VHS vs Beta

[robjv1]

Another topic about DVD sales veered slightly into the discussion of this famous (and now esoteric) format war. I often hear the argument made that "Beta was better quality; VHS had market share" and since I missed the original context of this debate (I was but a wee tot at the time) I'd like to know more specifically in what ways Beta was "better" then VHS in terms of measurable improvements and also in terms of perceivable improvements (for those that have actually compared them head to head).

Would we able to perceive the difference between the two even moreso today on today's television sets that tend to a) be very large b) amplify the problems with SD video signals? How about audio quality? Also was there anything unique in the PAL machines vs NTSC machines?

I hate to base assumptions on Wikipedia but here is how I understand the debate based on what I have to go by (NTSC) --

1975 Beta enters market - 250 lines vs 240 VHS, lower video noise, less luma/chroma crosstalk -- Advantage: Beta

Beta releases 2hr mode tape to compete with VHS SP -- lowers resolution to 240 lines to do so -- Advantage: all even

VHS comes out with VHS HQ - puts resolution at 250 lines -- Advantage: VHS (better resolution, longer tape)

SuperBeta (High Band Beta) comes out in 1985 -- 290 lines resolution -- Advantage: Beta... but it's too late as market share had dropped down to 10% and it's all over.

Also were SuperBeta tapes the same as regular Beta tapes in terms of compatibility with the older decks? Or was it similar to the difference between VHS and SVHS?

[edDV]

Are you interested only in technical issues? In todays terms Betamax and VHS were very similar. Both were color under Y/C formats that low pass filtered luma around 3MHz (~240 lines of horizontal resolution). S-VHS went out to 5MHz (~400 lines).

We had a discussion on this back in 2007.
https://forum.videohelp.com/topic320504.html

This article summarized the consumer and business reasons why Betamax failed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2003/jan/25/comment.comment

Some format details
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax
http://www.palsite.com/format.html
http://www.geocities.com/columbiaisa/camcord_formats_beta.htm

[robjv1]

Great! I was wondering if there was a previous discussion on this (seems bound to happen) but I couldn't locate any based on my search criteria.

I guess my question is most directed at technical issues, but I was also very interested in SEEING the differences between the two. I tried to look for some video clips on the internet to see if there were any noticeable and perceivable differences between the two of them (not just technical) as many people swear up and down then Beta was so much better in terms of image quality, but I suspect this is more swayed by marketing and it's "underdog" status more then anything since the technical differences seem to be negligible.

Anyhow, nothing turned up as far as video clips (and god only knows how they would be encoded, etc.) so short of gathering players and tapes together myself, I would settle for some commentary from those that used both formats and have ran them up against each other. Hopefully I will find some of that in the previous discussions. Thanks again!

[edDV]

Great! I was wondering if there was a previous discussion on this (seems bound to happen) but I couldn't locate any based on my search criteria.

I guess my question is most directed at technical issues, but I was also very interested in SEEING the differences between the two. I tried to look for some video clips on the internet to see if there were any noticeable and perceivable differences between the two of them (not just technical) as many people swear up and down then Beta was so much better in terms of image quality, but I suspect this is more swayed by marketing and it's "underdog" status more then anything since the technical differences seem to be negligible.

Anyhow, nothing turned up as far as video clips (and god only knows how they would be encoded, etc.) so short of gathering players and tapes together myself, I would settle for some commentary from those that used both formats and have ran them up against each other. Hopefully I will find some of that in the previous discussions. Thanks again!

You would need to view an actual model in playback. The differences would be very small. To show any difference, the two machines would need to be in SP mode. Beta lost out because most people wanted longer record time in BetaII or EP mode with quality being of less importance vs. tape cost. S-VHS was much higher for picture quality than Betamax but didn't sell well. Sony's answer was Hi8.

[robjv1]

Yeah, I figured. I guess I'm not curious enough to go searching for beta decks and tapes on eBay, but my guess was that the differences in quality would be pretty negligible. The only thing that led me to wonder otherwise was because of the common argument of "Beta picture was way better then VHS!" that gets passed around from time to time.

[robjv1]

One question though --

So pre-recorded Beta movies came on just one tape I am assuming... how did they fit a two hour movie on the tapes or was it only the blank tapes that were hampered initially by the less then 2 hrs recording time?

[edDV]

Yeah, I figured. I guess I'm not curious enough to go searching for beta decks and tapes on eBay, but my guess was that the differences in quality would be pretty negligible. The only thing that led me to wonder otherwise was because of the common argument of "Beta picture was way better then VHS!" that gets passed around from time to time.

It was similar to the SACD vs CD audio issues today. Some swear by SACD while most others have converted their CDs to lower quality mp3.

[edDV]

One question though --

So pre-recorded Beta movies came on just one tape I am assuming... how did they fit a two hour movie on the tapes or was it only the blank tapes that were hampered initially by the less then 2 hrs recording time?

They either recorded at lower speeds, used thinner tape or used multiple tapes.

[wulf109]

I was a betafile,owned 14 decks at one point. Beta's picture looked better than VHS primarily because beta used a larger diameter head drum which resulted in a higher writing speed. Remember that beta II was the 2 hour speed competing against VHS SP and still looked better. With superbeta Sony made yet another another mistake in not moving to a higher quality tape to support higher resolution. SuperVHS used a special high quality tape and finally beat beta in apparent resolution. I then moved to SuperVHS,but both formats are now dead.

[robjv1]

That's actually really interesting -- I will assume that the bigger releases came out on a single tape that used thinner tape. I can't imagine "ET" coming out on two tapes on beta versus one tape for VHS and fairing very well.

It seems that with VHS, big-movies always came out on longer tapes. Really long movies would get the two-tape treatment, but mostly anything 3 hrs or less was on a T-180 tape (which I can only assume that commercial T-180 tapes were of higher quality then the T-180 consumer blanks).

[robjv1]

wulf109 -- you don't by chance have any video clips of the same VHS/Beta tape for comparison do you? I know it wouldn't be an exactly true comparison due to the intermediate steps (likely compression and encoding into another format. etc) but it might give me a rough idea of the difference for curiosities sake.

[wulf109]

Beta was introduced as a 1 hour format,VHS was introduced as a 2 hour format. Anyone with gray matter between their ears knew the natural use for a VCR was recording movies,all 90-120 minutes. Most people would agree that recording length is what killed beta. I can remember re-spooling T180's into my beta cassette shells to increase recording length on my beta's. When beta blanks became scarce I used to re-spool VHS into beta shells all the time.
There was a fateful meeting that Sony held with the other Japanese electronic manufacturers to introduce their new product just before beta's release and arrogantly asked them to join them. They didn't because JVC-Panasonic were already developing VHS.

[orsetto]

The differences were not significant enough for average consumers to care, especially not 30 years ago when half the country thought reception using a coat hanger stuck on the back of the TV was high tech. The biggest strike against Beta was Sonys refusal to license it quickly when RCA and other then-huge American brands were hot for it. Panasonic stepped right up and whored VHS into the ground with no qualms, rapidly building market share using RCAs modification demand for a lousy but cheap LP (four hour) speed. We see this situation play itself out over and over: a company invents a dramatic, culture-changing device, thinks because they invented it they'll make a fortune keeping it proprietary, then get knocked off by competitors within a couple years and end up a footnote in the history of their own invention. Greed is a double-edged sword and will cut you when you least expect. The most staggering example of this was in 1985, when Bill Gates was absolutely certain the Apple Macintosh was a sure thing to take over the personal computing paradigm. He went to Steve Jobs and the Apple board with a detailed, concrete business plan advising them how to leverage the Mac OS by following the DOS marketing scheme and strangle IBM in its crib. Apple laughed, thinking people would tolerate $8,000 computers forever. Gates took his plan back to Redmond and used it to build the Windows empire. Oops.

Back when the machines were new, assuming both were working properly (never a guarantee with the trouble-prone Beta mechanics), at the two hour speed Beta edged out VHS for color purity. contrast, saturation, noise and sharpness. It was noticeably better to anyone who was particular, despite the fact the Beta two-hour speed was actually slower than the VHS. It was painfully obvious how much better Beta was if you were a collector who needed to make copies of other tapes: VHS was atrociously poor second generation, Beta was quite watchable. Standard VHS never caught up with Beta, no matter how many circuit add-ons JVC threw at it (there were at least three versions of "VHS HQ" alone, two of which were totally ineffective). Beta HiFi was far less static-y and much less prone to audio mistracking issues.

But none of this mattered to nine out of ten VCR users, 90% of whom were guys in their 30s looking for porn. Hollywood and adult tapes were easier to get on VHS: the VHS machine population was doubling every six months, and stores catering to VHS popped up on every street corner while Beta stagnated. Sony quickly fell behind on price point, there was a near two-year period when Sony had absolutely nothing to offer the discount shopper while Panasonic , RCA and Magnavox were slashing prices. I started with VHS, hated it, switched to Beta for a few years, then went back to VHS for several reasons (mostly because the Toshiba and NEC alternatives to Sony left the BetaMax market, and Sonys machines cost more in upkeep than my car with their constant breakdowns.) Once VHS matched the BetaHiFi audio feature, most of us holdouts grudgingly embraced VHS as inevitable and abandoned Beta, leaving it a niche market for obsessives. A mediocre recorder thats reliable and a world standard beats a superior but undependable format that no one else you know owns.

[wulf109]

Sorry I don't have any beta decks or tapes anymore,sold everything. My superVHS is stored and no longer used.

[wulf109]

One advantage beta did have was in ignoring macrovision copy protection. Because of the way beta's gain control worked macrovision did not work and a beta copy of a macrovision encoded tape would play normally.

[robjv1]

"and strangle IBM in it's crib" I love that line

Interesting! That's a very interesting point about multigenerational tapes that I would not have even thought to ask. I'm particularly interested in how it differed in terms of saturation from VHS?

[edDV]

"and strangle IBM in it's crib" I love that line

Interesting! That's a very interesting point about multigenerational tapes that I would not have even thought to ask. I'm particularly interested in how it differed in terms of saturation from VHS?

This is so much ancient history now. There are a few Betamax clubs/forums still around if you search. There are also video museums. Ampex had a good one but it moved and I lost track of it.

More interesting than Betamax were all the early semi-pro and pro tape formats. Betamax is just a scaled down U-Matic.

May I ask why you are interested in Betamax?

[FulciLives]

My family first bought a Sony Beta. The video rental store near us carried both Beta and VHS. It was or at least seemed to be fairly equal there for a while.

Then I noticed that they would get 2 or 3 of a movie on VHS and 1 in Beta. Then the people with VHS would complain (how come the Beta version is here but not the VHS). People with VHS would rent Beta by accident and get pissed off LOL

The nail in the coffin for me was when department type stores like WALMART (well back then there were no WALMARTS in my area but THAT kind of store is what I mean) started to sell VHS movies for $19.99 but not Beta. That was the final straw. I begged and cried and made my family buy a 4 Head Hi-Fi Stereo VHS VCR (our Beta was mono). I remember it was a Panasonic that sold for $599.99 and if I remember correctly it was "cheap" in that most other brands were $699.99 at the time. We knew the people that owned the local video rental store (that also sold hardware) and paid cash and they gave us a deal and sold it to us for $500 ... this was in 1986 if I recall correctly. Maybe 1987.

As for the difference ... I remember back around 1992 my Uncle gave me his old Beta which was a Sony that was Hi-Fi and had the SuperBeta tech. I made some recordings on it from my T2 LaserDisc which I also recorded to my Panasonic VHS. I think I used BII and SP respectively. The big thing that I noticed was that the Sony Beta had colors that looked "dead on" to the LD whereas the VHS copy had slightly different looking color. Maybe it was just the Panasonic (which was getting old and heavily used by then).

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[edDV]

Color saturation and hue are internally adjustable. The main differences to look at are luminance and chroma noise or other artifacts. Both used color under recording.

Broadcast recorders of the day used direct recording (e.g. Type B and Type C 1 inch helical)

After Betamax was phased out, the Betamax transport geometry was further developed into Betacam for broadcast ENG. The Betacam signal format was analog component Y, B-Y, R-Y. The required increase in tape speed meant a full tape recorded 20 minutes instead of 1 hour or more. Even that produced marginal video quality by today's camcorder standards. Analog Betacam was further developed into Betacam SP and later into Digital Betacam.

[robjv1]

Yeah, I was wondering that regarding saturation as well.

Anyhow my interest wasn't motivated by any particular quest, my curiosity is purely academic; it just crossed my mind as something I'd never seen quite fleshed out and I count on you guys for the little details that are hard to find otherwise! Thanks for the insights.

[edDV]

I added more above. DV format (1998) was the huge advance for home recording. It put home and lower professional broadcast on the same standard. Then came DVD MPeg2 (longer recording) and later high definition.

[mazinz]

One advantage beta did have was in ignoring macrovision copy protection. Because of the way beta's gain control worked macrovision did not work and a beta copy of a macrovision encoded tape would play normally.

That was only true up to a point. A friend of mine had a beta deck made in the mid to late 80's. Some of the "later" decks did have macrovision implemented into them. I recall he could not copy one certain film (name eludes me now) because it was copy protected (not sure what betamax brand it was), but my beta deck (being from 1985 and still here with me now) copied it without a problem

[edDV]

Unfortunately, the excellent Ampex Museum of Recording Technology is no more. They donated the collection to Stanford University for research use. They had examples of most recorders including those from Sony, RCA, IVC, Bosch and other companies.
http://www.aes.org/aeshc/museums/apx.stanford/ampex_museum_status_report_2003-10-01.html

Reminds me of the last scene in Indiana Jones. All the good stuff boxed in a dusty warehouse.

[edDV]

Some interesting Betamax-VHS history
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/recording/notes.html#beta

[Video Head]

Yeah, I was wondering that regarding saturation as well.

Anyhow my interest wasn't motivated by any particular quest, my curiosity is purely academic; it just crossed my mind as something I'd never seen quite fleshed out and I count on you guys for the little details that are hard to find otherwise! Thanks for the insights.

Thesis research?

Why does one product succeed while another technically superior product fails in the same market place?

Glad to hear the battle is still being hashed. I have studied it myself. Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.

[edDV]

Sony did much better with the Video8/Hi8 camcorder formats.

[Video Head]

Sony did much better with the Video8/Hi8 camcorder formats.

They did. The earlier Walkman was another big success for Sony, it's executives and shareholders.

Sony was at the train station when their boat came in on MP3:

In 1996 Sony had already designed, and was prepared to market an MP3 music player. It was far superior to anything on the market and would have been an IPod contraceptive...the IPod would never have been conceived or born.

But Sony had been on a buying spree. They bought major US movie and music companies. The executives at the music companies complained to the President of Sony Corporation in Japan that the new MP3 player was nothing more than a device designed to steal copyrighted music material and that consumers where now so used to the extremely high quality of CD music that they would never accept compressed MP3 music and its inferior quality. The President of Sony Corp agreed. Several fired Presidents later, Sony is still in the downward spiral that started in the mid 90's.

When Sony started buying Hollywood movie and music companies they learned : You can fire the entire executive management team (Japan or US) and nothing changes when the movie or music executives are involved. They do not understand the industry or the consumer. They understand their bonus and how to achieve it. Period.

[jagabo]

They do not understand the industry or the consumer. They understand their bonus and how to achieve it. Period.

Of course, that describes the execs at most companies these days.

[lordsmurf]

But none of this mattered to nine out of ten VCR users, 90% of whom were guys in their 30s looking for porn. Hollywood and adult tapes were easier to get on VHS.

Not only is the "90% looking for porn" statistic fake...
... but porn had nothing to do with the win or loss of the format.

That's a revisionist myth. It's more false than "Beta was better than VHS".

[Video Head]

But none of this mattered to nine out of ten VCR users, 90% of whom were guys in their 30s looking for porn. Hollywood and adult tapes were easier to get on VHS.

Not only is the "90% looking for porn" statistic fake...
... but porn had nothing to do with the win or loss of the format.

That's a revisionist myth. It's more false than "Beta was better than VHS".

I would like to see some data supporting that 90% of all people renting or buying video cassettes in the 1980's were guys in their 30's looking for porn.

The adult industry has always been the early adopter of technology to distribute its product: be it postcards, 8mm film, video cassettes, DVD or the internet. I don't think they care about the format, just as long as it gets the product out there. The Hollywood movie and music people could learn a thing or two from them. I think the problem is that it is a 20 billion US dollar a year industry that no one buys, or admits that they buy. A murky business at best.

Beta was better than VHS. 9 out of 10 guys in their 30's out looking for porn say so...it must be true.