Looking to buy new dvd recorder, any suggestions?

[heman31]

Hello I am going to get a new dvd recorder soon and I was looking at the different ones at my local walmart and its been a few years since I have gotten one for archiving my vhs tapes to disc. My one I use is a pioneer but they have not been made since a few years ago. I did use a Panasonic dmr e 55 dvd recorder but it was a little blocky in 2 hour mode and I always had problems with the audio some how to where if I played it in a ps2 that it would hickup some how and put the audio out of sync by one second but it you paused it then it would be ok until it happened again. So I got a pioneer to replace it and have not used my panasonic again. My pioneer gives good picture quality and is not as blocky as the panny was. I was wondering if the new pannys are any good and have gotten rid of the audio problem or should I get something else. I am looking for something that records good in 2 hour mode and is not really blocky in 2 or 4 hour mode as much as possible. The ones that seem to be made better quality are the Sony's, Phillips, and the Panasonics. But I do use a cheap sv2000 dvd recorder to record tv shows but I have not used it for archiving stuff cause I really don't know if its as good as my pioneer. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Eric

[wabjxo]

You can check out the Philips DVDR3575 here.

[jjeff]

Also the Panasonic DMR-EZ17 has excellent SP/LP quality. Tends to be a bit buggy, as the thread on AVS will say, but you cant beat the 4 hr LP mode for PQ. My latest has been going on a month, with no problems, knock on wood, and the 4 yr extended warranty makes me rest easier. In my opinion, the PQ cant be beat, especially in any speed over 2 hrs.

[lordsmurf]

Panasonic 4-hour mode is starved for bitrate and full of noise.

[simplesmn]

whatever you do, get a unit that handles DVD-RAM disks in addition to + or - RW's. (ultimately a unit that has a Hard-Drive too, but they are getting hard to find without that Tivo crap, JMHO on that last part)

RAM disks have more flexibility such as chaseplay capabilities.

[handyguy]

'RAM disks have more flexibility such as chaseplay capabilities. '

Plus you can edit on them easily. They are like a hd.

[oldandinthe way]

Your Funai burns disks which are just as reliable as any other brand of recorder. The 2 hour mode is generally well accepted as good quality image.

Buying a more expensive recorder at this time is kind of foolish. The more expensive models with built in digital tuners (you don't want to pay a premium price without one) are at the top of the manufacturing learning curve and are poised for dramatic price decreases as they ride the learning curve down.

[lordsmurf]

There's really no point to DVD-RAM, if you get a unit with a hard drive. The DVD-RAM is basically the poor man's hard drive, and you can't watch it in anything other than the recorder itself.

[jjeff]

Personally I dont have a problem with RAM discs, that said, I never use them myself. The incompatibility issues outweigh there conviences, IMO. The issue for me as far as being able to record one show, while watching another, is the limit of 2-4 hr of acceptable PQ/disc. Kinda hard to watch a 2 hr movie, while trying to record another 2 hr movie, in a 2 hr speed. I suppose the chase play feature could be cool, but it's never really been a issue with me. A HDD is really the way to go, but as lordsmurf said RAM is the poor mans HDD, but I dont have a problem with poor people

[Captain Satellite]

I have the Panasonic E80H with the hard drive that also records to DVD-RAM and use both features quite often. For instance, I'll record a concert or other music specials onto the hard drive then edit the commercials out and a burn a DVD from the hard drive.

I'm a big fan of DVD-RAM, maybe because I'm unaware of other possibilities? I record a lot of the late night musical performances and upload the performances to the internet to share with friends. With DVD-RAM I can record a 5 minute clip and load it into my computer without finalizing a whole DVD-R. I don't know of another format that can do this. Is there one?

Yes, I know that I could capture straight to my computer, but my DVD recorder is in my entertainment center with my UTV receiver that I record from - very convenient.

I know that you’re not a big fan of Panasonic DVD recorders (for recording), lordsmurf, but what are your thoughts on this? Besides what you already stated. Being able to record a few minutes onto a disc and pop it straight into my computer is something I will miss dearly when (not if) the DVD-RAM format tanks.

[wabjxo]

Try DVD+RW... no finalizing reqd.

[Captain Satellite]

I always wondered about that, wabjxo. I'll purchase a recorder that records to that format when my second E80H goes to DVD recorder heaven. Thanks!

Edited to add: What's your take on all of the not-so-good reviews on the Philips on CC.com?

[wabjxo]

Not so good reviews" ??? I assume CC.com is Circuit City, where user average is 4 stars out of five. Pretty good, I think?

It's always amusing to read reviews like on CC>com that say the 3575 can't do HD... no sh** Sherlock! Another complained that One-Touch Pause LIve TV was really Two-Touch... OMG! Another said "copying ,editing are fairly complicated"... better not ever think of using a Pio, Panny or Toshiba!

One national reviewer (not CC) spent several paragraphs bemoaning the fact that it didn't do HD. He was so disappointed. Guess he missed the "SDTV" on the box?

Another said it couldn't dub from DVD to HDD... prob. tried to rip off the Star Wars Trilogy?

Another complained about the lack of direct-entry buttons on the remote. It has 47 buttons, while my Pio 640 has 41 and most of the 3575's are direct-entry instead of Pio (and Panny) sub-sub-sub menus.

Anyway, I'm happy as can be with my 3575s, but always up for some reading amusement!

[lordsmurf]

On average, maybe 1-3 out of every 10 end-user reviews has useful info. The others were left by clueless morons that didn't understand the product. In the case of video, they usually know next-to-nothing about how video works. Ironically, reviews by users are only helpful to those of us who already know about the products. It's not too useful for those trying to learn.

....... getting back to the original post ............

I've heard good things about the SV2000. Try it out.

I can also recommend the Philips 3575 as being one of the best recorders currently available. Maybe the best. But only use 2-hour mode, maybe 2½-hour mode at most.

[jjeff]

Not sure about the SV2000, havent personally tried it, but am agrement w/lordsmuf about the 2 hr PQ of the Philips 3575. Try and stick w/the 2 hr mode max. Recording a resolution screen, I noticed a big drop in resolution going from the 2 to 2.5 mode in the 3575. Now here is where I'm going to disagree w/Lordsmurf, on my newer generation Panny's es-15 and on, I do not notice a big drop in resolution until I got PAST the 4 hr mode in the Panny's. Oh to be sure I got macroblocking in fast moving objects in anything above 3 hrs in the panny, but for recording a still resolution screen, the 4 hr mode on my panny's have fine resolution. I cant say that for the 3575.
I also know what LS is talking about when he talks of video noise on the panny's. Side by side there might be a little bit more noise on the panny's than the 3575, in the 2 hr mode, but I personally would rather see a little noise, and more resolution. JMO, I know others would rather see it the other way around. As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I just wish I had tried JVC, seems to be a favorite of LS, before they stopped making just DVDR's.

[Captain Satellite]

Oh, I'm well aware of the usefulness and validity of user reviews, which is why I ALWAYS rely on this forum for info; I haven't been steered wrong yet. I was just wondering if ANY of the issues or concerns raised was something that you encountered.

I only scanned the reviews; "dark picture" seemed to be mentioned a lot. My thoughts were that this had to be a user error or something not configured correctly. After reading your thread on the AVS forum, wabjxo, you seem quite satisfied with the 3575. I’ll probably jump on the 3575 – soon. Thanks for the replies guys, I appreciate it.

[lordsmurf]

The Panasonic and the Philips both do 720x480 up to 4 hours, and they both look like crap. There's not enough bitrate. The thing that bothers me about the Panasonic is that luma is off, with either a green or red shift, and the image is muddy (dark, too much contrast, loss of colors). I have to make serious changes to my tv to get quality reasonable, but it's still not close to the source.

[Captain Satellite]

The Panasonic E80H is 704x480. Are the new decks 720x480? Both my E80Hs shift towards green - I hate it. I'm not sure of the correct term, but you can see the green shift just watching through the Panasonic and of course on the recorded material.

[oldandinthe way]

The OP already owns an SV2000 and gets good results in 2 hour mode recording from TV.

Why should he spend any more money at this time? Of course he should try it for his video backups.

What we haven''t seen is a reason he needs another recorder if his Funai can't do the job. The major complaints about the SV2000 relate to timer recording from TV and he has mastered it.

This the time of year many of us get antsy and wish to buy a new toy. This year it strikes me that there is less available that is really compelling. I too am straining to buy something.

Is this the time to be encouraging unnecessary DVDrecorder purchases? Would next year's products be more attractive? Or will all the Japanese badges be gone from the market by then?

[wabjxo]

The Panasonic and the Philips both do 720x480 up to 4 hours, and they both look like crap. There's not enough bitrate. The thing that bothers me about the Panasonic is that luma is off, with either a green or red shift, and the image is muddy (dark, too much contrast, loss of colors). I have to make serious changes to my tv to get quality reasonable, but it's still not close to the source.

No, the Philips drops to 352 X 480 starting at SPP. I checked all rec. modes in my computer and posted this on AVS:

Did some more tests. Recorded Heartland (TNT HD digital channel) with separate title for each of 6 rec. modes, high-speed copied 6 titles to DVD-R, played each title with WIN DVD and read the stats. Here's what I got, plus what I observed while playing each title in my Pio 640 and watching the bit-rate meter (Mbps meter):

Mode.....Res..........Mbps-1...Mbps-2...Rec. Time on SL DVD, hours
HQ......720x480......9.558......9.5...........1
SP......720x480......6.124......5.5............2
SPP....352x480......3.758......4.0............2.5
LP......352x480......3.758......3.0............3
EP......352x480......3.758......2.0............4
SLP....352x480......1.572......1.5.............6

• Res = Reading shown by WIN DVD.
• Mbps-1 = Reading shown by WIN DVD, so actual computer analysis of average bit rate, as opposed to Mbps-2's human estimate of centerpoint.
• Mbps-2 = Best guess as to VBR *CENTERPOINT* as seen in Pio 640's wildly moving Mbps display.
• Rec. Time = Max. program time that can be recorded, + a little for each.

Not sure about the SV2000, havent personally tried it, but am agrement w/lordsmuf about the 2 hr PQ of the Philips 3575. Try and stick w/the 2 hr mode max. Recording a resolution screen, I noticed a big drop in resolution going from the 2 to 2.5 mode in the 3575.

It's been said before by users and national reviewers. Here's my comment on AVS:

There have been several users and national reviewers who tested the 3575 for PQ using display alignment patterns and plain old "eyeball" tests. The following 11/5/07 ZDNet review by Matthew Moskovciak seems to summarize this best:

"We were pleasantly surprised with the introduction to Star Trek: Insurrection, as it demonstrated that it does have 2:3 pull-down by correctly rendering the curved edges of the bridge railings and boat hulls. We moved onto the difficult opening sequence of Seabiscuit, and again the DVDR3575H handled it much better than the test patterns on HQV. So while it struggled with the difficult video-based tests of the HQV suite, the DVDR3575H performed better with actual film-based program material."

My personal consensus is: if you're looking for a DVDR to watch test patterns, consider another unit, but if you want a DVDR to watch your personal recordings and movies on DVD, the 3575 is an excellent choice!

[wabjxo]

Your Funai burns disks which are just as reliable as any other brand of recorder. The 2 hour mode is generally well accepted as good quality image.

Buying a more expensive recorder at this time is kind of foolish. The more expensive models with built in digital tuners (you don't want to pay a premium price without one) are at the top of the manufacturing learning curve and are poised for dramatic price decreases as they ride the learning curve down.

That learning curve may be going down, but the US$ is also going down... dramatically (40% or more)!

The Japanese and Chinese are still having to pay their workers and suppliers in Yen and Yuan, but they're actually getting LESS value in US$ to pay their bills... unless they start charging 40-50% higher US prices where they might then run into strong consumer resistance.

I wouldn't be surprised that the falling value of the US$ is part of the reason we're not getting the best units, like for example the Canadians who still are and whose currency has increased in value... now equal to the US$... OMG!

[lordsmurf]

Crap. I might have mixed up some of my tests then, with the 3 recorders I was looking at within a few days of one another. I've not had much time to test out the Philips like I want to beyond basic needs (QAM, SP, hard drive). Thanks for pointing this out. It's all rough notes, so it should be easy to sort out again.

352x480 at 3-hour and beyond should put out a much higher quality image than Panasonic, then, as it has more bitrate. Resolution means nothing if bitrate doesn't support it.

Since you've put some time into this, have you determined if it's based on the LSI Logic chipset, and have you observed chroma noise removal or grain reduction on VHS sourced conversions?

[jjeff]

Thank you Wabjxo, your testing only confermed what my eyes are seeing. There is a big drop in Res, and Mbps on the 3575, between the SP 2hr speed, and SPP 2.5 hr. speed.
I dont have all the fancy equipment that you do, but I would really be curious to see at what speed, even using the FR for precise times, that Panasonic looses bitrate/res. Has it been documented in the precise fashion that you have done for the 3575? If so, do you have a link for the info?
I think it's great what you have done for the 3575, as far as documentation. Makes it easy for a person without lots of fancy equipment to understand the workings of there 3575.
On the 3575, it looks like me, according to your chart, if a person needed more time than 2 hrs on the 3575, they might just as well use the 4hr EP speed. It's got the same res, and same Mbps 1, as the 2.5 hr SPP mode.
You are correct though that numbers dont always tell the tail. What you see with your eye is the most important, which is why I personally will try and avoid anything more than 2 hrs on the 3575, and 4hrs (3hrs w/fast moving objects) on my Panny's. It just looks better to my eye. But it's always nice when the numbers conferm what my eye's are seeing
P.S. what happened to the original poster "heman31". I havent seen a post from him, since the OP. We are all speculating what he wants, but no feedback......are you out there, Eric....

[wabjxo]

Crap. I might have mixed up some of my tests then, with the 3 recorders I was looking at within a few days of one another. I've not had much time to test out the Philips like I want to beyond basic needs (QAM, SP, hard drive). Thanks for pointing this out. It's all rough notes, so it should be easy to sort out again.

352x480 at 3-hour and beyond should put out a much higher quality image than Panasonic, then, as it has more bitrate. Resolution means nothing if bitrate doesn't support it.

Since you've put some time into this, have you determined if it's based on the LSI Logic chipset, and have you observed chroma noise removal or grain reduction on VHS sourced conversions?

Funny you should mention LSI. Check out this article published just TODAY about who's doing what with DVD chips, with one part saying:

"The gap between them [Zoran/ESS and LSI/Philips] could widen further, as LSI Logic, whose MPEG encoding technology is already in its fifth generation, continues to hone its encoding skills, while Philips is adding to its new MPEG-2 codec optimized hardware blocks for running new picture improvement algorithms such as adaptive picture sharpness detection and de-blocking artifacts removal."

From my personal viewing of the results I get here, I'd not be surprised if some of Philips improved algorithms got in the 3575... in fact, I asked that question months ago on AVS just as a WAG when I saw some of my excellent PQ results at longer rec. modes! I guess it was a SWAG (Scientific WAG)!?

I don't have any fancy instruments and certainly not an expert in anything, but I have seen some excellent results in VHS conversion, as you asked. One in particular, my wife's 8mm camcorder tape copied to VHS then to my 3575. It starts with a night scene and black sky, with lots of little dropouts in the VHS. The copy on the HDD and subsequent DVD virtually eliminated the dropouts.

I don't know what chip the 3575 uses, but answering jjeff also on the 2-hr-SP mode with the 3575, I've recorded from an excellent digital channel, TNT HD, downrezzed in my basic analog cable feed:

1. A James Bond action flick in 3-hr-LP mode and simply couldn't find anything wrong...and I was really looking. Bond jumped into a fast-moving car and I noticed he had a stubble beard, and I could count the hairs, even with a lotashakin goin on... it was a ROUGH ride thru the city!

2. A drama ("Heartlland"), portions in 2-hr-SP and 6-hr-LP mode for comparison, and had to search and search to find any difference between 2-hr-SP and 6-hr-SLP. Finally found a small instrument panel in the operating room that had a lighted "Power" display, and it was oh-so-slightly fuzzier edged.

Right around here is when I began musing on the possibility of a "different algorithm"...

I'm always puzzled when people say they wouldn't use anything beyond 2-hr-SP mode with the 3575 based on my experience with the longer rec. modes. The only things that might make sense are: (1) they are recording an analog channel, or (2) their source is not as good as mine (basic analog cable with some great digital HD channels as a bonus)? If an analog channel, I'd wholeheartedly agree... they're worlds apart from even downrezzed digital HD as a source for recording!

And I like to say, "It's the SOURCE, stupid!" in all my political campaigns!

I'd say no longer than SP for most analog channels, but up to and including 6-hr-SLP on HD digital channels... and you can tell going in if a longer rec mode will work well or not just by the "purity" and sharpness of the live PQ.. it's like darkness vs. brilliance when I compare my analog channels to my digital HD channels on my 47" 1080P LCD.

A side note: as you know, a large 1080P LCD is very unforgiving, and you can't get too close unless you like counting pixels, but I recently played a commercial movie on my 3575 via HDMI @480P set for YCbCr (digital Component, like on the DVD). I could put my nose almost on the screen and I couldn't see any pixels, just a sharp, beautiful pic like a large continuous-tone color photo! It was a scene of two guys fishing in a pristine river in mountain country... and I was in the scene! Caught a striped trout, 3 lbs.

[simplesmn]

lordsmurf said:

>>There's really no point to DVD-RAM, if you get a unit with a hard drive. The DVD-RAM is basically the poor man's hard drive, and you can't watch it in anything other than the recorder itself. <<

I say,
It aint got anything to do with being a poor mans harddrive. Its got to do with the as of late unavailability of harddrive based units. Yes hdd units are better, I've got 2 Toshiba 160 GB units (that ALSO do RAM). I wanted another and JUST COULD NOT find any in stock at any etailers or retailers ( that I would trust ). That goes for Panny's too. So, as far as just a DVD burner goe's, a unit with RAM and + and/or - RW capabilities is the way to go. In my NOT-SO HO.

[simplesmn]

jjeff wrote:
>>but as lordsmurf said RAM is the poor mans HDD, but I dont have a problem with poor people :<<D[/quote]


Just another point about RAM's not being a POORMANS way to go: Have you compared prices of RAM's to other re-recordable disks? RAM's are (unfortunalty) 2-3 times more expensive. So much for being Po man disks. Again, get a RAM and + or - RW recorder if you cant find a unit with a HDD, not INSTEAD of one.

[jjeff]

Wabjxo, I should clarify most of my testing comparing PQ has been done by copying a HQ NCP DVD from another DVD into the 3575's best input, S-in, to either it's HDD, or DVD, same results for same speed. That is where I notice a big, IMO, drop in PQ between the 2 and 2.5 hr speed. Which your own testing(using your supplied numbers) confermed a drop in not only bitrate, but screen resolution. That said, when just recording off the antenna in, one can indeed get excellent results in longer speeds with the 3575, and my guess would be since the PQ of the source is SO good, it can be downgraded, and still look very good.
On my last few recordings of HD via antenna in, I experminted w/various speeds, other than just 1hr and 2hr. I will try and analize them more for PQ. But again, your own testing confermed the drop when going more than 2hrs, so based on that, I am still reluctant to record any really precious events on anything but 2hr., this goes back to my early days of VHS (81-2) when for the first year I had the machine, I recored most things in SLP(6hr) speed. Only to later switch to SP(2hr). Now when I watch any of those very early SLP recordings, I say to myself, WHY WHY WHY, did I do that, the picture looks like crap. A person can never go wrong using a TOO fast speed, it only uses more media. IMO
P.S. did you ever do your analizing of screen resolutions/bitrates on Panny's? If so I would still like to see the real numbers, like you did for the 3575. Thanks

[wabjxo]

Wabjxo, I should clarify most of my testing comparing PQ has been done by copying a HQ NCP DVD from another DVD into the 3575's best input, S-in, to either it's HDD, or DVD, same results for same speed. That is where I notice a big, IMO, drop in PQ between the 2 and 2.5 hr speed. Which your own testing(using your supplied numbers) confermed a drop in not only bitrate, but screen resolution. That said, when just recording off the antenna in, one can indeed get excellent results in longer speeds with the 3575, and my guess would be since the PQ of the source is SO good, it can be downgraded, and still look very good.
On my last few recordings of HD via antenna in, I experminted w/various speeds, other than just 1hr and 2hr. I will try and analize them more for PQ. But again, your own testing confermed the drop when going more than 2hrs, so based on that, I am still reluctant to record any really precious events on anything but 2hr., this goes back to my early days of VHS (81-2) when for the first year I had the machine, I recored most things in SLP(6hr) speed. Only to later switch to SP(2hr). Now when I watch any of those very early SLP recordings, I say to myself, WHY WHY WHY, did I do that, the picture looks like crap. A person can never go wrong using a TOO fast speed, it only uses more media. IMO
P.S. did you ever do your analizing of screen resolutions/bitrates on Panny's? If so I would still like to see the real numbers, like you did for the 3575. Thanks

Is that "NCP DVD" the same one you said on AVS "I picked it up at a dollar store, and use it for my test copy dvd."? The same one you said you tried making multiple copies back and forth on the 3575 and it ended up "looking like crap"?

Why in the world are you using a $1 DVD for PQ tests? Are you TRYING to get the worst PQ you can for some reason?

That DVD was probably made in Ho Chi Min's fruit stand, during a Hashish party, and is probably pure crappy analog... and not very good analog at that. Commercial pressed movies of any note today are produced with digital Component video (YCbCr) and, if NCP, should copy with at least "good" PQ even tho going thru an analog connection. If it were truly NCP and copyable internally, the quality would probably be "excellent." But you also say you can't get it to do that? One reason may just be the poor quality of the original... it's so "unstable" that some machines read it as copy protection!

Now I'm confused, primarily about why you're using such a poor source for PQ eyeball tests!? Must be a good reason, I s'pose... must be. To prove a point you might trying to make only requires recording a crappy analog channel at higher resolutions, then copy that back and forth a couple of times. I can almost guarantee you'll get the results you seem to be looking for. And even at the HQ rec mode you say you used won't add any quality to a crappy original... it just retains the crap... no lost crap, if you will.

As you know, making multigenerational copies IN REAL-TIME copying (no high-speed) on the 3575, using a good source and HQ mode, produces AT LEAST 6 real-time generations with no visible loss in PQ, as tested by me here.

Back to the res. subject. I don't have any Panny recorders to test, but from reading other posts by Panny users, the bit rates at various speeds ar almost identical to my Pio 640, which tries to preserve 720 X 480 res. thru LP but uses LOWER bit rates than the Philips at all speeds from SP on.

Lordsmurf may help here cuz he understands the res vs bit rate "problem"... you can't keep 720 X 480 going in high PQ if you drop the bit rate... you're essentially "starving" the higher resolution of bit rate to sustain the perceived PQ. The Philips at least maintains a higher bit rate in the ~half D1 lower res, which is actually a better combo for maintaining overall quality. IOW, don't key in on the res. so much as the bit rate. And don't worry about the effects of fast movement since MPEG-2 eats it for lunch if it's relatively predictable movement. Repeating what I wrote on AVS:

MPEG-2, the compression standard for encoding our HDD and DVD recordings (detailed info here), is predictive in nature and does an excellent job in capturing predictable motion by relatively large, distinctive objects. The frame structure builds pics based on previous frames and many "look forward" to what motion it expects to come.

I've done lots of tests trying to understand MPEG-2 as we see it. I've used my Pio 640 to review various recorded video with its bit-rate meter on screen and watching for specific Mbps changes.

In these tests, I found that movement, by itself, is NOT difficult for MPEG-2 to capture with good resolution; where MPEG-2 has to work hard is in big scene changes. Large spikes in bit rate occur consistently at drastic scene changes, like from the CU of a face to a car explosion. Dark to light is not a special problem, but many scene changes can go from 4 to 10 Mbps, depending on the complexity of the change.

I recorded a NASCAR race in 2-hr-SP mode (normal bit rate: 5 Mbps), and the cars racing around the track kept the bit-rate meter almost constant around 2.5 Mbps on shots from all cameras (in-car and outside static and panning/tracking cameras)... even on long shots of cars moving fast around the track with out-of-focus background, with stands and people coming into view suddenly, as well as closeups of the cars racing by a stationary wall camera (doesn't get much faster than the zip-zip of cars moving by). This is where I first realized that predictable movement by relatively large objects is no problem at all for a good MPEG-2 encoder.

Motion artifacts come into play primarily when MPEG-2 has to predict multiple directions by tiny little objects (football players) on a BIG field of view (the long shots), or Lordsmurf's favorite, wrestlers' bodies flying around in unpredictable directions, etc.

[jjeff]

Wabjxo,
Actually the dvd that I was testing with was a HQ source camcorder, xferd to DVD via DVI in. It was that dvd I was refering to. The reason I said NCP, was because I wanted to clarify it was not a copyrighted disc, and all the problems associated with those.
The reason on AVS I was using my $1 test dvd was not for PQ, but rather testing the ability of the 3575 to copy a commercialy pressed disc, with what I believe has no copy protection, to the 3575, internally. And on that point I deduced that the 3575 cannot do this. I think the 3575 is setup so that if it can detect that the disc is commercially pressed, copy protection or not, it will not copy it. The 3575 WILL copy my camcorder -R dvd's just fine.

On that same vein, I was going to ask you if you have ever been able to copy a commercial disc, any disc, internally on the 3575. I was given a dvd from a friend yesterday. It was commercially pressed(at least as far as I could tell, looked professional) anyway it was about enviromental issues in my local area. It had a note, painted(or how ever they put a picture on a dvd) saying to please feel free to copy this dvd, and pass it on to friends, relatives etc. who would be interested in the cause. They are trying to get the word out about what was on the dvd. Well I tried to copy this dvd, which they said "feel free to copy" so I'm going to assume that they would not have put a copy protection on it. The 3575 would not copy that disc. Just got a red circle on the screen, when I tried to use the dubbing button, while playing the dvd. And consistant to what happened when I tried copying my $1 dvd, it did copy from my Sony dvd player, to the 3575's S-in. Also from there I was able to HS copy on the 3575 to another DVD -R just fine.
Sorry if there was confusion. The reason I like to test quality by copying from another dvd is because the subject matter on my home made dvd's are consistantly HQ, plus unlike most movies, the shots are more stable. That is they do no have scene changes every 1/10 th of a second, like lots of material off the air does. I personally find it hard to judge PQ, switching between 2 sources, if they keep changing the scene every 1/10th of a second. But as noted I got burned on that too. It was when I made original assumptions about recording speeds on my Panny's. They looked fine using LP, for slow moving objects. Only to later see that many of the LP recording that I had made off the air, looked less than ideal, with fast moving objects. With the LP on Panny's I noticed lots of blocking, if I instead used the SP, or even FR3, it dramatically reduced the blocking effect.
I'm not trying to say to anybody NEVER use anything but the SP 2hr speed on the 3575's. I'm just saying "I personally" would stick with the 2hr speed. Other people can use whatever speed they want, that's what the speed selector is for. My father uses EP8 on his Panny, and I'm sure if I convince him to buy a 3575, will more than likely use the SLP 6. Oh well, to each his own.

[wabjxo]

jjeff,
No, I've not been able to copy a commercial pressed disc internally OR externally due to their normal copy protection.

I'm a little puzzled why the 3575 CAN copy the disc from your Sony, which seems to indicate there is no CP, then CAN't copy the same disc internally? I must say it's an "odd" situation that is very intriguing... and interesting!

One angle in diagnosing this is the Sony element... is the disc one only the Sony likes, therefore it plays nice? From your DIRECT DUBBING attempt, I have to assume the disc actually started playing in the 3575...i.e., you could see its pic on screen as it played? That would mean the 3575 liked the disc also and should be able to dub internally.

If the 3575 did NOT play the disc to screen, that leads to a possible answer right away... but nothing is that easy!?

So, assuming the disc plays thru on the 3575, that leaves only the thing you're assuming: that the 3575 has a different drive-to-drive CP function compared to its line input CP function. That would be new and, again, very interesting, but so far no known cause or cure... hate to say... back to drawing board then!

One thing: put disc in 3575, let load fully, then see if Disc Edit menu is greyed out or available for use.