Recommendation Request: LG vs Pioneer vs Panasonic

[Seeker47]

On the Philips 3575 vs Pio 53x, I had the Pio 531, and now have a Pio 640 and several Philips 3575. I prefer the Philips recordings just a little over the Pio, but the real decider should be the digital tuner in the Philips.
Here's some subjects that might be of interest on the Philips 3575.

Thanks, wabjxo. I will look over those links you provided when I have the time. For now, I'd be interested in more in the way of direct comparison between the 640 and this Phillips. For example, I'm thinking that the Phillips is probably not going to offer VBR recording options or DL burning. (I'll go look that up shortly.) Lordsmurf has already commented on the frame accuracy thing. I seem to recall reading in a few places that much of the Phillips gear is not known for its longevity. If so, that would tend to suck in a $300. to $400. purchase, or even spending a lot less. (I never mind paying more for something that is truly good and durable.) My 520 has hit nearly the 3 year mark, under heavy use, and still performs well.

I don't suppose the Phillips has a user-replaceable HDD or burner ? That seems to have mainly been the case with the likes of Polaroid or Lite-On models. And how noisy is the fan ?

[trhouse]

No apologies needed. That was a great and very useful post !

I would agree. The post has wealth of new information. I bid on a 640 but the prices went wild on eBay. That is very disappointing if there are no burners that can replace the 640 burner.

[oldfart13]

So, how much do the Phillips cost in the US? I just found them at Best Buy Canada for $350CAD! OUCH!

[orsetto]

Thanks all for the positive post feedback!

Well, my reading of the 640H Service Manual seems to suggest that the 640 uses a variant of the 111 Pioneer burner. If this is true, there may be different connectors for which you could adapt some workaround. I hope what you said is not the final word, and that someone has successfully done this. I picked up a couple of 111 spares as a hedge against such future need, and I sure hope that was not in vain. Besides that, the discussions I've seen in threads on doing this replacement have said that what you usually need to do is not to replace the whole damn burner, but rather to transplant a new, good laser lens assembly from a working burner. If those are compatible, the rest may not matter. On the other hand, I just read a post in the long-running VH thread on upkeep of the 520, stating that that burner must get a 107 laser lens assembly, because even the 108 / A08 is different enough to not be compatible.

Seeker47, I'm completely baffled why Pioneer would not use their own burners instead of subcontracting to Sony-Lite-On? The only drive feature added to the 640 and later units is DVD-RAM burning: perhaps Pioneer initially planned to use a variation of their own RAM-enabled 111 drive and then discovered an integration issue with DVR use? No way to know for sure. I haven't seen the 640 service manual but I have examined three model 540 units and four 640 units and they all have this new "mystery burner". This and Hakans' tip led me to do more research online, and I discovered it definitely is a SONY/Lite-On burner: I have seen internal pictures of new European- and Japan-market Sony recorders and they use exactly this same burner. The actual part number is Sony DRW-v35a, it sells for a whopping $265-335 as a replacement/repair part!

Also, note the more significant factor is that Pioneer completely re-engineered the guts of the 640 and later recorders. On the older models, all you need to repair the burner is a compatible laser assembly from the same-model retail Pioneer burner (i.e. for the 520 burner you need a DVR-107 series computer burner to pull parts from). The proprietary CPRM firmware is coded into the ROM chips of the (520 etc) burner's own internal controller board- so some of us also have had success swapping the main board from a Pioneer 520 burner into a standard-issue Pioneer 107 PC burner and sticking that back into the 520. A little magic from the service disc and service remote, and "voila", it works perfectly.

Swapping circuit boards in the "Frankenstein" Pioneer/Sony 640 is much more tricky. First, the drive is almost ridiculously secured into the chassis: I'm at a loss how to even remove it. Second, Pioneer apparently did not simply add CPRM code to the Sony burners' own controller board: they dispensed with Sony's board altogether! Instead, they have miniaturized the recorder's own MOTHERBOARD and added their proprietary Pioneer drive controller to it, them melded it physically to the Sony drive. How this stuff all interoperates is now a complete mystery. Myself, I don't mind mucking about with a separate drive controller board, but I'm pretty leery of messing with the recorder's motherboard. Especially if I have no idea how it communicates with this weird new drive!

The 640 model is too new for any of them to have worn out their burners yet, so we may have to wait awhile before any brave souls attempt a self-help operation and enlighten us. Meantime, I would not recommend paying the inflated price some places are asking for these in the US- too many questions remain regarding future service options. A year from now this topic should make for an interesting repair thread...

[orsetto]

OOPS! Just realized I pretty much switched topics entirely with my last post.

Sorry, I'm still too new at this posting thing! I'll shut up now.

[wabjxo]

On the Philips 3575 vs Pio 53x, I had the Pio 531, and now have a Pio 640 and several Philips 3575. I prefer the Philips recordings just a little over the Pio, but the real decider should be the digital tuner in the Philips.
Here's some subjects that might be of interest on the Philips 3575.

Thanks, wabjxo. I will look over those links you provided when I have the time. For now, I'd be interested in more in the way of direct comparison between the 640 and this Phillips. For example, I'm thinking that the Phillips is probably not going to offer VBR recording options or DL burning. (I'll go look that up shortly.) Lordsmurf has already commented on the frame accuracy thing. I seem to recall reading in a few places that much of the Phillips gear is not known for its longevity. If so, that would tend to suck in a $300. to $400. purchase, or even spending a lot less. (I never mind paying more for something that is truly good and durable.) My 520 has hit nearly the 3 year mark, under heavy use, and still performs well.

I don't suppose the Phillips has a user-replaceable HDD or burner ? That seems to have mainly been the case with the likes of Polaroid or Lite-On models. And how noisy is the fan ?

For oldfart, the $350 Canadian is about right for your high-flying currency these days.
For Seeker47, I'm not sure you'll be happy with a Philips 3575. Here are some comparisons to a Pio 640 among those I could think of that a Pio aficionado would be happy or disappointed with in the 3575:

Unhappy features ?...

1. Fewer inputs and outputs.
2. Slower high-speed dub (up to 30 min. dep. on file size (MB)).
3. No frame-accurate editing.
4. No VR-mode (only +VR, compatible w/Video-mode).
5. No double-layer (DL) DVD recording (does play back).
6. No DVD menu selections/choices.
7. No FR/MN type rec. modes (only Auto mode for dubbing).
8. No high-speed copy from DVD to HDD.

Happy features ? ...

1. NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner (can get "HD-Lite" quality recordings from digital HD channels).
2. DV input.
3. Digital and optical audio out.
4. Faster JPG viewing via USB.
5. Only the most usable rec. modes (1/2/2.5/3/4/6-hr, and I use them ALL on my downrezzed digital HD channels)
6. 36-event timer.
7. Active RF passthru (a no-loss splitter, boosts incoming signal slightly even when off, Pio's is passive).
8. Simple, directly accessible op. menus.
9. Auto-chapter marking on the HDD.
10. Selectable index pic for DVDs.
11. Easy deletion of front- and end-matter in HDD editing (to 1st and last frame each end).
12. Superior rec. quality from a line input (excellent clean-up filtering).

I have three 3575s and two have super-quiet fans, one in our bedroom started out so I couldn't hear it but my wife could, now she can't hear it.

Hope this helps!?

[lordsmurf]

So, how much do the Phillips cost in the US? I just found them at Best Buy Canada for $350CAD! OUCH!

Walmart, $298 plus tax. Worth every penny.

I would agree that older Philips gear had many issues, but this 3575 surprised me. The only concern I have about the Philips is the DVD burner, but I'm worried about that on every recorder. This one just moves slow, so I'm thinking it's got a weak drive motor. Then again, the only drives of mine that ever died had overly strong drive motors.

[wabjxo]

Re: build quality, longevity, etc., it might help to know that, today, 50% of all players/recorders sold in North America are mfg by Funai, a large Japanese company with mfg ops in Japan, China, etc.

My Pio 640 BOX (not the unit) says proudly "Designed and Engineered by Pioneer" and right under that "Manufactured in China".

Funai just started mfg recorders in 2004, and I was surprised by the relatively good build quality in my 3575. As far as longevity, the jury is still in deliberations . . .

[Bridge]

I thought that was a great, informative post too orsetto.

I think you said something about the quality of the 5xx series going softer and giving up some fine detail in order to allow longer tape times. I wonder if that's the case with say my 640? I forget the hours but I think they extended the SLP long record time by a few hours between the 5xx and the 640 series. I wonder if by making the record times longer they made the video quality even softer? I do know that when I play back something from my 533 I hit 10.08 mps at times and stays about 9.7 for the most part on a DVD XP quality. My 640 never gets past 9.7 mps and stays for the most part around 9.2 - 9.3 mps. Maybe I'm use to the 5xx video quality but they might have soften the picture in the 640 to allow for longer tape times and I'm not use to that.


My Pioneer 640 doesn't say anything about "Deigned and Engineered by Pioneer." I have an August 2006 model. I wonder if they outsourced for some reason by this time?

Lordsmurf, you say the Phillips burner is slow. Is it slower than the Poloroid you tried out a while back?

[wabjxo]

My Pioneer 640 doesn't say anything about "Deigned and Engineered by Pioneer." I have an August 2006 model. I wonder if they outsourced for some reason by this time?

Are you looking on the box? (it's not on the unit)

[Bridge]

Oh! I was looking on the machine.

[Bridge]

It took a while to find it. One side had what was written on the back of the machine. Tons of stuff about it being an analog tuner and finally on the other side I found what you said.

[wabjxo]

Lucky you found it on one side...other sides are probably in French, German or Spanish...maybe even C'nad'ian!

[Seeker47]

Seeker47, I'm completely baffled why Pioneer would not use their own burners instead of subcontracting to Sony-Lite-On? The only drive feature added to the 640 and later units is DVD-RAM burning: perhaps Pioneer initially planned to use a variation of their own RAM-enabled 111 drive and then discovered an integration issue with DVR use? No way to know for sure. I haven't seen the 640 service manual but I have examined three model 540 units and four 640 units and they all have this new "mystery burner". This and Hakans' tip led me to do more research online, and I discovered it definitely is a SONY/Lite-On burner: I have seen internal pictures of new European- and Japan-market Sony recorders and they use exactly this same burner. The actual part number is Sony DRW-v35a, it sells for a whopping $265-335 as a replacement/repair part!

Also, note the more significant factor is that Pioneer completely re-engineered the guts of the 640 and later recorders. On the older models, all you need to repair the burner is a compatible laser assembly from the same-model retail Pioneer burner (i.e. for the 520 burner you need a DVR-107 series computer burner to pull parts from). The proprietary CPRM firmware is coded into the ROM chips of the (520 etc) burner's own internal controller board- so some of us also have had success swapping the main board from a Pioneer 520 burner into a standard-issue Pioneer 107 PC burner and sticking that back into the 520. A little magic from the service disc and service remote, and "voila", it works perfectly.

Orsetto, that sort of replacement part price is typical, not unusual. That's about what they quoted for the burner part on the 520 . . . and of course you'd probably just receive a refurb for your money. I'm wondering when this changeover occurred with the 640 -- from Day 1 of production, or considerably later. I could not for the moment locate my copy of the 640 Service Manual, but I have it, and I looked through it. It definitely shows a 111 series burner (different letter designation, though) for this part. When I have the file to hand again, I'll try to do a screen shot from that page, and post it here. Of course, we've all seen products and manuals that went through a couple of rev.s, so it's hard to know the meaning of this. It certainly suggests that this model at one time had such a burner in it, or was intended to. I guess I will only know for sure at such time as I may have cause to open the 640 case. (With computers, there are at least software utilities that can query the hardware and report back what you have, without your having to disassemble anything.) This all makes me very glad I got the extended warranty -- and even better, on a deal that did this at no added cost -- so I shouldn't have to sweat this until late in '09.

Swapping circuit boards in the "Frankenstein" Pioneer/Sony 640 is much more tricky. First, the drive is almost ridiculously secured into the chassis: I'm at a loss how to even remove it. Second, Pioneer apparently did not simply add CPRM code to the Sony burners' own controller board: they dispensed with Sony's board altogether! Instead, they have miniaturized the recorder's own MOTHERBOARD and added their proprietary Pioneer drive controller to it, them melded it physically to the Sony drive. How this stuff all interoperates is now a complete mystery. Myself, I don't mind mucking about with a separate drive controller board, but I'm pretty leery of messing with the recorder's motherboard. Especially if I have no idea how it communicates with this weird new drive!

If they are doing this on all of their DVRs, that is very bad news. Their top models with digital tuners that are sold in the European and Japanese markets go for up to around 2 Grand ! How can anyone be willing to spend that kind of money for "Frankenstein" Pioneer/Sonys that can't be fixed except at further exorbitant cost ? And you only get a Sony burner !? I wouldn't want any Sony burner, for use anywhere, even for free.

A year from now this topic should make for an interesting repair thread...

You got that right !

[lordsmurf]

Understand that by "slow", I refer to the speed of how quick the disc tray ejects from the system. The Pioneer computer DVD burner, for example, is a medium speed, and the drive comes out steady. The Philips DVD recorder comes out slow but steady. The Polaroid shot out like a rocket, wobbling the whole trip, and wobbling back in again.

Funai manufactured the Magnavox, it says so on the box (or maybe it was the instruction manual), which is using the identical case to the Philips. While Funai might be doing assembly, it's not a Funai product. The Magnavox has near-identical menus to the Philips, although the remotes are very different. Magnavox uses a generic crappy Chinese remote, the Philips uses a special one.

Longer record times mean lower bitrates, period. Resolution (and it's allocated per-pixel bitrate) just determines how well it looks. Bitrate is a constant.

[Seeker47]

Here are some comparisons to a Pio 640 among those I could think of that a Pio aficionado would be happy or disappointed with in the 3575:

Unhappy features ?...

1. Fewer inputs and outputs.
2. Slower high-speed dub (up to 30 min. dep. on file size (MB)).
3. No frame-accurate editing.
4. No VR-mode (only +VR, compatible w/Video-mode).
5. No double-layer (DL) DVD recording (does play back).
6. No DVD menu selections/choices.
7. No FR/MN type rec. modes (only Auto mode for dubbing).
8. No high-speed copy from DVD to HDD.

Happy features ? ...

1. NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner (can get "HD-Lite" quality recordings from digital HD channels).
2. DV input.
3. Digital and optical audio out.
4. Faster JPG viewing via USB.
5. Only the most usable rec. modes (1/2/2.5/3/4/6-hr, and I use them ALL on my downrezzed digital HD channels)
6. 36-event timer.
7. Active RF passthru (a no-loss splitter, boosts incoming signal slightly even when off, Pio's is passive).
8. Simple, directly accessible op. menus.
9. Auto-chapter marking on the HDD.
10. Selectable index pic for DVDs.
11. Easy deletion of front- and end-matter in HDD editing (to 1st and last frame each end).
12. Superior rec. quality from a line input (excellent clean-up filtering).

I have three 3575s and two have super-quiet fans, one in our bedroom started out so I couldn't hear it but my wife could, now she can't hear it.

Hope this helps!?

Thanks for your list. (The only thing you did not answer was the "user replaceable" drives part, and that is sufficiently rare a feature that I will then assume the answer must be NO.) This is an interesting set of Pros & Cons, but in the end I'm not sure it comes out as particularly appealing.

On the "Cons", #s 2 - 4 and 7 - 8 really hurt the convenience of use. As to #5, I noted that some other (more expensive) Philips models that are listed here under DVD Recorders do show +R DL recording as a feature. But I don't know if they are currently sold models. And I doubt we'd run into them at Walmart. Still, if that is correct about the DL recording, there may also be a different answer on some of these other features as well.

On the "Pros", #s 1 - 6 seem irrelevant to me. The rest is fine.

And this is now our best alternative ?

[Seeker47]

Re: build quality, longevity, etc., it might help to know that, today, 50% of all players/recorders sold in North America are mfg by Funai, a large Japanese company with mfg ops in Japan, China, etc.

Funai just started mfg recorders in 2004, and I was surprised by the relatively good build quality in my 3575. As far as longevity, the jury is still in deliberations . . .

While Funai might be doing assembly, it's not a Funai product. The Magnavox has near-identical menus to the Philips, although the remotes are very different. Magnavox uses a generic crappy Chinese remote, the Philips uses a special one.

Generally speaking, I am none too impressed by Chinese manufacturing prowess -- particularly in computers or electronics. (I'm sure we could come up with a few exceptions . . . ) The mfr. is going to be done there for the low cost labor, of course. But that is not really the end-all of it. Where there is a decent Japanese design and a name Japanese (or other) company that has certain requirements and keeps close tabs on the QC of the manufacturing, I think you can have good results. A lot of past Pioneer gear (including the Elite line) is probably good proof of that.

Read all the reviews and User Comment threads you can find -- while being aware of their limitations -- and try to avoid the problematic, the disposable electronics that just waste your money, the crap.

[lordsmurf]

1. Fewer inputs and outputs.
-- Not a big deal to me. It has 2 in, 3 out. Plenty.

2. Slower high-speed dub (up to 30 min. dep. on file size (MB)).
-- Lots of players are this say. It sucks, but I just walk away anyway.

3. No frame-accurate editing.
-- No recorder does. But the 3575 is GOP-length editing, others are always seconds off. That's a plus in my book.

4. No VR-mode (only +VR, compatible w/Video-mode).
-- These machines are based around a format. No machine does both (regardless of disc type accepted, as you can write DVD+VR on DVD-R). DVD-VR is no winner anyway.

5. No double-layer (DL) DVD recording (does play back).
-- No loss here either, as almost no machines that have DL do it worth a damn anyway, layer breaks are all messed up.

6. No DVD menu selections/choices.
-- Thanks for the confirmation. I figured as much. Most machines are like this.

7. No FR/MN type rec. modes (only Auto mode for dubbing).
-- It sucks, but machines all moved away from FR. I don't know why. At least there are several modes available, including SP, SP and 3-hour (LP?)

8. No high-speed copy from DVD to HDD.
-- Most people are going to use computers anyway. Not an important feature to the majority. Honestly, it's a weird feature period.

[wabjxo]

Thanks for your list. (The only thing you did not answer was the "user replaceable" drives part, and that is sufficiently rare a feature that I will then assume the answer must be NO.) This is an interesting set of Pros & Cons, but in the end I'm not sure it comes out as particularly appealing.

On the "Cons", #s 2 - 4 and 7 - 8 really hurt the convenience of use. As to #5, I noted that some other (more expensive) Philips models that are listed here under DVD Recorders do show +R DL recording as a feature. But I don't know if they are currently sold models. And I doubt we'd run into them at Walmart. Still, if that is correct about the DL recording, there may also be a different answer on some of these other features as well.

On the "Pros", #s 1 - 6 seem irrelevant to me. The rest is fine.

And this is now our best alternative ?

On the HDD replacement, so far everyone has units less than 6 months old, so no one has been willing to open their new machines to find out (warranty issue). It's quite possible that it can be replaced and, from my research, it appears that the 3575 uses Universal Data Format (UDF) for its file system/storage. From this Wiki entry, it also appears most, if not all, DVD recoders use UDF as well.

I knew my list would show you the 3575 is meat and potatoes and it seemed you were looking for french bread and wine. Sort of a "my glass is half-full, and your glass is half-empty" situation (suits me just fine, you prob. wouldn't be happy with it).

For others who might be "concerned" by the comment "And this is now our best alternative ?"... it's an excellent time-shifter with excellent SD recording quality. It uses only the most usable and closely coupled rec. modes, all of which you can use for recording from a digital HD channel, even tho that channel is a repackaged HD broadcast for transmission to analog-only cable subscribers. From other HD users, it also has outstanding rec. quality from a line input.

If you're looking for a simple-to-use, basic HDD/DVD recorder with digital tuners, HDD, and excellent rec. quality, the Philips 3575 should at least be on your "consideration" list. As always with new electronic gadgets, try purchasing from Wal-Mart or other B&M store where you can return it if you don't like it.

For me, it's worth its weight in gold just for the digital tuner. I only wish I could afford all-digital cable cuz the digital PQ could make a lifelong SD analog viewer go blind from its brilliance.

[Seeker47]

4. No VR-mode (only +VR, compatible w/Video-mode).
-- These machines are based around a format. No machine does both (regardless of disc type accepted, as you can write DVD+VR on DVD-R). DVD-VR is no winner anyway.

Not sure if I'm following you here -- the diff. between the disc type and VR type ? I use VR mode a fair amount, for temp. xfers in either direction. At 8x high speed copy (on the Pioneers), it is a hell of a lot faster than the max. 3x speed of DVD-Ram.

5. No double-layer (DL) DVD recording (does play back).
-- No loss here either, as almost no machines that have DL do it worth a damn anyway, layer breaks are all messed up.

I've found the layer break on DL discs made by the 640 to be adequate, more often than not. This adequacy is dependent on where you play those discs back. Some players may have an issue with them, some not. But I wouldn't expect them to be as good as doing it on a computer, using IMGBURN2 with the 32K gaps. But, even there, you can still have a "burned vs. pressed" thing going on, that some standalone players may find less digestible. I've seen that a few times.

I knew my list would show you the 3575 is meat and potatoes and it seemed you were looking for french bread and wine. Sort of a "my glass is half-full, and your glass is half-empty" situation (suits me just fine, you prob. wouldn't be happy with it).

Fair enough, but it still leaves me wondering whether any of the other, fancier Philips models would come closer to what the Pioneers or Toshibas offered ?

[lordsmurf]

"DVD-VR" and "DVD+VR" are recording specs. These are entirely unrelated to disc type (DVD-R, DVD+R, DVD-RAM, DVD-RW, DVD+RW).

DL media has a fairly touchy compatibility rating as it is, even with a proper layer break, so having a goofed-up layer break is pretty much a failure and a disaster in the long-haul.

I think the Philips has a few features that make it more than just meat and potatoes: 1080 upscaling, MPEG-4 playback, 160GB hard drive, DVD-ISO.

[nicky57]

Question, does the Phillips have the "chase play" feature?

[wabjxo]

Yes, the Philips 3575 has chase play.

This post might provide some other useful info on the 3575.

[Seeker47]

Yes, the Philips 3575 has chase play.

This post might provide some other useful info on the 3575.

I see that Walmart.Com lists the 3475 and the 3505, but no longer mentions the 3575. (Situation may be different at some of their store locations, as it was for a long while with the Polaroids.) Is this an indication that this model is going and soon to be gone ?

[wabjxo]

The Philips 3575 has been off and on at Wal-Mart .com, but it has been pretty consistently available thru Circuit City online. Now down to $279.99 w/free shipping.