Better DVD Recorder at 2hr (+?) from VHS ??

[StuR]

Sorry about asking this perenial question but I'm coping VHS to DVD.
As advised I've upgraded on the VCR:-
I've got a Panasonic VCR HR860 (tbc/nr) and an external TBC/synch (videotech VMX410)
but I'm just going back to look again at the DVD Recorder.
It's a Sony GX300 which I tend to use 2hr.
From RGB digital origonal source 2hr is pretty much as origonal, but as usual VCR isn't as simple.
I like to use 2hr but after using 1hr mode it really is sharper, not really better than the video but at least the same. But 1hr is convieniant, I have a 1.5hr mode which is better but can someone advise a better DVDR. I've read the comments about JVC, pioneer, and liteon but I wondered has anyone seen any video clip examples posted demonstrating this improvement.
Cheers

[Marvingj]

http://search.hp.netscape.com/hp/boomframe.jsp?query=videohelp&page=1&offset=0&result_...deohelp.com%2F


This will probably give you the information you wanted...I think this the correct one.

[Marvingj]

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=279460&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=dvd recorder clip


Sorry this is it..

[StuR]

Thanks, the only problem is that it seems to deal with copying from a good source (origonal dvd) and uses stills. I think video shows better the problems I've noticed i.e. the small white sparkles of noise as the DVDR tries to cope with the 'grainy' VHS.
http://www.digitalfaq.com/dvdguides/buyerguides/dvdrecorders/dvdrecorders.htm
I found this after following LordSmurf's links. The list is as he always suggests but I wondered if it really up to date now as I'm sure all manufactures will be levelling out now. My concern's with JVC are the lack of +RW and the higher than normal problems with them. LiteOn have the advantage of lower prices but they don't seem to have the same features available as JVC/pioneer, by that I mean to be able alter the incoming images NR level ect.

I'll have good look through the reviews and see if helps.

[pinetop]

http://www.digitalfaq.com/dvdguides/buyerguides/dvdrecorders/dvdrecorders.htm
I found this after following LordSmurf's links. The list is as he always suggests but I wondered if it really up to date now as I'm sure all manufactures will be levelling out now. My concern's with JVC are the lack of +RW and the higher than normal problems with them. LiteOn have the advantage of lower prices but they don't seem to have the same features available as JVC/pioneer, .

Keep in mind this list is nothing more than LS's opinions. He tends to be brand blind and brand bias. JVC is hard to find, and have had some problems. It might be easier to find a refurb JVC than a new one. Avoid Liteon recorders, just as hard to find as JVC, and quality control nightmares. Pannys are well liked at AVS forum, and yet there on his no go list.
It seems like your already set with equipment. I have a older Sony GX7, I've been happy with my VHS transfers in the 2hr mode. I have a few DVDs from a Sony 330, these are VHS transfers in the 2hr and 21/2hr modes. I think they look really good. How bad are your VHS transfers?

[trhouse]

You might want to read this sticky before changing recorders. Some of these devices provide much more control than typically found in a recorder so you can adjust the amount of processing to be optimum for a given tape.

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=239205

[FulciLives]

Here is a link for you:

http://rapidshare.com/files/4766263/Blade2c.mpg

That is a MPEG-2 DVD spec file that was created on a Pioneer stand alone DVD recorder (model DVR-531H-s). The source was an original studio made VHS videotape which thankfully had no copy protection. The VHS in question is BLADE II and it was played back on a 6-Head Hi-Fi Stereo Toshiba VHS VCR.

So there ... you now have an actual recording made on a stand alone DVD recorder from a VHS videotape source. Granted the Pioneer DVR-531H-s is no longer made but from all that I have read the current Pioneer model (DVR-640H-s) is just as good (i.e., the two are basically the same quality wise and even function wise).

So as you can imagine my suggestion is to buy the Pioneer DVR-640H-s although some people on this forum are very fond of the Toshiba RD-XS35

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

P.S.
When you follow the provided link you come to a page that might look ... confusing ... so look in the bottom right hand corner and you see the word "FREE" in a box ... click on that. That brings up a new page with a count down ticker. Once that ticker is done a special "CODE" appears. Type the code into the provided space and click on the DOWNLOAD button and there you go. It isn't very intuitive but it is free file hosting so deal with it!

ONE FINAL WORD ... if I recall correctly this recording was made at the 90 or 95 minute recording mode.

[lordsmurf]

He tends to be brand blind and brand bias.

Bullshit.

Brand has nothing to do with reviews. Brand loyalty is one of the dumbest concepts in existence. Performance and quality are the only considerations.

Silly features (timeslip, PIP, etc) are not important either. At the end of the day, video and audio quality are all that matter. You need a clean image with clean audio. This is why filters are an important consideration. Nothing else matters.

Most DVD recorders look the same at 1-hour and 2-hour modes. It's not until you go past that 2-hour threshold that you quickly notice image issues.

Audio mostly depends on the tuner and encoding. Stereo and compliant AC3 are the best.

Most JVCs, Toshiba XS-series, some LiteOns, some LGs, and some Pioneers are the only really good machines. Everything else tends to have several major flaws that render them worthless and useless for most folks in most situations.

You can find refurb/used JVC equipment. I suggest those first. The Toshiba XS34/35 would be next in line. Some of the LiteOn, LG and Pioneer would come next.

[davideck]

Silly features (timeslip, PIP, etc) are not important either.

Timeslip is one of the most significant advancements to ever be introduced into the consumer video market. The ability to "pause Live TV" is what ushered in the Tivo revolution. It gave people a good reason to replace their VCRs because it redefines the way they interact with their TV. It is also very useful during the capture process because it provides the ability to preview the DVD encode quality while the capture is in process.

At the end of the day, video and audio quality are all that matter. You need a clean image with clean audio. This is why filters are an important consideration. Nothing else matters.

Video quality is also dependent upon TBC performance. The JVC is sensitive to horizontal timing disturbances and often exacerbates their appearance. The JVC capture of some of my tapes was a jittery mess. This sensitivity can be masked by using an external TBC. In contrast, the TBC performance of a Toshiba is significantly better than the JVC. For reducing horizontal timing disturbances, the Toshiba even does a better job than a DataVideo TBC.

Too much filtering can look as bad as too little. The JVC DNR cannot be turned off. This causes a loss of detail when capturing higher resolution sources at 720x480.

The JVC is good for capturing low bandwidth, noisy sources at 352x480 with the use of an external TBC. The Toshiba is a better choice for capturing directly from a VCR, or for capturing higher quality sources.

Just one more opinion to add to the mix...

[Marvingj]

Whether you agree or disagree with Lordsmurf or not. His statement is true, name brand doesn't mean anything.. quality, clarity in the video & Audio world means everything. I own basically almost every brand of DvD recorder out there. He is correct with his statement. I not riding the bandwagon just when someone is telling the truth & being real about it. You applaud. If you believe anything different, RESEARCH it for you self..........

[samijubal]

The JVC is good for capturing low bandwidth, noisy sources at 352x480 with the use of an external TBC. The Toshiba is a better choice for capturing directly from a VCR, or for capturing higher quality sources.

I don't record VHS, so I wouldn't know about that. For recording from a satellite, Toshiba is far better than JVC, no comparison.

[Neuron]

...For recording from a satellite, Toshiba is far better than JVC, no comparison.

I wonder what drives your judgment?
What difference in recording from a satellite source do you see?

[pinetop]

Whether you agree or disagree with Lordsmurf or not. His statement is true, name brand doesn't mean anything.. quality, clarity in the video & Audio world means everything. I own basically almost every brand of DvD recorder out there. He is correct with his statement. I not riding the bandwagon just when someone is telling the truth & being real about it. You applaud. If you believe anything different, RESEARCH it for you self..........

I don't want to move off topic, but your the guy who thinks VHS is better than DVD. And that its hard to destory a VHS tape, and you get the same quality from a $40 vcr as you do from a $500 DVD player, and how VHS audio rules:
http://www.absolutevisionvideo.com/gpage3.html

LS stating he only cares about quality simply isn't exactly true he'll argue all day with someone who has a bad product that he loves. Its a fact, from DVDs to camcorders to media he likes to think he's the final word. "I only care about quality" is what every guy that favors certain brands says. A easy way to make yourself seem right.

[samijubal]

...For recording from a satellite, Toshiba is far better than JVC, no comparison.

I wonder what drives your judgment?
What difference in recording from a satellite source do you see?

The Toshiba records almost exactly the image it sees. I can't tell the difference between watching the sat and the recordings. The JVC softens the picture, dulls the contrast and colors and adds a compressed look, because of the filtering I'd guess. Like I said, recording from my sources, no comparison.

[Marvingj]

Not tryin to Hijack the topic, but just to put this young whipersnacker (pinetop) in place........


Why VHS is still better than DVD, after all these years!


VHS is reliable. Nuff said.

VHS is simply VHS, with no compatibility problems. If it's marked VHS, it
plays in all VHS players. Simple as that. Doesn't matter if it's Di$ney or
not.

VHS has no regions either.

VHS never skips, freezes, or "layer changes". It's smooth as silk.

VHS plays even if a few molecules on the medium are out of place. Not so
with DVDs. Even CDs are far more fault tolerant than DVDs.

VHS has no equivalent of "disk rot".

VHS tapes last long enough. I know it's not forever, but I don't expect
forever. Some of my 25 years old tapes are still good - unlike the
factory-reject disks foisted on the public, half of which never work from
the start. DVDs are their own worst advertisement.

VHS players don't go bad and/or format-obsolete every 6 months or so.

VHS is a mature technology that took only 1-2 years to mature. CDs took
about 4 years. DVDs? I'll believe it when I see it. I say they have as
much future as 8-track tapes.

VHS needs no special equipment to record or copy, just a VCR and tape.
Perhaps that is why it strikes fear into the hearts of hollywood plutocrats.

VHS can be enjoyed if you're a real person with ordinary luck. You don't
have to be Gladstone Gander, Teela Brown, or Ferris Bueller.

VHS may not be as good a theoretical medium as DVD (or for that matter, good
old Laserdisc) but it is practical. Maybe it was because VHS was designed
by engineers not retarded corporate heirs who could use some time in a
class-action labor camp.

CDs work, why can't DVDs? The answer is that DVDs came out in an era with
no manufacturing standards, quality control, or service ethic - only media
monopoly greed.

[lordsmurf]

VHS ... all VHS ... has chroma noise. That alone totally kills the format for me. Reduced chroma noise was the main reason I dumped VHS 10+ years ago, opting instead for S-VHS using s-video inputs. Not a perfect solution, but far better than VHS was.

For me, DVD was the upgrade from S-VHS.

[lordsmurf]

The JVC DNR cannot be turned off. .

This is pretty much the only thing you said that was true, as it concerns a JVC DVD recorder.

(Your other comments are really a stretch. Your exaggerations get bolder and bolder every time too. One need only look at your past complaints/nags in this area to see what I mean.)

Given that it will do NR on all sources, it might not be the best option for perfect sources that need no cleaning. However, it is unlikely any consumer will be in that situation. Be it cable, satellite, Laserdisc or even consumer DV, there is some degree of obnoxious crap in the video that could use a good cleaning. If you're converting Betacam SP or pro DV, maybe you've got a point.

Still, to this day, I've never seen "softens the picture, dulls the contrast and colors and adds a compressed look" on a JVC. If you want a compressed look (posterization), get a new-age Panasonic and turn on the NR. If you want dull contrast and colors, grab some of those cheap Chinese recorders sold at Walmart. The only time I've seen a bad JVC disc was when the TV set acted oddly, or the source signal had issues (i.e., not the recorder's fault).

[Neuron]

As an owner of two JVC DVD records I can say, based on my own experience with, that I do not see anything like "dulls contrast and colors and compressed look" either. I believe whatever you see is also depends on what TV you have and what is your color/contrast/tint and etc settings are on that TV. One of my JVC DVD recorders connected to 32" SONY XBR Trinitron (CRT TV ~ 10 years old) via S-VIDEO. All picture settings are in default position as manufacturer set them. No custom changes. Recorded video on that TV looks more then perfect to me. Very colorful, enough crispy and at the same time noiseless image with enough deep contrast. Another recorder connected to 42" Panasonic plasma HDTV via component cable. TV's picture mode set to "standard" and all settings are in default position. Same visual result is here - full of colors, deep contrasted picture. I would only suggest to re-set you TVs to the default picture mode/settings and see what the difference in picture will be after. I personally very pleased with JVC recorders. I used to have Panny DMR-E60 (my fist DVD recorder) and can tell you with all of my hart - JVC DVD recorder does its recording job much much better. And I'm not A/V professional and/or "power user" like lordsmurf. I'm just a regular consumer (maybe a bit into pro-summer) for who video is just a hobby.

[trhouse]

Whether the JVC dulls contrast, etc. depends on what you know about JVC recorders. The JVC is an IRE = 0 machine like the Sony GX315. This means that it cannot produce true black when recording from IRE = 7.5 sources like standard NTSC broadcast TV or VHS.

This has been thoroughly and independently tested on this thread,

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=279460&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=96

If you are aware of this and correct for it with a process amplifier or preceed it with another recorder that corrects for it you will be fine.

Very few recorders except the Pioneers offer much control over the degree of filtering once the signal goes into the recorder. External hardware filtering offers much more control so that the filtering can be tailored to the source. More filtering eliminates higher frequencies and those higher frequencies do not just contain noise. Conversely, noise does not conveniently lie only at high frequencies to make it easy to filter. It exists within the video band fairly uniformly so filtering can reduce but not eliminate it.

[davideck]

The JVC DNR cannot be turned off. .

This is pretty much the only thing you said that was true, as it concerns a JVC DVD recorder.

(Your other comments are really a stretch. Your exaggerations get bolder and bolder every time too. One need only look at your past complaints/nags in this area to see what I mean.)

Could you be more specific?

The JVC is good for capturing low bandwidth, noisy sources at 352x480 with the use of an external TBC.

As far as I can tell, your assessment of the JVC is similar to mine. You claim that it is good at recording 3-4 hours (low bandwidth sampling of 352x480) which you claim is sufficient for most if not all of your sources (which you also claim are noisy and require DNR) and that an external TBC is necessary to keep it from "vomiting". Where do we differ?

Given that it will do NR on all sources, it might not be the best option for perfect sources that need no cleaning.

I agree.

However, it is unlikely any consumer will be in that situation.

I disagree. DNR is not artifact free. Using DNR is a subjective choice.

[samijubal]

Noise reduction takes part of the good with the bad, that's a fact of all noise reduction. So if applied to a high quality signal that doesn't need it, the signal is degraded unnecessarily. What are you recording smurf? If it's cable or VHS, the PQ is lousy anyway and it's not surprising you don't see the difference I do. If you're using a DVD recorder's tuner, you'll never get the quality of the line inputs.

[Neuron]

....What are you recording smurf? If it's cable or VHS, the PQ is lousy anyway and it's not surprising you don't see the difference I do. ....
.

And if you do, what is your source from where you recording? Studio broadcast video camera?

[deuce8pro]

For chroma noise on vhs, I set the picture to soft on the JVC HR-S9800U. I have a lot of tapes that need that setting.
As posted here in the forums, you can VERY easily correct the black level problem on the Jvc with the inexpensive Toshiba dr-4 which can be found on ebay used for less then $100
Got mine with the remote and manual for $85
The JVC does a great job encoding. So I dont understand
any negative comment about this machine as far as encoding quality.

[samijubal]

....What are you recording smurf? If it's cable or VHS, the PQ is lousy anyway and it's not surprising you don't see the difference I do. ....
.

And if you do, what is your source from where you recording? Studio broadcast video camera?

C-band and 4DTV satellites. C-band and 4DTV is where many stations, including all premium networks, get their signal, so yes, it is broadcast video quality, and very easy to see differences in DVD recorders. Toshiba blows the JVC away for high quality sources.

[Neuron]

....C-band and 4DTV satellites. .... so yes, it is broadcast video quality.....

samijubal,
With all my respect - I do not believe in miracles.

[samijubal]

....C-band and 4DTV satellites. .... so yes, it is broadcast video quality.....

samijubal,
With all my respect - I do not believe in miracles.

Whatever that's supposed to mean.

[lordsmurf]

"Broadcast quality" is hardly what I would refer to as top quality video signals. Even if you insist on this signal being classified a high quality format, few people have that sort of signal. What are we talking here... 1% or less overall market share for c-band these days?

Something like "Toshiba blows the JVC away" is also so entirely exaggerated. Both produce excellent quality recordings, easily the two best machines available. The differences between them are minor. The Toshibas have a few small flaws, but nothing that really affects video/audio quality.

If you want to see "night and day", then I've got some comparisons between a Panasonic DVD recorder and a Toshiba DVD recorder. The Panasonic looks like pure crap compared to the Toshiba. I've also got a number of JVC recordings to compare against some of those other machines out there. I'll probably go MIA for a while, and these kinds of projects are why.

The original poster asked about the best recorders. JVC DR-M100S or a Toshiba XS34/XS35 would be my suggestions. The JVC has no hard drive and is thus cheaper.

[samijubal]

Do you even own a Tohsiba? If not, then why do you even get into these threads?

[FulciLives]

I still say that Pioneer is the best !!! :P

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[Marvingj]

Welcome to my World of the Bombs...

Breifly here are some of the advantages of C-band..

1) C-band has somewhat better picture, at least on some channels. The
last I looked you still had many channels being sent over analog
scrambling which means, in general, using something like 6MHz to send
the picture. An analog picture sent over that much bandwidth will
usually be better than a digital picture sent over a small dish,
although it really depends on how much bandwidth the small dish system
can dedicate to the channel.. One thing I noticed when I did a side by
side comparison some time ago was that very fine details were smudged a
bit by the small dish.

2) Want some of the channels that are only on C-band. To be honest I
can't think of anything there that I care for anymore, but there are
wild feeds and such. Of course most of it you can't find a listing for.
I do remember losing patience waiting for the next weeks episode of a
show and finding the feed of it television stations were meant to
record..

3) C-band is, or at least last I looked anyway, was cheaper, but you get
fewer channels and you really can't use multiple receivers without
multiple dishes, and even then you negate any savings..