AVS Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Okay, we've already established that anything beyond like MN-18 on the Pioneer Recorders is horrible, not to mention LP.


But then I looked at the Panny manual and figured out that MN-8 and MN-7 are 352x480 instead of 720x480.


And I quote Lordsmurf (from this page http://www.videohelp.com/forum/archi...h-t332419.html )


Quote:
Using SP mode only is a limitation caused by the machine. Your Pioneer, and even my Philips, are only good at SP mode. Take it for what it's worth. When somebody expresses an interest in longer recordings, let's give them the facts:


:

- 1 - Most source you'll be recording are NOT 720x480 or even close. Only a DV camera will be 720x480, but not cable, satellite, VHS or antenna. Downconverted HD channels (720p, 1080i) would be best at 720x480, but that's usually only primetime shows on a few select channels.


- 2 - 720x480 only look good with a minimum of 5000-5500 VBR bitrate, i.e. SP mode minimum, nothing longer. Squeezing more video in will result in blocks starting to form, and little amoeba-like fuzzies to form on the image edges. These WILL BE very noticeable, this is not a nitpick.


- 3 - 352x480 with a higher per-pixel bitrate, i.e. 3-hour mode, WILL look better noise-wise, than any SP mode. It will be closer to XP mode, as it uses the same bitrate allocation as XP.


- 4 - SP mode is a perfect double of LP mode, noise and all, as long as the 4-hour LP (or EP on some machines, like LiteOn and LiteOn clones) is using 352x480 at proper bitrate.


- 5 - Using 720x480 will NOT make your image look any better or any worse, even on large 60" HDTV sets. The 720x480 can only capture the video sent to it, and it will be much lower. Most often, a good 352x480 will be indistinguishable to a 720x480, given the same television/cable/satellite sources.


- 6 - Some machines uses lousy encoding chipsets, and even when all sets are correct bitrate-wise, the image quality is still a disaster. Most Panasonic and Sony machines are the worst offenders here. A few other long-gone cheapos were pretty miserable too, such as Cyberhome and Polaroid.


- 7 - DVD+RW only machines, meaning DVD-R and DVD-RW cannot be used, are OFTEN (but not always) adhering to RW Alliance specs. These machines use CVBR, a very nominal VBR (more like CBR), and therefore will look a bit worse when encoding. The discs usually have no blocks, but there is some degree of fuzzy noise on image edges. LiteOn and Polaroid are the two most common machines here. (RCA, on the other hand, is a VBR-using DVD+R/RW only machine, and has no such problem). These units are cheaper usually, and even with fuzzies, the image quality will surpass the 720x480 longer-mode or bad encoder machines.


- 8 - If you want to use 720x480 AND record longer than 2 hours (SP mode), using a hard drive and splitting the content off onto multiple discs is an option. Of course, that means a LOT more discs if you plan to record many VHS tapes or a long series of shows off tv. Another option is dual-layer media, but most DL-using machines have trouble making a good layer break (as of Nov. 2007), so you'd be making some expensive coasters in the long-run.

Sooo... does that mean that MN-8 would be waaaay better than lp. Would it even be better than like MN-16 (which I've sometimes had to use for longer movies)?


ps: a chart someone posted from the Pio manual is here: http://www.videohelp.com/forum/archi...h-t332419.html


Thanks Again!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,642 Posts
IMO it all boils down to your source. Most of my recording are done off of high quality sources like downconverted HD from a high quality CECB (CM-7000 via S-video) or copying a high quality DVD. Because of this I detest 1/2 D1 or 352x480, to me it looks way to fuzzy. Of course the problem with full D1 is you need to keep up a high enough bitrate or you'll have a macroblocking mess. Macroblocking really has to due with source, you can push a slower bitrate if your source doesn't have a lot of fast motion(running water, strobe lights etc.) or quick cutting scenes.

What I've personally found with Panasonic DVDRs is I can record ~3hrs/disc of things I record with minimal macroblocking in full D1. Some things like live award shows that have super fast cuts, strobe lights etc. I'm forced to use SP and even then I can see the occasional macroblocking. Heck I even see macroblocking watching the event live in 1080i on my 46" HDTV on CBS which I believe uses 19,000 bitrate and no sub channels. IOW IMO macroblocking is just a fact of life with our digital signal, it's just a matter of trying to reduce it to a level that's acceptable to you. Again for me that would be ~3hrs/standard SL DVD, I don't even consider 1/2 D1 except for something like a talk show where I'm basically only listening and not really paying attention to the video, for those I use the 6 hr speed. YMMV

I've never used a modern Pioneer but I've been told it's encoding and recording quality is similar to my Panasonics. The majority of movies I record are in access of 2hrs but rarely over 3hrs(or for my kids movies ~90 minutes each and I can fit 2/DVD) which is why I don't want a recorder that automatically switches to 1/2 D1 on any speed over 2hrs/disc. Due to cost DL discs are basically out of the question for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,308 Posts
scissorhands, theories and opinion and conjecture are never going to put your mind at ease: you need to actually try these other "legendary" machines so you can finally put your Pioneer in its proper perspective. I know money is tight these days, but thats what eBay is for: if you "test buy" popular models, you can always resell them a few weeks later for near what you paid. (But before doing that, check your Pioneer initial setup menu once more to make certain the HDD is not set to VR Mode: in VR Mode, the Pioneer HDD encodes in non-standard 480 x 480 at LP. In standard Video Mode, it encodes at 480 x 720.)


LordSmurf makes a good case technically on his various points, but in the real world of practical home recording situations none of these recorders performs as expected by specs. Every dvd recorder is a consumer product, sitting on the razor's edge between high performance and total mediocrity. Too much depends on the source material: any of them will look decent with a superb source, but if the source is the least but fuzzy or blocky ALL of these recorders will take those flaws and exaggerate them, each in its own way. THAT'S the difference: some people visually prefer some flaws to others. This is further compounded by the "spin" some recorders have programmed into them. The filters, stabilizers and enhancement varies from Panasonic to Panasonic, they aren't all identical and none are truly neutral. Ditto the JVC, which does so much processing it could never be called "neutral", besides having a couple of encoding inaccuracies common to many early dvd recorders (including the similar, frightfully expensive and fragile vintage Toshibas).


The first thing you need to buy is a vintage JVC. It is easy to find a JVC DR-MV5 combo vhs/dvd recorder in working condition for $50-75, the dvd section of this machine is identical to LordSmurfs reference-standard DRM-100, with the same encoder. processor and filters he raves about and the same "appropriate" LP resolution. It is absolutely impossible to understand LordSmurfs visual sense and point of view until you test drive one of these units. The LP recording quality of 2003-2005 JVC is so specific to those machines that nothing else looks remotely like it: you will either love it or hate it.


The same "love it or hate it" applies to the equally over-analyzed Panasonic LP mode. There is more to the Panasonic LP than just the resolution change: Panasonic also tweaks their encoders to apply some enhancement algorithm in LP. Despite LordSmurfs obvious misgivings, the higher resolution combined with enhancement spin DOES make the Panasonic LP appear superficially "better" to many casual viewers. Does it look that way with all sources? No. Would it hold up to the close scrutiny you will give it? Again, probably no. But like the JVC, there is no way you can grasp what the Panasonic fans are talking about until you try for yourself- the Panasonic LP quality is not as distinctive/specific as the vintage JVC, but its unique enough that you need to see for yourself. Panasonics are in high demand, even old decrepit units, but you should be able to pick up a representative ES-15 or ES-25 for under $80.


What you will find, as I did, is the Pioneers fall exactly between these two. They are totally neutral in terms of processing, because they don't have any (aside from very good line input stability from VHS). The Pioneer LP at 480 x 720 appears exactly as LordSmurf suggests: neither here nor there, because it isn't processed in any way to give it a "look". Its just lame old LP, and in real-world consumer digital, LP just isn't great for anything but timeshifting "Wheel Of Fortune" or "Oprah". For all practical purposes, Pioneers peter out in usefulness at the MN16 /170min speed, which fits about 3 hours and 5 minutes of actual recording time on a single-layer DVD. Why people continually obsess over getting to four hours, as if its some holy grail, is freaking beyond me: instead of being grateful that DVD-R is a quarter the cost and a twelfth of the storage space of VHS, they just gotta have that fourth hour. Well, you're not gonna really love it, whatever machine you use: LP simply pushes DVD recorders past their limit (no matter what specs and theory say). If you need to timeshift long-form sports in high quality, you need a DVD recorder with a hard drive or a subscription TiVO/cable/sat PVR: doing it at LP on optical disc is not going to cut it. Most movies will fit nicely on single layer up to 3hours, as will four one-hour dramas or eight sitcoms with the commercials deleted. Thats pretty decent capacity for a little 5 inch 35 cent disc. (Granted, if dubbing from VHS you may have to shave that capacity to between SP and 140mins, depending on the tape quality.)


DVD/HDD recorders are an incredible home video tool if one is mindful of their definite practical limitations and can work within them, not least of which is that 130mins per DVD is the outside limit for tape dubbing before image deterioration sets in. If you cannot be happy unless you squeeze four hours minimum on a disc at stunning quality, then you need to forget DVD altogether and buy a BluRay burner for your PC. The blank discs will cost ten times as much as a DVD-R, but you'll have your multiple hours on a single disc at decent quality. The only remaining alternative is pure hard drive storage, using hot-swap drives and a home theater PC.


I've used Panasonic, Pioneer, JVC, Toshiba and Phillips/Magnavox DVD/HDD models over the years, all have advantages and drawbacks. Eventually I settled on Pioneers as my primary recorders, based mostly on personal preference for their operational feel and overall compatabilty with my own tapes and VCRs for dubbing work. I didn't see a dramatic-enough difference in LP quality with a Panasonic to justify the outrageous price premium Panasonics command on the second hand market, otherwise I thought they were solid machines. The JVCs gave me no end of grief on an operational level, but I keep two in reserve for some very long recordings that do seem to benefit from their unique filtering and encoding. I use them less and less as time goes by, because they don't have hard drives and the image quality difference (to me) is often not worth dragging them out of mothballs, but I can see why they remain reference standards for many people. The Toshiba didn't stay in my hands long, I'm not a fan of TVGOS and the machine was not fun to operate, but image quality was top-notch at all speeds. Not enough for me to put up with its foibles, and not enough to resist an offer I got to buy it off me, but if you want "JVC image performance with a hard drive" an old Toshiba is as close as you'll get. The Phillips (now Magnavox) I gave to my Dad, decent unit with good ATSC/QAM tuner but klutzier to operate than a Pioneer or Panasonic (best value out there in a new recorder, though).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Jeff - Thanks. Hmm u have a Panasonic. Does it have manual recording speeds like my Pioneer? (In between speeds)


It sounds like fuzziness at 352 x 480 is more annoying than macroblocking when u stretch out 750x480 to 4 hours?



Citibear - A long complex answer, once again. Thank you.

So did Lordsmurf use a Pioneer as well? I thought he did. Or was it only a jvc?

And you didn't really answer the last part of my question, but then, maybe Jeff did....

But that question was:

Do you think that on the pioneer mn-8 would end up being better quality than lp (because mn-8 is 352x480 not like lp which is 750x480) ? And if it is better than lp do u think it would be better than even like mn-16 (also 750x480)?

I guess it depends on what you are recording like Jeff said? how bout if u were recording the Daily Show and the Colbert report? I have been recording every episode and then just erasing the non funny / guest segments.


ps: i know u are probably going to say the logical thing which is "you have to test it yourself." But I did - a little bit - and I wasn't sure if I could see a difference or tell which one was better. Maybe it's cuz I have a tube tv.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,642 Posts
Unfortunately Panasonics do not have MN speeds like Pioneer. They use something called FR (flexable record). What FR does is to fill up the disc with with exactly anywhere from 1 to 8 hours, you set the duration down to the minute. As long as you're around to stop the recording (with the STOP button) you can use FR as a almost infinite speed setting. For example if you wanted to use a speed that would equate to a 3hr speed (Panasonic only has canned speeds of 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours) on a new disc you would set FR for 3 hrs and push REC. At the conclusion of your event you would push STOP. Lets say that event was 2hrs 1 minute long. If you wanted your next event to be in a 3hr speed for that next event you'd set FR for 59 minutes. If this last event was your last event you wanted on the disc you could just leave your machine unattended and it would automatically stop after 59 minutes and the disc would be full.

Recording to DVD you cannot use FR for the first event of a timer recording unless you want the whole disc filled up with the amount of time you've set FR for. You can use FR for the last event of the DVD and again it will be full as the conclusion of the event.

FR isn't as easy to use as Pioneers MN format although it does you give you many more speeds than is possible with MN.

Whether you prefer Macroblocking or fuzziness it's entirely up to you. When I copy a DVD I usually use LP for the extras and a maximum of FR set to 3hrs for the movie itself. I personally prefer to get the extras in full resolution at the expense of macroblocking but others may differ.

It would be nice if any DVDR would give the user the option of full or 1/2 D1 so we could decide(based upon source material) what resolution we want. Unfortunately none that I'm aware of have such a setting. A way to trick a Panasonic into recording 1/2 D1 is, instead of using LP, use FR set for anything above 4hrs (eg. 4hrs 1 minute on a new disc). This forces the machine to drop it's resolution.

If you're recording the Daily Show or Colbert report from a analog source and watching on a tube TV you might not notice that much of a difference between 1/2 and full D1. If you're recording from downconverted HD(or a commercial DVD) and watching on a larger flat screen HDTV you'll definitely be able to tell the difference, at least I can.

If you're recording to a HDD and plan on deleting it anyway I'd personally just use SP and have the better picture quality and minimal macroblocking. If you're planning on burning it to DVD then you may want to save some disc space and use a slightly longer speed, ~3hrs. on a Panasonic and a similar MN16 according to Citibear. Note again if your recording something like a live events show (Grammys, Oscars etc.) you may want to stick with SP on either machine. The high resolution and quick screen cuts/strobe lights plays havoc with DVD recorders at most any speed with longer speeds being considerably worse. Motion is the killer of longer recording speeds, don't make the mistake I did of using too slow of a speed (LP in my case) because it looks great for recording a static image. Later when you get a larger TV you'll kick yourself every time you watch one of those discs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,995 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by scissorhands /forum/post/16920918


I guess it depends on what you are recording like Jeff said? how bout if u were recording the Daily Show and the Colbert report? I have been recording every episode and then just erasing the non funny / guest segments.


ps: i know u are probably going to say the logical thing which is "you have to test it yourself." But I did - a little bit - and I wasn't sure if I could see a difference or tell which one was better. Maybe it's cuz I have a tube tv.

I have a Pio 640, and a 56" 720p DLP TV. I don't agree with your premise, Pio's LP does not look "horrible." I think it looks better than SP VHS, and I find it suitable for some things, like Congressional hearings. Of course LP is no where near as good as SP, which I find virtually indistinguishable from the original, most of the time.


For films over two hours, I will stretch a recording to 140-150m, at most. For longer, I use DL discs, or break the recording up over multiple SL discs.


Since you are watching on a CRT TV, presumably 25" or less, LP probably wouldn't be too objectionable. But, when you update to a larger, HDTV, you would see the difference.


I too record The Daily Show,, and a few other things regularly. Six whole Daily Shows, w/o commercials will easily fit on one $.20 disc. Editing the way you do, I should think one DVD would hold 8 or more shows. LP would double that. So, I can't understand why you would consider recording in MN8. At LP, you could record them all for ~ $2 per year, or ~$4 for SP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks Jeff.

Those panasonic fr speeds sound complicated. But i guess you get used to it.


kjbawc - i can't copy and paste from this damn best buy computer i'm on,


but u were saying that you can't understand why i would use mn-8 instead of lp. Well my theory, if u read all the above stuff is that mn-8 is 352x480 while lp on the pioneer is 750x480, so i was worried that at 4 hours lp might not be as good as mn8....?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,340 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by scissorhands /forum/post/16910656


Sooo... does that mean that MN-8 would be waaaay better than lp. Would it even be better than like MN-16 (which I've sometimes had to use for longer movies)?

As the other posters have mentioned, it's impossible to make generalizations because there are just too many variables:


- the source material varies

- the type of material (static vs. action, bold vs. muted colours, etc. etc.)

- the display you use

- your personal preferences and tendencies to notice various types of artifacts.

- etc. etc.


I long ago decided to ignore all the hoopla about the various flavours of LP mode recordings. I stick with SP or near-SP speeds and they've kept me very happy. Discs are cheap, even the good ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
Source is indeed the most important aspect to consider, followed by the encoding strengths of the hardware/software, when determining how much can be fit on a single disc, while retaining a certain level of quality.


To consider 352x480 Half D1 "fuzzy" is to ignore the source. A VHS tape, and many other sources, are already "fuzzy" compared to higher grade source. Encoding the lower-end res material to LP 720x480 is senseless, unless you just want to add macroblocks to the "fuzzy".


Avoiding LP is wise advice for most folks, with most equipment. Unless you're ready to own multiple machines, and really learn about video, SP is the way it needs to be these days. Or better yet, XP, from those home movie DV, 8mm and VHS tapes. You can gain quality by using Half D1 3-hour encodes, if a number of variables all line up. Large HD displays has really compounded the problem, as those displays comes with their own problems, aside from making source/encode errors far more obvious.


There was a lot of stupid dogma online some years ago, including from this site, and I've fought it non-stop. To read respectable debate on how all these factors come together to affect quality is just really nice to see, after all this time.



Learning all the truth, and then making judgment calls on a PER RECORDING basis, is really the way to do it. I record XP, SP, SP+, LP, LP+, EP all the time, it really depends on the content, source specs, ultimate destination/use, viewing hardware, etc.


Good job.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,530 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski /forum/post/16933265


I can't say I've ever used an EP mode on any of my HDD/DVD recorders.


Except maybe once, when I got my first one - just to confirm to myself why I should never use it.

Do I use EP (set for six hours per disc) on a Panasonic?


One nearby OTA-only sub-channel carries America One programming that includes two (often obscure) movies per day. Sometimes these movies are poor quality 16mm prints. The larger problem is that it that this local station has turned up the audio gain so high on this sub-channel that there is clipping and echo. This station’s other sub-channels, two shopping networks and a video music service, have normal audio. I found good audio streamed on the internet by an America One station in Pensacola Florida. That stream’s audio perfectly synchronizes with the video on the local sub-channel (with the exception of the local commercials inserted into the America One programming).


From February until about two weeks ago I had been recording these movies at the EP “speed” in the event that America One shows some rare gem that I may later transfer to my computer in order to fix the audio myself. (This is something that I would have to learn how to do.)


A number of times since February I’ve called the local station concerning the cranked up audio on this sub-channel. I suggested that they turn down the audio gain if this is a local problem, or, if this is a signal source problem I suggested that they “borrow” the audio from the streamed Pensacola station. I was told, in no uncertain terms, "we know what we're doing, thanks for the call." After around five months of constantly bad audio on this sub-channel it doesn’t appear that they know what they’re doing.


Around two weeks ago all this station’s sub-channels “went dark.” I had hoped that they would correct the audio problems during that time. These sub-channels have intermittently returned to the air but the audio problems on the America One sub-channel haven’t been fixed. I’m no longer recording their movies, even at EP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by CitiBear /forum/post/16914409


scissorhands, theories and opinion and conjecture are never going to put your mind at ease: you need to actually try these other "legendary" machines so you can finally put your Pioneer in its proper perspective. I know money is tight these days, but thats what eBay is for: if you "test buy" popular models, you can always resell them a few weeks later for near what you paid. (But before doing that, check your Pioneer initial setup menu once more to make certain the HDD is not set to VR Mode: in VR Mode, the Pioneer HDD encodes in non-standard 480 x 480 at LP. In standard Video Mode, it encodes at 480 x 720.)


LordSmurf makes a good case technically on his various points, but in the real world of practical home recording situations none of these recorders performs as expected by specs. Every dvd recorder is a consumer product, sitting on the razor's edge between high performance and total mediocrity. Too much depends on the source material: any of them will look decent with a superb source, but if the source is the least but fuzzy or blocky ALL of these recorders will take those flaws and exaggerate them, each in its own way. THAT'S the difference: some people visually prefer some flaws to others. This is further compounded by the "spin" some recorders have programmed into them. The filters, stabilizers and enhancement varies from Panasonic to Panasonic, they aren't all identical and none are truly neutral. Ditto the JVC, which does so much processing it could never be called "neutral", besides having a couple of encoding inaccuracies common to many early dvd recorders (including the similar, frightfully expensive and fragile vintage Toshibas).


The first thing you need to buy is a vintage JVC. It is easy to find a JVC DR-MV5 combo vhs/dvd recorder in working condition for $50-75, the dvd section of this machine is identical to LordSmurfs reference-standard DRM-100, with the same encoder. processor and filters he raves about and the same "appropriate" LP resolution. It is absolutely impossible to understand LordSmurfs visual sense and point of view until you test drive one of these units. The LP recording quality of 2003-2005 JVC is so specific to those machines that nothing else looks remotely like it: you will either love it or hate it.


The same "love it or hate it" applies to the equally over-analyzed Panasonic LP mode. There is more to the Panasonic LP than just the resolution change: Panasonic also tweaks their encoders to apply some enhancement algorithm in LP. Despite LordSmurfs obvious misgivings, the higher resolution combined with enhancement spin DOES make the Panasonic LP appear superficially "better" to many casual viewers. Does it look that way with all sources? No. Would it hold up to the close scrutiny you will give it? Again, probably no. But like the JVC, there is no way you can grasp what the Panasonic fans are talking about until you try for yourself- the Panasonic LP quality is not as distinctive/specific as the vintage JVC, but its unique enough that you need to see for yourself. Panasonics are in high demand, even old decrepit units, but you should be able to pick up a representative ES-15 or ES-25 for under $80.


What you will find, as I did, is the Pioneers fall exactly between these two. They are totally neutral in terms of processing, because they don't have any (aside from very good line input stability from VHS). The Pioneer LP at 480 x 720 appears exactly as LordSmurf suggests: neither here nor there, because it isn't processed in any way to give it a "look". Its just lame old LP, and in real-world consumer digital, LP just isn't great for anything but timeshifting "Wheel Of Fortune" or "Oprah". For all practical purposes, Pioneers peter out in usefulness at the MN16 /170min speed, which fits about 3 hours and 5 minutes of actual recording time on a single-layer DVD. Why people continually obsess over getting to four hours, as if its some holy grail, is freaking beyond me: instead of being grateful that DVD-R is a quarter the cost and a twelfth of the storage space of VHS, they just gotta have that fourth hour. Well, you're not gonna really love it, whatever machine you use: LP simply pushes DVD recorders past their limit (no matter what specs and theory say). If you need to timeshift long-form sports in high quality, you need a DVD recorder with a hard drive or a subscription TiVO/cable/sat PVR: doing it at LP on optical disc is not going to cut it. Most movies will fit nicely on single layer up to 3hours, as will four one-hour dramas or eight sitcoms with the commercials deleted. Thats pretty decent capacity for a little 5 inch 35 cent disc. (Granted, if dubbing from VHS you may have to shave that capacity to between SP and 140mins, depending on the tape quality.)


DVD/HDD recorders are an incredible home video tool if one is mindful of their definite practical limitations and can work within them, not least of which is that 130mins per DVD is the outside limit for tape dubbing before image deterioration sets in. If you cannot be happy unless you squeeze four hours minimum on a disc at stunning quality, then you need to forget DVD altogether and buy a BluRay burner for your PC. The blank discs will cost ten times as much as a DVD-R, but you'll have your multiple hours on a single disc at decent quality. The only remaining alternative is pure hard drive storage, using hot-swap drives and a home theater PC.


I've used Panasonic, Pioneer, JVC, Toshiba and Phillips/Magnavox DVD/HDD models over the years, all have advantages and drawbacks. Eventually I settled on Pioneers as my primary recorders, based mostly on personal preference for their operational feel and overall compatabilty with my own tapes and VCRs for dubbing work. I didn't see a dramatic-enough difference in LP quality with a Panasonic to justify the outrageous price premium Panasonics command on the second hand market, otherwise I thought they were solid machines. The JVCs gave me no end of grief on an operational level, but I keep two in reserve for some very long recordings that do seem to benefit from their unique filtering and encoding. I use them less and less as time goes by, because they don't have hard drives and the image quality difference (to me) is often not worth dragging them out of mothballs, but I can see why they remain reference standards for many people. The Toshiba didn't stay in my hands long, I'm not a fan of TVGOS and the machine was not fun to operate, but image quality was top-notch at all speeds. Not enough for me to put up with its foibles, and not enough to resist an offer I got to buy it off me, but if you want "JVC image performance with a hard drive" an old Toshiba is as close as you'll get. The Phillips (now Magnavox) I gave to my Dad, decent unit with good ATSC/QAM tuner but klutzier to operate than a Pioneer or Panasonic (best value out there in a new recorder, though).

All I can say is THANK YOU Citibear and ALL you Knowledgeable People who take the time to write a post like this!!! Excellent information! I learn more from you guys than I did at School....which was a loooong time ago!!!

Keep up the enthusiasm!!!!

Mickboy
 
1 - 13 of 13 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