VHS vs. Beta
dim...@ucla-cs.uucp
vtr 34a (is this the correct model?) for $460+tax. I had to go
through the VHS vs. Beta dilemma, and I decided for VHS for 2 reasons:
before getting the machine I talked with 7 video rentals and 2 told
me that they didn't cary Beta stuff. I also saw more VHS movies than
Beta's. Second, my friends have VHS.
I learned that you can't have VHS & hi-fi. Who cares? I watch tv, I
never really listen to it (do you?). [Yes, I don't want my mtv!].
Are you gonna keep waiting until they develop the write laser disc
recorder?
If your performance measure is chuminos ($$$$), then you should realize
that you can get a $300 (acutally 299) Beta machine, with no frills, from
Toshiba or Sanyo (how's their quality?). I had to pay 50% more to get VHS
format...
I guess it depends on what you want. Do you want to see movies, use up more
space for cassettes, and have a great selection? Then go VHS. Are you into
hi-fi multi-tickles high-tech weaponry-this-is-for-me!, then go ahead and
get Beta.
Do you agree?
Adolfo (dim...@ucla-locus.arpa)
///
bra...@trwspp.uucp
>> I learned that you can't have VHS & hi-fi. Who cares? I watch tv, I
>> never really listen to it (do you?). [Yes, I don't want my mtv!]. Are
>> you gonna keep waiting until they develop the write laser disc
>> recorder?
You can't have a VHS hi-fi? I thought Panasonic just came out with one?
On another subject, I don't remember the company, but I saw an add for
an all-in-one camara that used real VHS tapes, not the Kodak 8mm tape.
Anyone know anything about it?
-- Brad Brahms
usenet: {decvax,ucbvax}!trwrb!trwspp!brahms
arpa: Brahms@USC-ECLC
Jeff Meyer
>space for cassettes, and have a great selection? Then go VHS. Are you into
>hi-fi multi-tickles high-tech weaponry-this-is-for-me!, then go ahead and
>get Beta.
>
>Do you agree?
>
> Adolfo (dim...@ucla-locus.arpa)
> ///
Not quite... I think another reason to go Beta is that, from many responses,
the Beta format is better engineered -- VHS was built to get around the Sony
patent rights, for the most part. I know many people with VHS models who
have to take them in for tune-ups about once a year... the few who do this
for Beta units seem to be the ones who have 4-head (instead of two-head)
Beta, which are usually non-Sony models. Hoever, I agree on one point... if
you're REALLY into getting movies (without hi-fi), you'll probably have more
selection on VHS. I chose Beta for the lower maintenance costs, the better
picture (and the hi-fi audio), and the fact that I want to do a lot of
TV-recording (Hill Street and St. Elsewhere start in a month....)
"It looks just like a photon pod... but in verrry bad taste."
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!mori...@uw-beaver.ARPA
P.LAMASTER
If anyone has seen an ad for a true standard VHS camrecorder, please
let me know...I've been looking for one for over a year and was
about to give up. Zenith and JVC make "VHS compatible" camrecorders
which use mini-tapes that must be played back on the camrecorder or
via a converter...I've decided that those don't fill my wants.
Lately I've been considering the SONY Betamovie...does anyone know
if I can do playback on it and hook the video out to the video in
of my VHS machine? That way I'd have both VHS and Beta availability.
Pete LaMaster NJ (201)949-5009 ihnp4!hou2f!pvlm
Gordon Davisson
I recently acquired for a time a Granada (local TV rental place; I believe
the actual brand name is Hitachi) VHS recorder from a friend, primarily to
copy Doctor Who tapes a friend in California is sending me (are you reading
this, Dave?). I also have a Beta SL-5100 (not particularly new) machine, so
I have had the opportunity to compare the machines close-up.
The two machines compare feature-wise: they both have seven-day timers,
pause and fast-forward and reverse scan. The VHS machine also has a "frame-
advance" feature which the Beta lacks, but I consider that minor, as it isn't
terribly useful. The paused picture on both machines is pretty bad by today's
standard. The main difference is the fact that the VHS machine is slow!
There is a several-second delay when pressing "play" on the VHS machine for
the picture to come up on the screen, compared to about 2 seconds on the Beta.
If you press "rewind" on the VHS machine while it's playing, it pauses several
seconds before it begins to scan, while the Beta machine does it instantly.
My overall impressions of the VHS machine are that it is clunky and slow.
I suppose people who've had VHS exclusively don't notice this as much, not
knowing that there is a better way, but when you have to live with one after
having Beta, I begin to consider kicking it. I'll take Beta, thank you.
Human: Jamie Green @ Gordon's Account
UUCP: {ihnp4,decvax,tektronix}!uw-beaver!uw-june!gordon
ARPA: gordon@uw-june
Gordon hates flames, so send 'em in!
P.S. Please note that I am not a tried-and-true Sony fan (except to the point
that I acknowledge that they make good products), nor am I a general VHS-ill-
wisher (in fact I considered buying one until I tried the one I'm using now),
I am just relating my experiences with the machines.
Jay Gwatkin
of the SONY Betamovie to your VHS machine the answer is NO.
The unit doesn't play anything back. It only records. In fact
it won't even rewind the tape. To the best of my recollection,
it has only one speed and the battery lasts about 2 hours.
Viewing what you record is through a viewfinder - not a screen.
The good part about it is that you don't need a recorder to go
with it.
Hope that helps.
Jay Gwatkin
ITT Telecom
Robert Perlberg
>patent rights, for the most part.
Give me a break! I've always considered the VHS system to be
far superior to the Beta system. Every aspect of Beta makes
it obvious to me that Sony was just trying to push something
out the door before VHS got to market. VHS is much better thought
out than Beta. VHS can run for 8 hours. Beta can only run for
5. The slight difference in cassette size cannot account for
this. Sony just coudn't engineer enough quality into an 8 hour
speed. And look at the speeds. The progression from single to
one-half to one-third speeds in VHS was as natural as if they
planned it that way, which they probably did. I can't even remember
the correspondence between the Beta speeds. They just pushed
it as far as they could in a futile attempt to remain competitive
with the superior VHS system.
More: All Beta cassettes are CHROME. VHS gets the same quality
from Normal tape. All Beta's use Dolby. VHS gets the same quality
without Dolby, and some units give you the option of using Dolby
to further improve the quality. As far as Beta-HiFi, VHS-HiFi
units are already available.
Is it any wonder that more movies are available in VHS format?
The Sony Betamax sells for the same reason that the IBM PC sells--some
people don't look any further than the name plate.
Robert Perlberg
Resource Dynamics Inc.
New York
philabs!rdin!perl
Bob Piety
A couple of years ago, I went out with the intention of buying a VHS machine.
After looking at the video quality and feature of several, I went home with a
Sony Sl-2000. The Sony's quality at the slow speed is quite good-- good
enough that I use the "5-hour" mode for 99% of my taping. Two years ago, I
couldn't find a VHS machine that equalled the quality of the SL2000, in the
long-playing mode.
I've read articles comparing the way the tape is handled, mechanically. I
believe the Beta machines put less stress (stretching, twisting, distorting)
on the tape than VHS, but the difference is, evidently, slight. Such a
difference might only be apparent when playing tapes from one machine on
another or for critical uses such as digital audio, where excessive dropouts
are a real concern.
As far as tape availability is concerned, the video store that I rent tapes
from (Prime Time Video, Sunnyvale, Ca.) carries EACH title in both Beta and
VHS. Since there are more VHS owners than Beta owners, a popular titled
movie will often be already rented but I can usually get a Beta copy. Thus,
I have found no disadvantages to owning Beta, except for a few, rare
occassions when a friend with a VHS machine had something I wanted to see,
and vice-versa.
The fact that there are many more VHS machines sold than Beta does not imply
high quality-- merely ADEQUATE quality, often for non-discriminating
consumers. There are more Chevrolets and Fords sold, but few will admit
that they are of higher quality than a Honda, Toyota, Subaru, or Datsun.
For those of you who are unconvinced, make several generations of a VHS
tape, from one VHS machine to another, on slow speed, and observe the
degradation of video quality. Now try the same on Beta, at least the Sony
SL2000. You will be surprised.
You say you never need to make multiple-generations of copies, VHS-slow to
VHS-slow??? Great! So where's the beef? You're happy; so am I.
Bob (with an eye on a Sony SL2700, BETA!!!)
Jeff Meyer
the errors that were printed in this article (there were so MANY!). But
before placing corrections, let me say this: I am not saying that VHS is
junk and Beta perfection... I am just saying there are reasons why I picked
Beta over VHS, and then listing said reasons. I notice that after one buys
one or the other format of VHS, one tends to root for it... after all, if
it's Hi-Fi, you've put ~$1K into it. However, this article had so many
mistakes in it that I think I should point some of them out. Remember,
this is net.video, not net.flame! We're trying to pass information and
opinions here, not rah-rah.
>Every aspect of Beta makes
>it obvious to me that Sony was just trying to push something
>out the door before VHS got to market.
Please read the case histories. This can be done in numerous articles
published by consumer magazines and the like (VIDEO comes to mind). VHS was
built after Beta had been out on the market for about a year (different
articles vary the time... I can't remember back that far :-) ). The
companies that designed the VHS VCRs had to get around the patent rights
placed by Sony. As to the superiority of the Beta engineering system over
the VHS, well, that's an opinion, but before buying it, I talked to a lot of
engineers and read a lot of the aforementioned articles, and most (not all,
but most) thought the Beta was engineered better. What varied most was the
degree of improvement.
>More: All Beta cassettes are CHROME. VHS gets the same quality
>from Normal tape. All Beta's use Dolby.
Both blatently false. I have a non-Dolby Beta system at home that does not
use Chrome tapes.
>Is it any wonder that more movies are available in VHS format?
>The Sony Betamax sells for the same reason that the IBM PC sells--some
>people don't look any further than the name plate.
This is what annoyed me most about the article. Please, from now on,
restrain the insults; they do no one any good, and lower other people's
opinion of you as an objective observer.
"Wink-Wink, Nudge-Nudge, Know-what-I-mean, Know-what-I-mean?"
Jeff Meyer
about equal here, but best check out other's opinion of that). But as to
the 830 Beta tapes, I have a few. I discovered from my local Video person
(bless her chromatic heart) that the 830 tapes (at least the Sony ones) are
made of thinner material than any of the shorter speeds, and so are of less
quality. I haven't noticed THAT much degredation, but it is there. I use
'em for recording the news and other things where quality of picture and
sound are not important (Dan Rather in living color is just not a high
priority). Other 830 tapes may be better made, but I doubt it.
"Who are you, who are so wise in the ways of Science?"