March 2006 Consumer Reports DVD Recorder Quick Picks

[David K]

FYI

The March 2006 Consumer Reports has a mini-article update on DVD Players and Recorders, which includes the following quick pick recommendations.

Best Choices for basic TV recording:
Panasonic DMR-E65S
Sony RDR-GX300
[They like these for their "excellent recording quality" and the fact that both could control a cable box.]

Best for recording and archiving to DVD:
Pioneer DVR-633H-S
Pioneer DVR 533H-S
Humax DRT-400
["Both Pioneers provide the best images from the widest range of recorded DVDs and have TV Guide on screen." "The Humax unit has the more advanced TiVo programming guide."

Best choice in a DVD recorder/VCR combo:
Panasonic DMR-ES30V

Finally, CR suggests holding off from getting a high-def DVD player (Blu-Ray or HD DVD) because "only one high-definition format will prevail, or both might combine into yet another format."

[gshelley61]

This is old info. The Panasonic DMR-E65 and Sony RDR-GX300 are year 2004 models and were discontinued many months ago. Note also that they never mention the myriad of problems many people have with the TVGOS system, regardless of what brand or model of DVD recorder has the feature.

CR reviews on audio/video gear are nearly worthless.

[lordsmurf]

It's good to see that CR still fellates Panasonic and Sony
for no reason except name alone.

CR is a waste of cyberspace, a waste of printed words.

If you want the very best in 2005-2006 DVD recorders, browse the models from JVC and Pioneer. LiteOn and Toshiba have some decent offerings too.

[Jester700]

I don't think CR favors anyone for the name alone, though they may test more of what's commonly available in Sears, Circuit City, etc. and what they consider "the big names".

I still respect their honesty, but I'd bet their testing methodology is flawed, or at least aimed at simpletons. I mean, IIRC they only test at top or 2 hr. quality, which in an eyeball test, would be hard to spot differences (and I think all the recorders were rated equally here, so what good is the test?). Especially from an RF input, say. In testing for how "most people" use gear, they may well make their own test pointless.

They used to have more detailed results, from which you could sometimes suss out the best machine for your needs if your needs weren't "typical". Much shorter articles now, even on the web where space is cheap.

And their "quick pick" articles are based on months-old tests, in which many machines are already discontinued when the INITIAL article comes off the press.

[smearbrick1]

I imagine Consumer Reports is just like J.D. Power and Associates with their bias toward domestic cars. These people list Oldsmobile near the top of the luxury class? They list Honda and Toyota in the middle of the class in reliability (after several American cars)? This makes no sense.

I pretty much stick to consumer reviews for my purchases. If Joe Consumer likes it, I'll probably dig it. I don't trust people who sell advertising to the very same people whose products they are reviewing. Seems like a conflict of interest to me.

[MikDee]

Isn't the Panny DMR-ES40V a newer better version of the same unit as the DMR-30V?
Why did they not choose this one instead, are they that far behind the times?

[Almost Human]

To smearbrick1 - It's obvious you have never read a Consumers Report. CR is the only magazine that does not nor never has accepted advertising. All their income comes from sales of the magazine and contributions from subscribers. The only bias CR exibits is to rate items in a maner that helps the average buyer chose a purchace.

There are many item I purchase that CR does not test, but if they test something I would like to purchase I consider their results - no more no less. CR is a valuable tool in a world bombarded with advertisement from all angles.

[FulciLives]

I learned long ago in my late teens that CR was a waste of time ... giving good reveiws etc. to sub-par equipment. Back then you had VIDEO MAGAZINE and STEREO MAGAZINE etc. and that was where you would find what was really good ... not CR ... it's a joke.

Now if you want to find what is good you have websites such as this one which has more value than CR ever did.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[divuer]

It’s distressing to read the negative comments posted here in regards to Consumer Reports. The publication happens to be one of the few voices left in the media that is not owned by some corporate behemoth. An overwhelming number of magazines (and online) review publications are nothing more than part of the marketing department for their client companies. They get their products at no charge, directly from the manufacturer. The reviews are edited by the publication to make sure they sell the product and do not offend their clients since they do not want to lose their advertising revenue. In short the consumer they cater to is the manufacturer who pays them not the end user like you and me. They are nothing more than wordy advertisement disguised as a review.

Consumer Reports on the other hand buys the products they test at the retail level once the item is in regular production. They do not take advertising money and are not bound by any concerns about offending a crappy product or company. I may not always agree with their opinions but they have been the most impartial source available for the consumer. Please do not confuse them with impostors like Consumer Digest or JD Power who are nothing but spokespersons for the manufacturers.

[FulciLives]

Well CR needs to get people that know their shit.

The people testing A/V stuff are worthless.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[trhouse]

Virtually everything said here has a ring of some truth. Impartiality does not imply competence. Unfortunately, competence does not imply impartiality either.

Magazines that take money from advertisers may not want to offend them, so does that mean magazines that take money from consumers want to offend them? If CR found most of its readers liked a product, but they did not think much of it, what do you think they would say ( ie would the consumer dump CR first or the product they like )?

[Rich86]

Anyone who has followed Consumer Reports over the years knows their greatest strength is their absolute integrity and accuracy in testing/evaluating products for the average/common consumer. I say this with respect.

If you are a consumer who values a level of quality and sophistication beyond what a person might consider to be intended for the average consumer, then this testing magazine is not for you.

I believe in this magazine for purchasing dishwashers, clothes washers, lawn mowers, TV's for the bedroom, VCR's for recording and playing back broadcast TV shows, small cameras, etc. I would never follow CR's advice unchallenged for purchasing speaker systems, multi channel power amplifiers, pre-amplifiers, high end dvd players, etc. as the testing standards do not give enough weight to increased performance beyond what the average consumer would consider important and worth high prices.

[InXess]

I was always wondering why would it be almost a death sentence for a magazine to publish buyers guides and reviews like European ones. Just take any good UK or German magazine and you'll find all sorts of rankings, listings detailing pros and cons while in the US it always has to be a consumer who is ultimately burdened with maticulously gathering data, reviews and time consuming in-depth investigation of the subject. Why Epinions.com never grew up (although undeniably popular) to have its printed equivalent. Why testing something professionally like they do in Europe is almost a crime here. Keep in mind that those magazines in Europe never complain about a lack of advertisers. Moreover, the same companies (as here) proudly include their product test results in their branded adverts.

[ebenton]

I have for a long time believed that CR is an OK publication for ranking diswashers, refrigerators, blenders, microwave ovens, and other kinds of "generic" appliances.
If there is a speciality magazine out there for the product, such as stereo gear, video gear, cars, etc. then those magazines generally have more-knowledgeable people evaluating the gear.
That doesn't mean that the specialty magazines are not more subject to conflict-of-interest than CR. It just means you are more likely to get more detailed data than you are in CR. If you are a real expert user of a product, you can get better data from a specialty magazine review than you could from CR. I value lordsmurf's opinion of DVD recorders over CRs, even if CR might have more resources than he might.
If there are any specialty magazines that do reviews of any of the "generic" appliances I mentioned, then I would take that product off the "OK for CR" list.