In defense of Betamax

"dmaster" wrote in message
...
On Feb 25, 8:19 am, "Richard Harison" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008, 9:17pm (Richard Harison) said:

...I watched it [Betamax tape] tonight, and I
could not believe my eyes. It looked just as
good as ANY SD content I could get
OTA/satellite.
...Oh, did I mention that I recorded these
programs at Beta's SLOWER speed!

No disrespect intended, and you are certainly entitled to your opinion,
but you were most likely watching on a monitor that degraded the
"SD/OTA/satellite" quality to match that of the Betamax. Try comparing
composite and component test signals on a waveform monitor.

How does that work? I have an upconverting HDTV. The HD signal I recorded
came from an HD digital station.
True, my input to the VCR was from the sat box composite jack (therefore
downrezzed) but how does my monitor, a Sony SFP CRT degrade a signal? It
....

Just to chime in, this is where your losses occur. I don't know how
good a job your sat box does at down rezzing, but it's probably
serviceable. However a composite connection has some definite
luminance limitations, and VCR quality is pretty low, even on high
speed. I'm sure it depends on your VCR and tape, but I doubt any VCR
does justice to even 480i coming out of the sat box. I converted
completely to recording on DVD rather than VHS tape a couple of years
ago, and the quality was markedly improved. In my case I either
record directly to DVD with a box with an ATSC tuner in it, or from a
Samsun external tuner into a DVD recorder via S-video (which should be
a bit better than composite), or from a Sony HD DVR into a DVD
recorder via S-video. All three methods produce great results from
down converted HD or digital SD. And its a lot less space than a
bunch of tapes. }

Dan (Woj...)


Absolutely no argument here. I know VCR limits, and I also know there is
general agreement that Beta eats VHS alive for native PQ.
I am convinced that the marriage between my Beta and the upconverting HDTV
tells the tale.

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

In article ,
Richard Harison wrote:
In this NG, There recently has been a lot of usenet ink debating the
merits/demerits of video formats. I refer specifically to the HDDVD vs. Blu
Ray issue. Unfortunately, a lot of the posting has been more of personal
preference --taking sides. In these "discussions" there have been
numerous-- and yes-- logical and obvious comparisons to the Beta vs. VHS
struggle in the 80s.

I have both formats in my home, but I have always reserved use of my Betamax
for the replaying of archived material. I have no desire to copy these
recordings to VHS, simply because of the generation loss, coupled with a
lesser quality format.
But just this week, I did have to resort to Beta to record some live
content. I watched it tonight, and I could not believe my eyes.
It looked just as good as ANY SD content I could get OTA/satellite.
True I have a Sony SPF upconverting CRT, but even at a viewing distance of
only 4' the quality was impressive.
Oh, did I mention that I recorded these programs at Beta's SLOWER speed!

If it ain't broke-- don't fix it, If it works-- use it

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison



And if you think that looks good, by EDV-9500 - with a test tape
shows resolution of about 525 lines. The circles on the test
pattern are readable at 500 lines but disappear at the 550
line circle.

Resolution is about the same as DVD.

However, as with all analog devices, if you know what to look for
and have a good set you can see 'slight' noise, but most people
would never notice it.

Prior to that my 1000 running SuperBeta I - 6Mhz bandwidth looked
wonderful. The EDV series had 10Mhz bandwidth when using
metal tapes. I used the 20 and 30 minute BetaCam SP tapes for
the machine. Those got 2 hours and 3 hours. The EDV was
sort of like a composite version of Betacam. Heavy beast -
comes in at about 20 pounds, and comes with rack mount ears.
The most marvelous home machine I've ever owned.

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

In article ,
Richard Harison wrote:
"G-squared" wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 6:17 pm, "Richard Harison" wrote:
In this NG, There recently has been a lot of usenet ink debating the
merits/demerits of video formats. I refer specifically to the HDDVD vs.
Blu
Ray issue. Unfortunately, a lot of the posting has been more of personal
preference --taking sides. In these "discussions" there have been
numerous-- and yes-- logical and obvious comparisons to the Beta vs. VHS
struggle in the 80s.

I have both formats in my home, but I have always reserved use of my
Betamax
for the replaying of archived material. I have no desire to copy these
recordings to VHS, simply because of the generation loss, coupled with a
lesser quality format.
But just this week, I did have to resort to Beta to record some live
content. I watched it tonight, and I could not believe my eyes.
It looked just as good as ANY SD content I could get OTA/satellite.
True I have a Sony SPF upconverting CRT, but even at a viewing distance of
only 4' the quality was impressive.
Oh, did I mention that I recorded these programs at Beta's SLOWER speed!

If it ain't broke-- don't fix it, If it works-- use it

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

I still have an SL-HF950 which was a pretty good deck in its day but
as good as OTA SD? I think you're a little optimistic. But enjoy it
while it works. I don't think there are parts for them any more.

GG


I replaced the video head only last year--from a warehouse in Kansas IIRC
I imagine they would have other parts as well. I use my machine sparingly
for that very reason

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison



Would you care to name that warehouse for we remaining Beta users?

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

The ONLY advantage VHS had over Betamax in my opinion and the reason it
was most popular had NOTHING to do with image quality.Most everyone
knew that Betamax was superior in how it looked.
VHS was superior in the respect that you could record up to *8 HOURS*
at its slowest speed (with a T-160 tape),whereas the most Betamax could
do was 5¼ hours if I recall.I was interested at the time with CRAMMING
as much programming per tape as I could,image quality be damned.That is
the only reason I went with VHS.The quality was acceptable enough and
the lesser tape time of the Betamax
pushed me to buy the VHS system.
I was interested not in archiving,but in watching shows only once on a
time delayed basis.VHS was good enough.

"SAC 441" wrote in message
...
The ONLY advantage VHS had over Betamax in my opinion and the reason it
was most popular had NOTHING to do with image quality.Most everyone
knew that Betamax was superior in how it looked.
VHS was superior in the respect that you could record up to *8 HOURS*
at its slowest speed (with a T-160 tape),whereas the most Betamax could
do was 5¼ hours if I recall.I was interested at the time with CRAMMING
as much programming per tape as I could,image quality be damned.That is
the only reason I went with VHS.The quality was acceptable enough and
the lesser tape time of the Betamax
pushed me to buy the VHS system.
I was interested not in archiving,but in watching shows only once on a
time delayed basis.VHS was good enough.
-----------------------------

Your point regarding recording time is valid, but wasn't the driving
factor in VHS winning out over Beta. When Beta first came out the
maximum recording time was an hour. VHS came out and you could record
two hours. Eventually the recording time topped out at 5 hours for Beta
and 8 hours for VHS.

Popularity of VHS over Beta was also driven by the fact that JVC (who
"developed" VHS--more accurate to say found a way around Sony's patent
on the Beta transport mechanism) licensed out their technology to any
Tom, Dick and Harry. This led to VHS machines being branded by just
about anybody in the Pacific rim. I imagine Snyder Drug Stores had there
own store brand VHS machine.

This led the movie studios to release more and more content (yes, porn
too) on VHS format vs. Beta.

My 25 year old SuperBeta is still operable. I have a vast archive of
recorded material that still looks great, better than stuff I record
with my VHS machine today.

"Bill Vermillion" wrote in message ...
In article ,
Richard Harison wrote:
"G-squared" wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 6:17 pm, "Richard Harison" wrote:
In this NG, There recently has been a lot of usenet ink debating the
merits/demerits of video formats. I refer specifically to the HDDVD vs.
Blu
Ray issue. Unfortunately, a lot of the posting has been more of personal
preference --taking sides. In these "discussions" there have been
numerous-- and yes-- logical and obvious comparisons to the Beta vs. VHS
struggle in the 80s.

I have both formats in my home, but I have always reserved use of my
Betamax
for the replaying of archived material. I have no desire to copy these
recordings to VHS, simply because of the generation loss, coupled with a
lesser quality format.
But just this week, I did have to resort to Beta to record some live
content. I watched it tonight, and I could not believe my eyes.
It looked just as good as ANY SD content I could get OTA/satellite.
True I have a Sony SPF upconverting CRT, but even at a viewing distance
of
only 4' the quality was impressive.
Oh, did I mention that I recorded these programs at Beta's SLOWER speed!

If it ain't broke-- don't fix it, If it works-- use it

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

I still have an SL-HF950 which was a pretty good deck in its day but
as good as OTA SD? I think you're a little optimistic. But enjoy it
while it works. I don't think there are parts for them any more.

GG


I replaced the video head only last year--from a warehouse in Kansas IIRC
I imagine they would have other parts as well. I use my machine sparingly
for that very reason

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison



Would you care to name that warehouse for we remaining Beta users?

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com


Hi Bill!
Had to do some digging and I was wrong about Kansas

Sony Electronics, Inc.
8281 NW 107th Terrace
Kansas City, MO 64153

1.800.488.7669
www.sony.com/accessories

Hope that info is still current. I bought my disk in Dec. 2004
(wrong about the date too! --time flies)

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

On Feb 26, 7:47*am, "Richard Harison" wrote:
I still have an SL-HF950 which was a pretty good deck in its day
but
as good as OTA SD? I think you're a little optimistic. But enjoy
it
while it works. I don't think there are parts for them any more.

GG

I replaced the video head only last year--from a warehouse in
Kansas IIRC
I imagine they would have other parts as well. *I use my machine
sparingly
for that very reason

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

Would you care to name that warehouse for we remaining Beta
users?

Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com

Hi Bill!
Had to do some digging and I was wrong about Kansas

Sony Electronics, Inc.
8281 NW 107th Terrace
Kansas City, MO *64153

1.800.488.7669www.sony.com/accessories

Hope that info is still current. *I bought my disk in Dec. 2004
(wrong about the date too! --time flies)

--
All the Best,
Richard Harison

That is the Sony national parts center. You may find this useful as
well

https://servicesplus.us.sony.biz/

Know your part number? Plug it in and get price/availability. They
will also show you pages from the service manual - at least for
exploded views.

GG

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008, Richard Harison posted:
However a composite connection has some definite
luminance limitations, and VCR quality is pretty low, even on high
speed. I'm sure it depends on your VCR and tape, but I doubt any VCR
does justice to even 480i coming out of the sat box.

In general, the above is true. Most consumer VCRs could only manage
couple of hundred lines of horizontal resolution.

However, the relatively rare ED Beta was a consumer format that came close
to delivering 480i performance when using S instead of composite. My ED
Beta tapes look well (better than what cable and satellite deliver on SD!)
even after all these years, and IIRC they outdid Laser Disc in horizontal
resolution. By comparison, VHS and standard Beta are painful to watch on
an HDTV monitor.

Among professional formats, U-Matic SP and Betacam did quite well assuming
that the physical media held up.

All of this is academic today, of course. Tape is dead, as is analog
recording. Most people would say good riddance to both. But it is
fun to play with these old format, now that it's possible to get some
really nice U-Matic equipment dirt cheap!

Sadly, ED Beta equipment still goes for a hefty premium; I guess because
the few people who have it snap up working players to guard against losing
access to their library if their current player dies. [That's why I
bought a new DVL-919 LD player...I realized that my LD player was aging
and I ought to get a new one while I still could.]

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Oh, did I mention that I recorded these programs at Beta's SLOWER speed!

If it ain't broke-- don't fix it, *If it works-- use it

Pic quality is only 1 selling aspect of a video format.

I had both the top of the line Sony Super Beta and Super VHS hardware. Both
got the job done with the video edge going to the Super VHS machine.

Where I loved Beta, (on the better machines) was its ability to handle tape.
It was like a rack car compared to a family car. Much faster to react, and
the smaller size was more convenient. The audio was also more stable on the
Beta format. In the end, many of the technical features of Beta worked their
way into VHS. Typical low end Beta hardware was not superior to the typical
VHS hardware, in my experience, video wise.