do I HAVE to filter VHS tapes when going to DVD?

[gshelley61]

You want a JVC 7000 or 9000 series. One of the more recent models.

How about something like a 7600 or 9500, or a 9800? I don't know much about the 7600 or 9500; were these considered good machines? Wasn't the 6700 supposed to be a very good pro-grade deck?

JVC did make some real nice, heavy duty S-VHS decks prior to the machines with "DigiPure" processing. However, the video noise reduction capability alone of the later units is very effective and desirable. Plus, the 6600 (for example) is from 1989. Even if you locate one in excellent shape, it is 15 years old now.

There's a nice prosumer model JVC made that has all the circuits that would eventually be called the "DigiPure" processor (except the line TBC). If you have a standalone TBC, the BR-S378U has an exceptionally good playback image with built-in I/Q white balance, color saturation and sharpness/softness adjustments. It's built like a tank, and looks great, too.

[lordsmurf]

Suggest JVC S-VHS VCRs:

NTSC:
SR-V10U
HR-S7800U
HR-S7900U
HR-S9600U
HR-S9800U
HR-S9900U
HR-S9911U
BR-S378U

PAL:
HR-S8965EK
HR-S7965EK

[gshelley61]

The HR-S7600U has a nice picture, too... it has the 2MB DigiPure processor and is put together a little better than the 7800.

[tonyp2]

How do all these JVCs stack up against a Mits BV-1000 or U795, or a Panny AG-1980?

[lordsmurf]

The HR-S7600U has a nice picture, too... it has the 2MB DigiPure processor and is put together a little better than the 7800.

Does it still have the calibration (AUTO, SOFT, EDIT, SHARP) and stabilization? As well as audio monitor (HIFI, NORM, etc)

I know the x500 series was limited in this regard, which is why I never suggest them. I started with the x600 machines in the mid 90s, but I've never seen the 7600 (that I can remember at this date, at least)

[BrainStorm69]

Does it still have the calibration (AUTO, SOFT, EDIT, SHARP) and stabilization? As well as audio monitor (HIFI, NORM, etc)

I know the x500 series was limited in this regard, which is why I never suggest them. I started with the x600 machines in the mid 90s, but I've never seen the 7600 (that I can remember at this date, at least)

Yup, has all the standard JVC goodies.

[gshelley61]

How do all these JVCs stack up against a Mits BV-1000 or U795, or a Panny AG-1980?

The JVC's are hard to beat in the playback image quality department. I've had the opportunity to compare the Panny AG-1970 (which is basically identical to the AG-1980) with several different JVC S-VHS units with the "DigiPure" processing... the JVC's simply have a cleaner, less noisy image. I think the chroma noise reduction in particular is more effective than what the AG-1970 has on board. To be fair, I have not had the chance to have a look at any high-end Sony units (SLV-5RU, SLV-R1000, etc.)... so I don't know how they would compare to the JVC's.

I did get to evaluate a Panasonic AG-7750 professional editor (about $7,000 when new) and it looked great. It has a built-in full frame TBC, proc amp, and Faroudja licensed video noise reduction.

So far, the JVC SR-W5U delivers the best VHS playback I've seen.

[farnlc]

Interesting topic with what seems to be a lot of answers. Well, here's my take. My girlfriends dad has a whole collection of tapes and wanted them all to DVD so he took one to a local conversion service with all the high end equipment and they charged him like $50 to convert one tape to DVD at thier highest quality. He then gave the same tape to me and I passed the signal though my JVC S-VHS player through my JVC DV cam and into my firewire card using Vegas software at its highest settings. I then let my Ulead DVD software convert the AVI to MPEG as it burned the DVD. After comparing my DVD to the pro DVD to the original VHS I realized one thing....VHS SUCKS, YOU CAN'T INCREASE THE RESOLUTION, so there is no reason to invest $2k into reproduction tools just to get the same quality that came into the computer.

A word of advice for the kid who started this post. Don't go out and spend a lot of money on this whim. Stand alone DVD recorders are now as low as $150 so why would anyone pay you money to do what they can now do themselves very cheaply. I highly doubt that you will make enough money out of your dorm room to justify spending any extra money on equip other than what you have already got. It doesn't sound like you are too advanced in video editing or otherwise you wouldnt have started this thread, so go take a basic A/V editing class as one of your electives and if you want to offer a service offer an editing service because that is somthing that is very hard to do well on a stand alone DVD recorder and is somthing that a lot of people are too lazy or busy to do themselves. Once you have that ability, then and only then, would I recommend you go out and invest in new equipment.

P.S. Once you get some practice and only after you get some better equipment, there is a lot of money to be made from weddings.

[BSR]

Vhelp - nice post. I agree with you.

But I always do very light filtering on my VHS captures anyways.

choirislife923
Do as little filtering as needed. TMPGEnc's built in noise reduction with settings 10,1,10 does a nice job.

[lordsmurf]

...VHS SUCKS, YOU CAN'T INCREASE THE RESOLUTION, so there is no reason to invest $2k into reproduction tools just to get the same quality that came into the computer.

Not entirely true. VHS sucks, no argument here.

But good equipment, better than you mentioned, can fix this. A good detailer unit CAN and WILL restore detail, which essentially creates sharpness and detail that can ONLY be maintained by a higher resolution format. Something like 352x480, which is a good bit higher than VHS resolution, will be able to retain some of this. In extreme cases, even 704/720x480 would be desirable with certain enhancement.