AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Does anyone know of a a multi-region VHS/DVD recorder? Seeing that you may want to burn your DVD's in different regional formats, I thought there would be a few to choose from, but alas, I can only find Region 1 units here in the states. I always thought that was just a playback limitation.

So if I have friends in the U.K., and I want to convert a VHS to thier region, how would I go about it?


thanks
 

· Registered
Joined
·
14,210 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvmaster /forum/post/16886367


Does anyone know of a a multi-region VHS/DVD recorder? Seeing that you may want to burn your DVD's in different regional formats, I thought there would be a few to choose from, but alas, I can only find Region 1 units here in the states. I always thought that was just a playback limitation.

So if I have friends in the U.K., and I want to convert a VHS to thier region, how would I go about it?

U.S. DVDRs are Region 1 only for playback. Any discs YOU create in a U.S. DVDR gets region coded for Region All, or 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, as my Philips and Magnavox DVDRs do. To play back in the U.K, you'd just need a player/TV system that plays NTSC discs, which I believe most or all EU units are capable of accordiing to reports here???


Here's a snippet from a ref. site on NTSC/PAL:


"DVD

The encoded video (MPEG2) on a DVD is stored in digital format, but it's formatted NTSC or PAL. Some players play only NTSC discs, others play PAL and NTSC discs. All DVD players sold in PAL countries play both kinds of discs. Most NTSC players can't play PAL discs."
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,344 Posts
"Regions" are separate from "formats": region coding is pretty much only used by Hollywood studios to discourage people in Europe or Asia from importing and watching retail USA dvds of movies which may still be playing in theaters there. (Why the hell Hollywood can't get its act together for a unified worldwide theatrical release is another of those imponderable "lunatics running the asylum" questions: there were technology reasons for this in 1939, but not 2009.)


Wajo is correct: all consumer DVD recorders create "region 0" (i.e. "region-free") discs. North American recorders sold in our stores record in the NTSC format, which used to be a problem for our European/PAL friends until a few years ago when nearly all new PAL televisions began shipping with built-in NTSC>PAL converters. Odds are good you can simply send your self-made NTSC dvds to the UK and your friends/family will have at least one TV with built-in conversion. Ask them to check before you proceed: if they do not have an up-to-date television, you will be stuck with aggravating workarounds. Its a total pain in the ass to hard-convert NTSC recordings to PAL, and the effort on your part is unnecessary. If you're doing the favor of recording things for them, its really their responsibility to either own a current television or an inexpensive converting DVD player like a Phillips.


There are no recorders of any kind that will internally convert one format into the other, even the multi-region recorders only work with one format at a time (if you feed them NTSC, they record NTSC, if you feed them PAL, they record PAL). The only options are to buy an analog standards converter to connect between your VCR and DVD recorder (costs $200, seriously degrades video quality) or to use complex software on your PC to perform a digital conversion (no picnic). Seriously, your friends/family need to step up on their end: its much easier all around if they obtain a converting television or converting DVD player.


BTW its apparently a much easier trick to convert NTSC to PAL than PAL to NTSC, which is why conversion became a popular affordable feature in European televisions but is still a rarity in North American displays. One would think the move to LCD and plasma technology would make multi-format TVs more affordable, but the big name brands prefer not to offer it, leaving the field to bargain display brands. Your $399 Olevia is multi-format, your $2199 Panasonic is NTSC-only: go figure mfr logic.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
14,210 Posts
The "Region" thing is part of the regular training system for new Hollywood employees of studios, networks, post-production houses, etc.


The course on Regions is entitled "Maximizing Profits" and it's most often taught along with "Protecting our Asses" which covers Copy Protection... it was originally spelled correctly as "Assets" but one memorable course announcement used "Asses" and it's stuck to this day.


Then, there's the special course for Marketing and Business Development people titled "There's No Such Things as a Bad Movie, Just Bad Marketing."
 

· Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by wajo /forum/post/16886706


The "Region" thing is part of the regular training system for new Hollywood employees of studios, networks, post-production houses, etc.


The course on Regions is entitled "Maximizing Profits" and it's most often taught along with "Protecting our Asses" which covers Copy Protection... it was originally spelled correctly as "Assets" but one memorable course announcement used "Asses" and it's stuck to this day.


Then, there's the special course for Marketing and Business Development people titled "There's No Such Things as a Bad Movie, Just Bad Marketing."

OK, thanks for the info. Didn't realize that a Panasonic VCR / DVD combo recorder would burn Region 0.

But it still would be nice to be able to burn PAL, even nicer if the combo unit had a simple converter inside. I guess that's where I'll have to leave it then, as it sounds like no one makes a combo player/recorder that offers NTSC/PAL conversion as part of it's makeup.

I convert stuff all the time (Nero, TMPG etc), but was hoping there was a simple all-in-one solution.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,995 Posts
If you must have PAL recordings, a multiregion DVDR, and a converting DVD player, rather than an expensive converter, is the way to go. You can make the original DVD in NTSC, on the DVDR. Then, you play back the NTSC DVD on the converting player, outputting PAL, connected to inputs on the DVDR. Then you record, in real time, in PAL. There are Toshiba and Philips DVD players that convert both ways for as cheap as $40. For $160, way less than a converter alone, you could buy a really good converting player, also an excellent upscaler for just watching DVDs. That player is the Oppo 980. But, that is a lot of extra work, probably unnecessary, if your friends can play NTSC discs.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,959 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by CitiBear /forum/post/16886644


Wajo is correct: all consumer DVD recorders create "region 0" (i.e. "region-free") discs. North American recorders sold in our stores record in the NTSC format, which used to be a problem for our European/PAL friends until a few years ago when nearly all new PAL televisions began shipping with built-in NTSC>PAL converters.

Not quite correct.


Since the late 80s/early 90s - most TVs sold in Europe have locked to both 50Hz and 60Hz SD TV signals. In the early days, they still only included PAL 4.43MHz chroma decoders for composite/S-video, in addition to the standard SCART RGB inputs. If you connected a regular NTSC 3.58MHz source (as output from a US VCR or Laserdisc player at the time) you'd get a locked, but black and white picture. Therefore in the late 80s we started to see "NTSC Playback" VCRS (and in some cases Laserdisc players) in Europe. These replayed NTSC 60Hz VHS recordings as PAL 60Hz (i.e. they were output with PAL chroma, but at the same line and field rate as regular NTSC) You get a perfectly acceptable colour picture. The only thing converted was the chroma information - the actual video standard remained 60Hz.


However very quickly - certainly by the early 90s - it was standard for European TVs to have multi-standard chroma decoders - capable of PAL, SECAM and NTSC decoding (often both NSTC 4.43 and NTSC 3.58) - whcih meant you didn't need an NTSC to PAL 60 transcoder in your player device.


By the time DVD players arrived in the late 90s, you could pretty much guaranteee that all modern TVs sold over the last 5 years or so would be compatible with NTSC composite outputs and display a colour NTSC 60Hz picture with no problems. (My 21" 4:3 Sony Trinitron from 1994 does and isn't unusual) This was NOT a conversion from NTSC to PAL internally - it was a straight NTSC decode - just as a US TV would operate.


However the NTSC decoder (for composite/s-video) was actually redundant in most European SDTVs used with DVD players - as our 21 pin SCART socket (standard on European TVs since the early 80s) has supported RGB (similar quality to component) interconnects - which bypasses PAL and NTSC composite chroma entirely.


This means that "PAL" discs are replayed in RGB 50Hz and "NTSC" discs are replayed in RGB 60Hz. As a large number of TVs sold for nearly two decades in Europe have locked to an RGB 60Hz signal (even if they only have a PAL chroma decoder) - there is no issue with replaying "NTSC" discs on a reasonably modern European display if you have an RGB connection.


NOTE - this is not an "internal PAL to NTSC conversion" it is a native display at 60Hz - either from RGB, or from decoded NTSC (or in some cases PAL 60)


I used to repair TVs with my father - and European TVs had multi-standard decoder chips in them years ago - 50Hz PAL and SECAM decoded and displayed at 50Hz, 60Hz NTSC (and PAL-M) decoded and displayed at 60Hz.


The only slight issue is that some European CRT SD TVs show slightly more line-structure when displaying 60Hz content, as they have a spot-size optimised for the European 50Hz 625/576 line format rather than the US 60Hz 525/480 line format - meaning you see slightly more visible scan lines.

Quote:
Odds are good you can simply send your self-made NTSC dvds to the UK and your friends/family will have at least one TV with built-in conversion.

Compatibility rather than conversion would be a better way of describing it. European TVs just display NTSC sources these days - they don't "convert" as such.

Quote:
Ask them to check before you proceed: if they do not have an up-to-date television, you will be stuck with aggravating workarounds. Its a total pain in the ass to hard-convert NTSC recordings to PAL, and the effort on your part is unnecessary. If you're doing the favor of recording things for them, its really their responsibility to either own a current television or an inexpensive converting DVD player like a Phillips.

The quality will also nosedive if you do a conversion at the consumer level.


I've not owned a TV since the 80s that wouldn't display a 60Hz signal - and all my current displays (21" CRT 4:3 from 1994, 28" CRT 16:9 from 2000, 40" LCD 16:9 HDTV from 2006, 40" LCD 16:9 HDTV from 2008) will display 60Hz video - and all have NTSC decoders (though I use RGB SCART for SD TVs and HDMI for HD TVs)

Quote:
There are no recorders of any kind that will internally convert one format into the other, even the multi-region recorders only work with one format at a time (if you feed them NTSC, they record NTSC, if you feed them PAL, they record PAL).

Yep - though there WERE VCRs with internal (but lousy) converters that would take an NTSC 60Hz signal, convert it and then record a 50Hz PAL signal, and vice versa. I think Panasonic marketed a model called the W1? (They were usually tuner-less - as multi-standard tuners are more complex than multi-standard decoders)

Quote:
The only options are to buy an analog standards converter to connect between your VCR and DVD recorder (costs $200, seriously degrades video quality) or to use complex software on your PC to perform a digital conversion (no picnic).

I think you mean a digital standards converters. Analogue converters transcode the chroma from PAL 4.43 to NTSC 3.58 or from NTSC 3.58 to PAL 4.43 but DON'T change the line-standard from 625/576 50Hz to 525/480 60Hz. They are useful in some situations (colour replay of PAL content when you have a US TV that locks to 50Hz but doesn't have an NTSC decoder for instance)


To record a PAL 50Hz DVD from an NTSC 60Hz source you will need a digital standards converter - as only digital techniques are viable for converting from 50Hz to 60Hz and from 525/480 to 625/50 line frames - or vice versa.


(They may have analogue inputs - but the conversion is done digitally. Some just field drop/repeat and line drop/repeat, more expensive ones used multiple-field and multiple-line interpolation - changing the interpolation based on the motion - c.f. 4-field/4-line adaptive)

Quote:
Seriously, your friends/family need to step up on their end: its much easier all around if they obtain a converting television or converting DVD player.


BTW its apparently a much easier trick to convert NTSC to PAL than PAL to NTSC, which is why conversion became a popular affordable feature in European televisions but is still a rarity in North American displays.

Sorry - that is just wrong. There is no CONVERSION going on in European displays. Europe traditionally used both PAL and SECAM - so multi-standard PAL and SECAM displays (both 50Hz) were available throughout the 80s. (Belgium used PAL B/G, France used SECAM L for instance)


It seems that for some reason multi-standard compatibility - NOT CONVERSION - became much more popular in Europe. This could be because we startede importing US Laserdiscs, VHS tapes and DVDs, and a multi-standard decoder is better quality AND cheaper than a conversion.

Quote:
One would think the move to LCD and plasma technology would make multi-format TVs more affordable, but the big name brands prefer not to offer it, leaving the field to bargain display brands. Your $399 Olevia is multi-format, your $2199 Panasonic is NTSC-only: go figure mfr logic.

Though in Europe - all HDTVs with the pan-Europe "HD Ready" logo have to be both 50Hz and 60Hz. My Sony 40W4000 will accept PAL, SECAM and NTSC composite/s-video, and 480i/p 60Hz, 576i/p 50Hz, 720p 50Hz and 60Hz,1080i/p 50Hz and 60Hz, and 1080p 24Hz - with no conversion other than scaling (if the source is not 1080 lines) and de-interlacing (if the source is interlaced)...


Apologies if this seems like a long post... I'm a former broadcast video R&D engineer, and get a bit annoyed at the confusion that concerns multi-standard displays and conversions.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,344 Posts
Well, if that wasn't the most informative dressing-down I've received on this forum, I don't know what is
! Thank you for the detailed corrections, sneals2000: interesting stuff indeed which should be reassuring to anyone wanting to send NTSC DVDs to friends/family in PAL territories. From what you explained, it appears multi-format compatibility has been common in European displays far longer than we thought. The exact details and terminology of this capability is not discussed by your "average European" in the terms you specify, however: none of my friends/family in the UK, Finland or Italy know from "refresh rates", "native decoding" or why SCART exists. They use the word "conversion" because in practical terms thats what they feel the TV is doing for them: converting my NTSC dvds to PAL so they can view them. So while I understand your frustration with sloppy use of technical descriptions, I'm afraid lay people will continue to call this process "conversion" because it makes the most immediate sense to them.


You reached me, though
: going forward I will append some of your info to any remarks I make about "conversion", especially what you said regarding the better performance of multi-format native decoding on the TV as opposed to the lesser conversion by multi-format players: an excellent point I don't think anyone has mentioned here previously (and I obviously hadn't considered
).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
11,761 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 /forum/post/16900328




Yep - though there WERE VCRs with internal (but lousy) converters that would take an NTSC 60Hz signal, convert it and then record a 50Hz PAL signal, and vice versa. I think Panasonic marketed a model called the W1? (They were usually tuner-less - as multi-standard tuners are more complex than multi-standard decoders)

Yes it was the AG-W1 and IMO it did a very decent job of converting any format to any output. I rented one in the early 90's to convert about 50 PAL VHS tapes to NTSC VHS. I think the deck cost ~$2000, hence why I rented it for a weekend at ~$100. Shortly after, several mfgs. sold a PAL player with NTSC output, I remember a Aiwa (or was it Akai, I get them confused)
anyway they were more consumer vs. the commercial AG-W1 and as such cost
 

· Registered
Joined
·
123 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff /forum/post/16902982


I wonder what the Europeans will come up with for ATSC, I liked the expression Never The Same Color (NTSC) for our previous system

I've always been amused by the interpretation of "SECAM" as System Essentially Contrary to the American Method, since it appears that French national pride was indeed a major reason for its development. To be fair to NTSC, it was the earliest deployed color broadcast system (1953), over a decade before PAL and SECAM (1967), so it's not surprising that it had some deficiencies compared to the later standards.


Europeans (and many other countries) already have their own alternative to ATSC (i.e. DVB, "Digital Video Broadcasting") and Japan has yet another (IDSB, "Integrated Services Digital Broadcasting"). The window of opportunity for creating a universal digital broadcast standard has long passed.


Tony
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,995 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 /forum/post/16900328



The quality will also nosedive if you do a conversion at the consumer level.

Thanks for taking the time to give such a thorough explanation. It was very interesting. I would say it deserves a sticky, as there are often questions about PAL, and European systems around here. But, I have a minor quibble with the above.


For many years I worked at a film festival where we received lots of PAL entries, first on VHS, later mostly on DVD. Sometimes it was necessary to convert them. For VHS, we had a $400 Samsung multiformat converting VCR. We watched on a SD projector with a screen size of about 5'. Of course VHS doesn't look that great at that size, even without conversion. Good PAL tapes looked as good, or better, than an average VHS tape, even with conversion. Bad PAL tapes looked, well, bad. Dubbing the converted output of a PAL tape from the same player to a DVDR/DVD in SP looked as good as the original playback from VHS.


I have converted 50 - 100 PAL DVDs by dubbing from a converting DVD player to a DVDR. Most I did on a $40 Toshiba. They looked good on my 56" DLP HDTV, within the range of PQ produced by NTSC DVDs. When the Tosh died, I got a Oppo 980 converting DVD player, which I easily made region-free. I have converted at least 15 PAL DVDs using the Oppo, and I would challenge anyone to look at the NTSC version, and be able to tell it had been converted. I remember one short in particular that had about a sharp a PQ as I have ever seen in SD, even after real-time dubbing.


Okay, I don't doubt that professional conversion equipment could do a measurably better job, but few, even of the sharp-eyed folks here, would be likely to notice a difference between that, and converting with the Oppo. Except for the audio, of course. DD 5.1 is lost in such conversions.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,344 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by arciervo /forum/post/16903684


I've always been amused by the interpretation of "SECAM" as System Essentially Contrary to the American Method, since it appears that French national pride was indeed a major reason for its development. (...) The window of opportunity for creating a universal digital broadcast standard has long passed.

Well, the French had the last laugh, didn't they? We went full circle ourselves, pissing away billions of dollars on the pipe dream of a "superior American-invented digital broadcast system" instead of just signing up for the same lousy DVT-B system already in use by most of the world. Digital broadcasting is digital broadcasting: it all sucks compared to the practical coverage of analog. Anyone with an ATSC kitchen TV, who has to move their powered antenna every five minutes to keep an an unbroken signal going as they chop onions (even if they live 100 yards from the broadcast tower), would agree DVT-B could not possibly have been any worse and would have saved a lot of time, money and frustration for North America and our Asian electronics suppliers. I keep trying to come up with a nasty acronym for ATSC, but verge on a apoplexy by the time I get to the letter "T" so I give up.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,959 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjeff /forum/post/16902982


Yes it was the AG-W1 and IMO it did a very decent job of converting any format to any output.

It was groundbreaking at the time - and did a job that was previously only possible with broadcast gear. However the quality was OK for VHS sources and destinations, it wasn't great if you used it E-to-E to convert decent quality stuff for decent quality viewing (but it wasn't designed for that)

Quote:
I rented one in the early 90's to convert about 50 PAL VHS tapes to NTSC VHS. I think the deck cost ~$2000, hence why I rented it for a weekend at ~$100.


Shortly after, several mfgs. sold a PAL player with NTSC output, I remember a Aiwa (or was it Akai, I get them confused)
anyway they were more consumer vs. the commercial AG-W1 and as such cost
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,959 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbawc /forum/post/16904038


Thanks for taking the time to give such a thorough explanation. It was very interesting. I would say it deserves a sticky, as there are often questions about PAL, and European systems around here. But, I have a minor quibble with the above.


For many years I worked at a film festival where we received lots of PAL entries, first on VHS, later mostly on DVD. Sometimes it was necessary to convert them. For VHS, we had a $400 Samsung multiformat converting VCR. We watched on a SD projector with a screen size of about 5'. Of course VHS doesn't look that great at that size, even without conversion. Good PAL tapes looked as good, or better, than an average VHS tape, even with conversion. Bad PAL tapes looked, well, bad. Dubbing the converted output of a PAL tape from the same player to a DVDR/DVD in SP looked as good as the original playback from VHS.


I have converted 50 - 100 PAL DVDs by dubbing from a converting DVD player to a DVDR. Most I did on a $40 Toshiba. They looked good on my 56" DLP HDTV, within the range of PQ produced by NTSC DVDs. When the Tosh died, I got a Oppo 980 converting DVD player, which I easily made region-free. I have converted at least 15 PAL DVDs using the Oppo, and I would challenge anyone to look at the NTSC version, and be able to tell it had been converted. I remember one short in particular that had about a sharp a PQ as I have ever seen in SD, even after real-time dubbing.


Okay, I don't doubt that professional conversion equipment could do a measurably better job, but few, even of the sharp-eyed folks here, would be likely to notice a difference between that, and converting with the Oppo. Except for the audio, of course. DD 5.1 is lost in such conversions.

Lousy was probably a bit subjective. Compared to current broadcast converters, which use very good quality vector-adaptive (sometimes using Phase Correlation to assist), the consumer conversions are normally pretty basic - and the W1 was pretty awful (using similar techniques to converters produced in the 70s). The current consumer converters used in many DVD players that do an internal conversion use techniques similar to stuff used by the broadcast gear used in the 80s.


HOWEVER - if you are mainly concerned with converting 25p 2:2 interlaced FILM content which has no motion between fields the conversion artefacts are noticably less obvious than if you are converting 50i native content, with motion between fields.


The less taxing nature of 25p content means that consumer level converters do a less-bad job with converting 25p content to 60i, than they would with video 50i content (such as live sport or entertainment)


I have two converting DVD players - a Samsung and a non-branded Chinese player. Both do an acceptable - though not outstanding job with 25p content converted to 60i - but when you convert 50i native stuff you can spot the conversion a mile off. The 50i motion is just mangled.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,959 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by CitiBear /forum/post/16904059


Well, the French had the last laugh, didn't they? We went full circle ourselves, pissing away billions of dollars on the pipe dream of a "superior American-invented digital broadcast system" instead of just signing up for the same lousy DVT-B system already in use by most of the world. Digital broadcasting is digital broadcasting: it all sucks compared to the practical coverage of analog. Anyone with an ATSC kitchen TV, who has to move their powered antenna every five minutes to keep an an unbroken signal going as they chop onions (even if they live 100 yards from the broadcast tower), would agree DVT-B could not possibly have been any worse and would have saved a lot of time, money and frustration for North America and our Asian electronics suppliers. I keep trying to come up with a nasty acronym for ATSC, but verge on a apoplexy by the time I get to the letter "T" so I give up.

DVB-T doesn't suck that badly in Europe - well not in the UK. However many European countries, like the UK, where OTA is the dominant TV system (i.e. people mainly watch TV via their antenna/aerial rather than cable) have houses with rooftop aerials/antenna, and because our broadcasting set-up is based on national/regional rather than local set-ups, all of our stations broadcast from central transmitter sites - so we can use directional aerials. Not many of us use set-top aerials - though some use internal aerials mounted in loft-space.


I have never had a problem with DVB-T reception via my roof top aerial - and I'm on the edge of my transmitter region - and was also able to receive the low power HDTV tests that ran for a 12 month period in 2006/7 with no errors.


We're about to go to 36Mbs DVB-T2 in the UK for our first HD OTA service - it will be interesting to see how robust this is. Reports are that it works pretty well in tests from low power transmitters from two sites (London and Surrey) Like most DVB-T HD broadcasts (apart from Australia) we're also using H264 compression rather than MPEG2 for HD via DVB-T2.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,344 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 /forum/post/16907190


DVB-T doesn't suck that badly in Europe - well not in the UK.

Yes, I have heard it works fairly well in UK from my British friends. When I tagged it as "lousy", it was more from the standpoint of using it in the USA. The biggest excuse lobbyists used here to prevent its adoption was "DVB-T's lousy reception properties are untenable for use in America". Uh-huh. Because you know, ATSC has no flaws whatsoever. Idiots!



Normally I don't react strongly to the stupid venal machinations of our bureaucratic weasels and the lobbyists that manipulate them, but the ATSC mess just really sticks in my craw. Off-air television is too important a public service to have been left at the mercy of moribund mismanaged companies like Zenith. To this day it utterly astounds me that a company that was virtually out of business was able to rise from the dead and wield enough smoke-and-mirrors influence to convince the US government that a US-exclusive DTV system would bring television production back to our shores "overnight". This delusional fantasy is why we got stuck with ATSC: no one seriously believed it, but they voted it in anyway. Whatever technical arguments that were made against adopting DVT-B (and there were some valid ones) took a back seat to this "America-first" pandering. The billions wasted on stalling and then adopting ATSC could have been used more effectively to make DVT-B work better here (subsidize more towers, whatever). I have not heard a single complaint about DVB-T based video recorders being totally dysfunctional because their digital tuners contaminate every aspect of recorder operation: the exact opposite is true of ATSC, which has virtually destroyed the usefulness of any recorder its embedded in.


In an ironic twist, the Zenith name is silkscreened on the front of one of the very few government-subsidized ATSC converter boxes thats any good: its actually one of the two best we can buy. How that happened I've yet to figure out, because Zenith the American company is as dead now as it was during the Clinton administration.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
17,223 Posts
It would make more business sense for LG to choose to use the Zenith name on the box, because of the reputation and familiarity with the name.


Notice that the Zenith and the RCA are the most "older people and JSP"-friendly boxes out there, for their remotes and their ease of setup and use.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top