Whats the best recorder for LP video quality?

[hockeytown9321]

I have lots of tapes that need to be converted, but most are over 2.5 hours long. I need a reccomendation on a recorder that has good quality on LP, and will last for a few years, but I can't spend more than about $500. Besides the loading error bug(which I think is fixed on the newer shipments?) I think I'm leaning toward the JVC DRM10, but I'm open for suggestions.

[zorankarapancev]

You should never use LP recording mode for archive purposes, regardless of the brand and model of the DVD recorder. The LP mode has inferior PQ compare to SP or FR mode for up to 3 hours recording time. If the content of the VHS tapes are not important to you, then, more or less, any DVD recorder will give you similar quality of LP (4 hours) recording.

[hockeytown9321]

So I'd be just as well off to get a panasonic E55 or E85 and break the tapes up into 2-3 DVD-R's?

[greengate69]

The Liteon 5005B with the firmware hack gives excellent quality in the 3 hour mode (to me indistinguishable from 2 hour mode). I have used it for countless VHS transfers with terrific results.

[zorankarapancev]

Most definitely! I have yet to see a better LP then SP recording from any DVD recorder available today.

[samijubal]

The JVC is a little cleaner from VHS, but I think it's mostly because it softens the picture and takes out alot of contrast, thus making it seem cleaner, but sacrificing the look of the original recording.

[lordsmurf]

I totally disagree about the JVC "loss of contrast" comment. The "softens the picture" is also relative to the size of your tv. Something viewed @ 60 inches will look blurred period.

The JVC DR-M10 (or ANY JVC series machines) is easily the #1 machine on the market when it comes to the quaity of it's 4-hour (LP) mode.

It does JUST AS THEORY SUGGESTS, and looks as perfect as SP 2-hour mode because 4-hour is a near-exact half setting using almost the same bitrate allocation. 720x480 is overkill for most sources, and is what SP uses. 352x480 is the half setting, and is comparable to most sources (VHS, tv, cable, satellite, etc). Why people insist "the image is too soft" is preposterous because the source was never "720 sharp" to start with. Artificial DIGITAL sharpening is a bad practice (use a DETAILER if you want to increase sharpness, see restoration forum for info on that device).

And UNLIKE ALMOST EVERY OTHER RECORDER (especially the crap quality of LP found on Panasonic), this HOLDS TRUE. Most other recorders turn to yucky goo past 2-2½ hours. Lots of macroblocks onscreen. NOT THE JVC!!! Maybe the other recorders think it's a ploy to make you buy more discs? Who knows.

The Pioneer is a close second, not as clean an image as the JVC. The LiteOn, while decent, can have "crunchiness" (grain on scene changes) at four hours. 3 hours are honestly the best settings on those two.

Why the JVC? Because it has JVC DigiPure technology AND the LSI encoder chipsets. Two of the best image enhancing technologies (available to consumers) in one machine.

The idea that "LP is inferior" is usually forged by people that have been exposed to crap DVD recorders (usually Panasonic) for too long. Their opinions are the unfortunate outcome of a faulty machine.

The JVC 3-hour settings (accessed via FR mode) is also quite astonishing, and uses near-superbit bitrate allocation. Up to 5000k of VBR at this setting, and the image could not be any better. No hint at noise of any kind, pretty much a flawless/transparent encode. Even better than the already-amazing-high-quality 4-hour LP setting.

Don't let these whacked-out jealous-that-their-recorder-sucks boogeymen scare you away with a often-unseen "loading" error that was mostly found on summer makes/shipments from last year. New makes almost never have this problem. JVC has identified and fixed this problem. Even if it comes up at some point, they know how to quickly (and freely) fix it. Simple resistor defect on some of them (NOT ALL!). It does exist, nobody hides that, but some of these people are as bad as Chicken Little ("the sky is falling, the sky is falling").

[jrh1194]

Don't fall for that bull...The JVC is truly crap quality...It may do a fair job in LP mode...If you can overcome the loading problem that certain people will tell you doesn't exist.

[samijubal]

Amen, the machine is garbage.

[hockeytown9321]

Why is it garbage? lordsmurf at least gave me the argument for it, whats the argument against, besides the loading bug?

[canadateck]

The JVC is a little cleaner from VHS, but I think it's mostly because it softens the picture and takes out alot of contrast, thus making it seem cleaner, but sacrificing the look of the original recording.

[samijubal]

Why is it garbage? lordsmurf at least gave me the argument for it, whats the argument against, besides the loading bug?

Every recording I made on 3 different machines, no matter what the source, had lines moving up and down in the picture, made movies almost unwatchable sometimes. Likes to lockup if you get to pushing buttons on the remote too fast, has to be unplugged to reset. Picture is too soft for a machine that has 500+ lines of resolution. Badly overheats, power supply and video circuits both. Bad spots in 75% or so of recordings with discs that work flawlessly in everything else. The worst RAM reader ever made. Need more?

[samijubal]

The JVC is a little cleaner from VHS, but I think it's mostly because it softens the picture and takes out alot of contrast, thus making it seem cleaner, but sacrificing the look of the original recording.

The problem is that the JVC recordings don't look like the source.

[lordsmurf]

- Never an overheat problem. Overheat is caused from leaving discs in the machine with power save off on the faulty models. Goes with "loading" issue. Normal machines are very cool.
- Never any lines on screen. That's a signal error. Fix your signal. Filter it if needed.
- Never had a problem with the remote.
- Never any "bad spots" in recordings. Sound like more bad source, bad signals being fed into it.
- It does have a bad RAM quality ... but pretty much EVERY RAM disc is questionable on any recorder, as DVD-VR mode is not the greatest. VR mode in general uses odd resolutions and bitrate allocation is often lacking. Use VIDEO MODE on RW media instead. I guess you can call this a "problem" but not really. RAM on the JVC I sometimes saw give odd quality, never any problem on R or RW media. Plus RAM is slow as hell to transfer on a PC (regardless of drive) while RW is very fast on a ROM drive (or even a burner).

You know, sometimes I think people make up things to make it sound worse. How sad.

Sorry, samijubal, but we've covered this over and over again. Your case was either user error, bad signal, or bad luck ... or simply a combination of some of them. You had some weirdo experiences that nobody else has ever been able to cooberate.

Gshelley and myself have a strong interest in video restoration and highest possible video quality, and we've both settled on the JVC because of it's visual performance. I could not have asked for a better DVD recorder, this was the kind of machine I had always hoped for, especially after the 2001 introduction of Panasonic machine, which have been lacking since day one.

[lordsmurf]

Another note:

Give me some time, and this weekend I may be able to toss up some screen shots of the worst possible quality both do, and the best possible quality both do.

Panasonics are also quite notorious for butchering VHS tape quality.

[samijubal]

I've used 4 different Panasonic recorders in the same location with the same source, before and after the JVCs, I have never seen anything in the picture in any of the recordings. It was in 3 different JVCs. I'm recording from a 4DTV digital master broadcast satellite, it's far from a source problem, it's a JVC problem. End of story.

[ejai]

I still use my JVC but will not recommend it because the video appears softer than the original. It is true that the JVC's captures are not as sharp as the Panasonic captures. Also the Panasonic has better contrast and more vivid color than the JVC.

Most reviewers have sited the Panasonic as some of the better machines on the market today. Only a few people in this forum think otherwise. I have both machines and when I want a true copy that looks good I use the Panasonic. I only use the JVC to record TV shows that I am unable to watch at that particular time.

Also as far as the size of the televison when viewing the files. I have a 13", 32" and 52" using component hookups and still my findings are true in all cases, the Panasonic give a better picture overall.

I was one of the first people to state on this forum that my JVC had malfunctioned after 2 weeks of using it. It has worked fine since I had it repaired. I don't think the JVC is a bad recorder, due to the fact most people will not really notice much difference and some people don't really care.

I don't think you can go wrong buying the JVC but if you are picky then the Panasonic might be a bit better. One last thing, I first started noticing the softer video once I recorded some movies that aren't very sharp to begin with. My eyes started to water a bit indicating to me that the video was somewhat blured and my eyes were strained. After careful evaluation I noticed the video on the tape was more sharper than the video made using the JVC. I was able to tell by comparing sharp structures and items on the video created by the JVC and the original.

I then took my Panasonic out of the closet (because I thought at the time that the JVC was a better machine), I made similar captures using both machines and compared the results. That is when I changed my mind and went back to using the Panasonic because the color was pure and strong and the sharp edges in the video were much better than the JVC's.

This is only one man's opinion, but the eyes don't lie 8)

[samijubal]

I have a very clean, excellent color and sharpness source, what you say is the gospel truth.

[canadateck]

Got this in Off topic

http://www.jvc-australia.com/_home.asp

[gshelley61]

Here's a link to some tests I ran months ago on this subject.

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=228869&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60

The JVC DVD recorder processes analog video signals before encoding them to MPEG2. This "DigiPure Technology" feature includes a simple line time base corrector to help stabilize the image, has surprisingly effective video noise reduction to clean up and smooth the image (hence the slightly softer picture than the original), a chroma noise reduction circuit, provides excellent 3-line motion adaptive Y/C separation (for composite video sources), edge enhancement, and luma level control. Sometimes the resulting image is very slightly lighter then the original, too.

However, the issue I have with Panasonic DVD recorders is that they encode everything you send to them, including video noise, grain, etc. Sure, the image is closer to the original at the higher bitrate settings (like XP), but macroblocks and mosquito noise are rampant if the source isn't clean as a whistle and you want to go over about 90 minutes. Both the Panny and the JVC have MPEG noise reduction on playback to suppress encoding artifacts like macroblocking, grain and mosquito noise, but as soon as you play the resulting discs in a machine that does not have any playback filtering, the results are undeniable. The JVC does a better job of producing MPEG2 video, probably because it delivers a cleaner, smoother, less noisy image to the encoding chip to start with.

In practice, I use a proc amp and an image detailer to enhance and correct the image before I even send it to the JVC. I get dynamic, vibrant, sharp recordings that are relatively noise-free and look somewhat better than the original. And I'm playing back the finished discs on an upscaling DVD player through the DVI input of a 46" DLP display... one of the most unforgiving setups you can have (flaws are very evident). If the Panasonic did a better job... believe me, I would have kept it and would still be using it.

LS is right on about half D1 (352x480) encoding with the JVC. For VHS it is perfectly fine and will allow 4 hours at very acceptable quality on a single DVD. On a typical direct view CRT television, you won't be able to tell the difference from the original VHS tape.

[steve2713]

I can't speak for the JVC's picture quality, never used one. But I see people bring up this 'digipure' stuff pretty often when speaking of the advantages of the JVCs. I think the hyping of 'digipure' is being overused, if nothing else it is an attractive marketing term.

My Pioneer 420 has similar features, they just happen to not put a fancy name on it such as 'digipure'. For recording, the Pioneer has a TBC, an adjustable 3-D Y/C filter, adjustable noise reduction, adjustable 'detail' edge enhancement, optional white level adjustments including automatic, adjustable white and black levels, adjustable hue and chroma levels. The Pioneer also has similar adjustments that can be made for playback.

I'm not saying that the 'digipure' features aren't nice, I'm sure they do help at times. I'm just pointing out that there are certainly other recorders with similar technologies, they just may happen to not have marketing terms for them.

[gshelley61]

I can't speak for the JVC's picture quality, never used one. But I see people bring up this 'digipure' stuff pretty often when speaking of the advantages of the JVCs. I think the hyping of 'digipure' is being overused, if nothing else it is an attractive marketing term.

My Pioneer 420 has similar features, they just happen to not put a fancy name on it such as 'digipure'. For recording, the Pioneer has a TBC, an adjustable 3-D Y/C filter, adjustable noise reduction, adjustable 'detail' edge enhancement, optional white level adjustments including automatic, adjustable white and black levels, adjustable hue and chroma levels. The Pioneer also has similar adjustments that can be made for playback.

I'm not saying that the 'digipure' features aren't nice, I'm sure they do help at times. I'm just pointing out that there are certainly other recorders with similar technologies, they just may happen to not have marketing terms for them.

Panasonics don't have the noise reduction filter or the other input adjustments you mentioned. Only the line TBC and the Y/C filter. It sounds to me like the Pioneer is definitely worth looking at.

[zorankarapancev]

In practice, I use a proc amp and an image detailer to enhance and correct the image before I even send it to the JVC. I get dynamic, vibrant, sharp recordings that are relatively noise-free and look somewhat better than the original.

Let’s set something straight: If you have to correct the picture (pedestal, sharpness, color saturation…) before or after the recording, that proves only one thing: the machine, by itself, is not good enough to record high quality picture. Any recorder will definitely benefit from TBC’s, proc amps and video processors, not only JVC.

I noticed that some people always claim that the JVC recorder with the aid of some kind of video processor has a better picture than any other DVD recorder. I don’t doubt that claim at all as I don’t doubt the fact that any other DVD recorder using the same electronic enhancement will have better or the best PQ.

So please, from now on lets compare apples with apples (DVD recorders as they are manufactured) and oranges with oranges (DVD recorders with external video processors).

[gshelley61]

In practice, I use a proc amp and an image detailer to enhance and correct the image before I even send it to the JVC. I get dynamic, vibrant, sharp recordings that are relatively noise-free and look somewhat better than the original.

Let’s set something straight: If you have to correct the picture (pedestal, sharpness, color saturation…) before or after the recording, that proves only one thing: the machine, by itself, is not good enough to record high quality picture. Any recorder will definitely benefit from TBC’s, proc amps and video processors, not only JVC.

I noticed that some people always claim that the JVC recorder with the aid of some kind of video processor has a better picture than any other DVD recorder. I don’t doubt that claim at all as I don’t doubt the fact that any other DVD recorder using the same electronic enhancement will have better or the best PQ.

So please, from now on lets compare apples with apples (DVD recorders as they are manufactured) and oranges with oranges (DVD recorders with external video processors).

I used the same processors on my Panasonic DVD recorder, as well. The link to the test frame examples I posted above used no processing at all.

I don't know about your specific situation, but every video source I encounter varies from one another, especially when it comes to black level and color saturation. Luma and hue are generally OK, but sometimes these need adjustment, too. Anyway, that's why I use a proc amp. I like my blacks to be black, not grey. Plus, establishing the correct black level helps with masking some chroma noise. I also don't see the purpose in recording something that is under or over saturated when it can be corrected first. The detailer/sharpener I use is very effective for squeezing out a bit more clarity from some sources (like laserdiscs, for example) prior to recording. The finished DVD transfers I wind up with look a little better that way to me. The same was true when I was capturing with the Panasonic. The hardware processors worked just as well for that unit, too. My use of hardware processing is all about correcting and enhancing the source image, not making the DVD recorder work any better. My point was that the JVC does not butcher the image (by making it too light or too soft as some claim), but like any other recorder can greatly benefit from image correction prior to capture.

I just happen to like the way my JVC does the job of converting analog video to MPEG2 better than I did with the Panasonic I had. No big deal. Use whatever machine you like best.

[ejai]

As far as noise filtering goes I agree that Digipure is just another marketing tatic. I recorded a tape that had a woman wearing a bright red dress when I was testing the JVC and Panasonic recorders.

The JVC showed some streaking in the video and the color blending was not smooth at all.

The Panasonic showed no streaks at all, it handled the red color with no sign of noise or color degradation.

I am one person who also had to use video enhancement tools in order to get the right color and sharpness while recording using the JVC. This recorder reminded me of the days when I was creating VCDs and hoping the final product looked good.

The Panasonic has filters that work quite well and doesn't take away from the original source. As far as macro blocks go it is true if you are recording 90 minutes or over they show from time to time. The JVC does a better job but unfortunately the video resolution drops a step and the smoothing is even worst. If the video is extremely sharp then the JVC will do a better job on long captures.

All-in-all I find the Panasonic does a better job overall and the JVC is ok depending on the circumstances.

[ejai]

My point was that the JVC does not butcher the image (by making it too light or too soft as some claim), but like any other recorder can greatly benefit from image correction prior to capture.

This statement is not true, I was taping a program off a satellite station and noticed the JVC made the capture lighter due to a slight loss of color. I unhooked the JVC and ran the video through the television bypassing the JVC, going straight from the satellite straight to the TV. The picture showed more color and better contrast.

Gshelley61 states that he bought video enhancers in order to fix the video source not the recorder. I bought mind for just the opposite, to enhance the recorder.

What I'm trying to say is that the JVC is a very good recorder but the Panasonic is in the same league. Both have issues and most people will be happy with either machine.

[lordsmurf]

I simply have no idea what some of you are talking about. The color is fine. The "softness" issue is almost negligible and moreso a psychological imagination than not. Making a big deal over nothing.The brightness is fine too, there is not more change on it that on Panasonic. In fact, I found the JVC to hold color BETTER than the Panasonic.

To me
MACROBLOCKS = CRAP VIDEO
Panasonic has slight macroblocks even at 2-hour,
but ESPECIALLY beyond.

The Panasonic hardware MPEG encoder is most likely based off the often-hated crap-quality Panasonic MPEG Encoder software that pretty much went belly-up in the past few years. Nobody in their right mind ever liked that thing. It made CCE look noise-free, which is a known noisy encoder.

Panasonic is also playing a con-game when it comes to their INCORRECT IRE settings in the hardware. They adjust it or "fix" it by tweaking gamma settings. I'm currently researching this. I'm not positive that IRE and gamma can be used interchangeably like this, nor that they are "the same thing".

Plain and simply ... if the JVC looked like crap, I wouldn't use it.
- Panasonic adds blocks, colors muted (IRE/gamma issues)
- Philips is grainy, sometimes color oversaturated
- Toshiba is flawed (IRE)
- Cyberhome, Polaroid, Apex .. severe mechanical issues
- Pioneer is fine
- LiteOn is fine, but CVBR can cause grain at 4 hour, nice to hack
- Sony had drive problems, some grain issues too

These are just test units off the top of my head too, I'd have to whip out the full list for more.

I only use proc amps and detailers on damaged tapes. I do not use it at any other time, the JVC conversions are flawless as is.

[jrh1194]

Plain and simple - The JVC is garbage...No doubt that softened image and loading problems equate to a piece of crap. You can knock the Panasonic machines with whatever nonsense you can fabricate, but the truth is that they are much better than JVC..They always have been. If they were not, then so many of us would not be happy with them. You may be able to fool yourself, but not the rest of us. JVC machines are inferior...Both in picture quality and reliability. They are just barely a cut above Liteon!!!

[jossy]

The JVC DR-MH30S recorder right now has the best picture quality in LP mode!!

[lordsmurf]

I've always been amused with some portions of the videohelp crowd. Certain "beliefs" are held in this place that would easily get you laughed out of other forums, most of them filled with more experienced video hobbyists and professionals.

The JVC is a solid machine, and I'm actually researching a myth of Panasonic right now that will uncover some of the "mystery" as to why Panasonic owners think JVC is "too bright" amongst other bogus claims. Those ARE after all, the ONLY people that jump and down yelling "it's too bright" and "it's too soft". (A few Philips users too on the "soft" comments.) Coincidence? I think not.

+++++++++++++++

Excellent 3-hour to 4-hour mode recorders includes:
- JVC (LSI, VBR)
- Pioneer (Renesas, CBR and VBR)

Good 3-hour to 4-hour mode recorders includes:
- Apex (LSI, VBR and CVBR)
- LiteOn (LSI, CVBR)
- Sanyo (ESS, CVBR)

++++++++++++++++

Panasonic not only doesn't make the cut, it doesn't even make the runner-up category.

The runner-up category is
- Emerson (??)
- Sharp (??) ... not the Panasonic clones
- LG (LSI)

Sadly, these have good quality, but major flaws
- Toshiba (Zoran, ??) ... IRE issues
- Sony (Sony, Cirrus) ... drive problems

....... these are mainly good at 2 hours but can go longer, though you'll tend to easily notice flaws the longer you go. Up to 3 hours is still generally decent, if the unit allows it.

++++++++++++

The "hell no" category includes
- Panasonic (Panasonic, VBR)
- Philips (Philips, CVBR)
- Cyberhome (Cirrus, CVBR)
- Polaroid (ESS, CVBR)
- and LOTS of other crap brands using random chips

........ these are barely even good at 2 hours, there are flaws that can easily be seen, and it just gets horribly unviewable past 3 hours. It can vary from encode to encode, but at some point in time, ESPECIALLY FROM VHS, you'll hit this ugly quality.

++++++++++++++++++++++

UNTESTED CURRENT MODELS
LG (Cirrus) formerly LSI
Samsung (Cirrus) formerly Zoran
Memorex (??)
RCA (Cirrus)
Mustek (Cirrus)
Daewoo (LSI) combo machine

++++++++++++++++

Magazines and review sites tend to test machines only in XP (1 hour) and then EP (6 hour) mode. Some do 2 hour (SP) if you're lucky. They also grade machines are retarded criteria like "attractiveness" and "remote control button layout". These people really DO NOT KNOW what to look for when judging equipment. More and more in the past couple of years, tech magazines have been full of erroneous dribble.

+++++++++++++++++++

Panasonic has become the "most sold" recorder because they have about 3-4 times more models (minimum!) than the other companies. There is no other reason behind their market share aside from simple flooding of the market. It does not take a genius to see this.

Pioneer has probably the second largest lineup, but the prices have always kept them back a bit.

LiteOn and the LiteOn clones are QUICKLY sucking up huge portions of the market thanks to lower priced units. They don't have to charge for "name brand" like a lot of the others, and it's possible many of these clones are sold as cheap bulk kits to the rebranders.

+++++++++++++++++++

Lower grade machines, usually COMBO units and Panasonics, are also sold in stores like Best Buy, which are the least common denominator in terms of general quality of products sold. Videohelp is flooded with too many Best Buy'ers, and therefore we get all these "I love Panasonic" comments from people that have probably never used more than 1 or 2 recorders at most. They would not know quality equipment if it slapped the in the face. Take a look around. How many people are still using BT8x8 chipset cards with 10-year-old VHS machines and no TBC? Most of them. And how many people love their flawed imperfect methods? You guessed it: a lot of them.

++++++++++++++++++++++

Images to follow, just give me some more time. I have about 3-4 threads on the site where it takes some actual effort (not just words) to supply some samples. Busy person, and I don't get paid for this.

++++++++++++++++++

Use what you like best is always solid advice.

This is what my years of experience and research into DVD recorders has resulted in. Not to mention dozens and dozens of tests on dozens of units.