I now have 3 Sony TVs (KV-1917, KV-25XBR,
>>KV-32XBR36) and 2 Sony VCRs (SL-HF400, SLV-R1000). Their performance is
>>top notch and I have never had trouble with any of them.
>
>mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
The R1000 is also a consumer deck! Although it may be better than the
lower models, it is definitely not up to par with a JVC!
>Anyway, I have found that Sony has become all-too-willing to slap their
>name on just about everything anymore. Yes...Sony still makes the
>best pro gear in the world. They also make some of the best PROsumer
>stuff out there. But there is lots of low-end models with Sony labels
>on them too. You cannot just assume that the Sony name makes it good.
>I think there was a time, years ago, that you could depend on their
>name alone, but those days are past.
I agree... Some of their stuff is quite good (XVC900 Color Corrector)
while some is not quite up to par... In either case, they're
products are way overpriced.
Jeff.
JEFF HUM
>: Consumer Reports did not look at the SLV-R1000. They looked at sub-$500
>: mono and stereo VHS decks...in other words....CONSUMER decks.
>
>The SLV-R1000 is a consumer deck, by the way. Your above comment implies
>it is prosumer, which is incorrect. And while I'm on the subject, I would
>add that this deck is nowhere near as good as its predecessor, the
>SLV-R5. I am very unimpressed with current Sony consumer VHS/SVHS products.
I'm not only unimpressed with SONY but rather ALL the manufacturers!
The R5 was not too great anyways...
Jeff.
Allen B
writes:
> I'm not only unimpressed with SONY but rather ALL the manufacturers!
> The R5 was not too great anyways...
I believe the R5s (and that entire Sony model year, most likely) have
flaws in their design. I own two R5s and a 676 (same year, lower model)
and they have all come down with the same symptoms (and two of them have
multiple times, despite repairs). I'd like to write Sony to
complain, but don't know the proper address. Can anyone give it to me?
Additionally, I just bought a new JVC S-VHS deck (uh, something
something 9000, I think). The transport's smooth, but the user
interface is easily the worst I have ever worked with in every way. The
sound, especially in the tuner section is much inferior to the Sonys,
the video and hi-fi tracking are questionable, and the lack of more
ins and outs make the deck very hard to integrate into any reasonable
system. In a word, for a high-end deck, it bites.
If I could get my Sonys working as well as they did when I bought them,
I'd be much happier than I am with two limping Sonys (the other is out of
service contract and warming the bench 'til I feel like paying for
repairs) and the JVC.
On the other hand, I will not buy another Sony because their remotes
only support 3 VCRs (I already have 3!). JVC won't get much more out of
me either since they only support 2! Stupid companies! :-)
(I know I'm outside the average user curve, but the JVC has such
glaring problems I can't believe they made it the way they did.)
ab
Alexanderthe Great jr.
>>>In the March issue of Consumer Report magazine, Sony SLV-770 is rated the
>>>worst Hi-Fi VCR. Sony VCR is also ranked next to worst in the mono VCR
>>
>>What did they say about JVC? If they ranked them high, it will confirm my
>>suspicion that in recent years Consumer Reports has gone way downhill. They
No the quality of Japanese products has gone downhill!!!! This is from
my own experience as I MAJOR consumer of all sorts of hi-tech products.
Being a rather sophisticated user and very knowledgeable about
electronics (Ph.D. in EE) I don't always agree with with the simplistic
views of Consumer Reports on many tech. subjects, but I am convinced
that they are 100% impartial in their testing, UNLIKE EVERY other
magazine that publishes product tests.
>Remember, Consumer Reports rates only one or two models out of the many
>available from each manufacturer. You can't interpolate from their
>ratings to different models from the same manufacturer.
Absolutely 100% TRUE!
>vcr with a different model number from the ones rated by Consumer
>Reports that you are pleased with, that does not mean Consumer Reports
>screwed up on the models they rated.
Absolutely 100% TRUE!
>Many people have noted in this and other Usenet groups that the
>quality of much Japanese consumer electronics seems to have
>deteriorated over the last few years. Several have attributed the
>problem to the attempts of Japanese manufacturers to maintain their
>price points in the US despite the falling value of the US dollar
>versus the Japanese yen. Normally, Japanese manufacturers would have
>to increase their prices to compensate for lower valued US dollars.
>Instead, they have largely opted to preserve price points and market
>share, by reducing the quality and features of their products. I
Let me add my voice to the number of consumers who have already
attested to this.
If -I- was asked to explain the phenomenon, I couldn't have said
it better.
As an aside, it's probably time for the revival of a domestic consumer
electronics industry, but I know I'm dreaming...
Alexander Kanaris