How do I ajust the sharp/softness on my Panasonic VCR? Picture seems grainy

[orsetto]

What do you guys know about the Panasonic PV-9451? I'm assuming it's a late 1990s - early 2000s model.

Its a 1999/2000 model, just about the very last of the "bulbous Jetsons faceplate" models I recommended as good low-end options for $20 or under. It looks just like the earlier 1997/1998 "compact" models, but the playback image is a tad grainier (tho nowhere near as grainy as the pricier full-size consumer Panasonics of the era). With slow-speed LP-SLP-EP we're more interested in tracking performance than any picture parameters, because bad tracking will blow any perceived image advantages of any random VCR. Panasonics began getting a bit twitchy in their slow-speed tracking towards the late 1990s, other than Sharp they remain probably the best brand for LP/EP tracking but you may experience difficulty with some tapes. It should track tapes made on most other VCRs reasonably well with the exception of JVC, which can be harder to track at SP and near-impossible at EP/SLP. (It used to drive me crazy when I owned several JVCs that none of them could even track each others tapes.) If your parents PV-9451 is newish condition it should prove useful for slow=speed tape playback. Don't be alarmed if its very noisy during FF/REW: they all were, because of the cabinet design acting like a diaphragm. Also note the compact Panasonics have no counter readout on the front panel: only visible onscreen when you push the remote Display button.

[NJRoadfan]

Yeah I'd love to see your examples -- I'm curious if it is a similar look to what I've experienced. Maybe I can dig up some samples as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEXlTUsP3DQ

Its very visible at 1:23 along the edges of the "99c" text and the "Whos No 1" graphic at the end along with all the lower 3rd text during the newscast. Of course double compression (I gave that video on DVD to a friend, who ripped it to YouTube) kind of smoothed it out. It looks like dot crawl (a given seeing that it was recorded on a circa 1986 Panasonic), but its only noticeable when played back on the DVHS deck.

[sanlyn]

Thanks, orsetto, that kinda matches the assumptions I made about that VCR. I'm a bit leary of recommending (or buying) any of this line made after 1998 or so. My biggest problem with used VCR's is their alignment: all but 2 of the used models I've been thru lost anywhere from 10 to 22 pixels off the bottom of the frames. My 8661 has only 2 pixels of noise down there, the PV-4662 loses 6 pixels. I thought this was just a simple alignment fix with a screwdriver, but apparently no local shop I've seen in 2 states seems to know how to do it (I sure don't). So I'm keeping track of every 1996 model I see on eBay, and some 1995 models seem to look OK. I'm looking particularly for Panasonics that the seller says have been "serviced". I'm not sure what that means (ran some head cleaning tape thru it? Cleaned the heads with solvent? Played a tape and got an image, of any kind, period?). I'm down to copying 6-hour VHS for the most part (yes, I know. . .A great way to learn denoising with Avisynth, if nothing else!). I don't think shelling out $$$ on an AG-1980 or higher-end 9000 series would be worth it for slow-speed tape that grungy. I had my share of problems with two PV-9668's circa 2000, purchased new. I'd hesitate to go that route again.

[robjv1]

What do you guys know about the Panasonic PV-9451? I'm assuming it's a late 1990s - early 2000s model.

Its a 1999/2000 model, just about the very last of the "bulbous Jetsons faceplate" models I recommended as good low-end options for $20 or under. It looks just like the earlier 1997/1998 "compact" models, but the playback image is a tad grainier (tho nowhere near as grainy as the pricier full-size consumer Panasonics of the era). With slow-speed LP-SLP-EP we're more interested in tracking performance than any picture parameters, because bad tracking will blow any perceived image advantages of any random VCR. Panasonics began getting a bit twitchy in their slow-speed tracking towards the late 1990s, other than Sharp they remain probably the best brand for LP/EP tracking but you may experience difficulty with some tapes. It should track tapes made on most other VCRs reasonably well with the exception of JVC, which can be harder to track at SP and near-impossible at EP/SLP. (It used to drive me crazy when I owned several JVCs that none of them could even track each others tapes.) If your parents PV-9451 is newish condition it should prove useful for slow=speed tape playback. Don't be alarmed if its very noisy during FF/REW: they all were, because of the cabinet design acting like a diaphragm. Also note the compact Panasonics have no counter readout on the front panel: only visible onscreen when you push the remote Display button.

I went ahead and grabbed it. Overall I'm pleased with it, strictly for my troublesome LP tapes (which were all recorded on a slightly older Omnivision deck). The JVC SR-W5U deck I use tracks all of my SP and EP tapes great, but LP performance is spotty with a particular run of my tapes, with the noise I'd noted before occurring in two decks of the same model #. No such noise occurs on the Panasonic deck, although the picture itself isn't as pristine of course, but I'll take the tradeoff.

My general impressions of the deck is that it definitely pumps up sharpness, though not to a ridiculous level. Tomorrow I want to run it through a few more tests with images that have some fine detail in them so see if it's washing out detail and then pumping up the sharpness, or just pumping everything up all together. There is also a slight amount of "contrast" enhancement as well. EP tapes on the deck really don't look very good, at least on the couple I tried. There is an unusually large drop-off in picture resolution between the LP and EP/SLP speeds -- the EP tapes look much better on the other two VCRs. Not sure what that is all about yet. And yes it is LOUD on FF and REW. Maybe I'll do a little side by side comparison tomorrow between it and my two other VCRs and post the results.

[orsetto]

The slower LP/SLP/EP tapes can be a real problem. I have very few slow-speed tapes, one look at the results back in 1981 was sufficient for me to go hungry if necessary to keep strictly SP. As time passes and technology changes, we don't realize some of the unconscious adaptations we make. Back in the '80s, we convinced ourselves SLP was "watchable" because we didn't want to go into hock recording everything in SP (esp 1980-1982 when a TDK T120 sold for $14.95). It helped that we were watching 19" or 25" CRTs, which conceal a multitude of video sins. All this talk of detecting "edge enhancement" and "contrast boost" differences between various old VCRs cracks me up: this is only possible now because of forensic PC viewing and todays harsh huge flatscreen TVs- we'd never notice it on a Trinitron.

If the SLP graininess or edge sharpening gimmicks in modern VCRs really bother you, you might have to go much farther back and hunt down a mid-1980s Matsushita (Panasonic, Quasar, Magnavox) two-head VCR. These were the last generation of top loaders, with sleek chassis and touch-button controls. They have large mechanical tracking thumbwheels with wide range, and they're optimized primarily for SLP use. They predate the addition of various cheap enhancement tricks, so their SLP and LP playback is much less harsh. While not large VCRs by any means, they were built like tanks and transports were very durable. Look for models like PV-1220, PV-1265, Magnavox VR8405SL01, and their many many similar variants. If you find a clean one that still works, and can find a tech that still has some clue how to restore them, they make killer LP/SLP source decks.

samlyn, I'm curious about your complaint of missing pixel lines at the bottom of your screen with many VCRs you've tried? I have never noticed this, either on CRT or LCD televisions. I do see all kinds of crap when viewing VHS transfers on a PC, esp on the right hand side of the frame, but I just crop it out using the software player adjustments. How did you become aware of missing lines on the bottom? All I ever see there is the usual few lines redundant from the top, like you'd see on a failing CRT television.

[sanlyn]

I'm curious about your complaint of missing pixel lines at the bottom of your screen with many VCRs you've tried? I have never noticed this, either on CRT or LCD televisions. I do see all kinds of crap when viewing VHS transfers on a PC, esp on the right hand side of the frame, but I just crop it out using the software player adjustments. How did you become aware of missing lines on the bottom? All I ever see there is the usual few lines redundant from the top, like you'd see on a failing CRT television.

There is always some noise at the bottom of a VHS frame. I've seen it explained as a sync or pulse signal of some kind. It's a border of just plain noise, 2 or sometimes 4 pixels high, normally a black background with brighter streaks or dots racing along lickety-split. But what I get on a couple of my machines is one of two effects:

One effect is just solid noise, horizontal white-on-black, rapidly streaming-blinking streaks with no intelligible objects or shapes in there, about 8 to 16 pixels high. First time I saw this, I thought it was misalignment of a tape recorded on one machine but played on another. Then I realized: the tape was retail VHS, not home-made. Other tapes had the same problem, retail or not; noise looked the same with any tape, any speed. On another machine, the noise appears as distortions and twists of the bottom part of the image; a small portion of the twisted image looks like maybe 2 or 4 pixels of the image repeated but shoved to one side; then the twisted image below that for the next 10 pixels or so is a distorted continuation of the image above it, similar to tearing. That type of noise reminds me of CRT horizontal hold glitches. Above that noise line and along other borders, the picture looks normal.

I blame only myself for one of those boo-booh's: Due to what is euphemistically called an unusual juxtaposition of events (i.e., I screwed up), I accidentally left a tape half-played in one machine for several weeks while it was in storage. I had in my hand the cover for the VHS tape I was going to continue capturing, and I noticed the slipcase was empty. Now, where did I put that tape? At the same time, I pushed the VCR's power button on. Alas, the loud ratcheting, scraping sound followed by a quick 'snap' from the VCR told me where that tape had been misplaced, alright. A few seconds of silence passed, then the machine quietly burped the tape out, intact. That's the 9668 that now shows just plain noise down there. The "new" 8662 and my old SONY display the twisted image at the bottom. The 8662 has maybe 6 pixels of this, the SONY has a noisy band twice as thick.

Wish I had a captured sample in my files somewhere, but I never kept a tape in those machines long enough for a capture, fearing I'd harm the tape or the machine or both. I'm sure it's something you've seen elsewhere.

[jagabo]

There is always some noise at the bottom of a VHS frame.

It's head switching noise.
http://preservation.bavc.org/artifactatlas/index.php/Head_Switching_Noise

[sanlyn]

jagabo, right! OMG, I sat here 20 minutes trying to think of that term. Must be the aging process. Head switching noise looks like that, but "pulse/sync" is what you see on tv usually at the top (hope I got those right). When the switching noise is 2 to 4 pixels, just cover it with black. But when it's 2 or 4 pixels on a machine one day, then 16 to 20 pixels on the machine next day, I suspect something needs work.

[jagabo]

In my experience head switching noise runs 8 to 12 lines on consumer VHS decks.

[sanlyn]

Now, that seems odd. The head switching noise on my PV-8661 is only 2 pixels on a 640x480 frame. On my PV-4662, it's 4 pixels. Just-arrived used and clean PV-8662 = 6 pixels. On my ancient but rebuilt SONY SLV-585HF it used to be 4 pixels, now it's about 20. I realize that some VCR's use masking techniques over that noise, so apparently some machines don't show much of it. But why 4 pixels one day and suddenly 20? Same tapes, some retail, some home-made (and some were recorded on the same SONY a few years back).

[Brad]

Same tape each time? I've seen variance of around 2 to 8 playing different tapes on the same VCR.

[sanlyn]

No. That isn't what I said.

[jagabo]

It may have to do with tension in the mechanism that wraps the tape around the drum. More tension leads to better contact in the zone where the tape separates from the drum. Temperature differences could cause changes in the spring constant. Or different tracking alignment from day to day.

[sanlyn]

Mm, no, I don't see day to day differences. The VCR #4 that I refer to above is the one that was in storage for a while with a tape accidentally left inside. When it was powered on, that's the VCR that made the horrible noises and spit the tape out. So I would suspect that VCR #4 might need a tension adjustment -- if, indeed, that's what has changed.

I recall seeing info on that adjustment a while back. Think I'll look it up.

[robjv1]

The slower LP/SLP/EP tapes can be a real problem. I have very few slow-speed tapes, one look at the results back in 1981 was sufficient for me to go hungry if necessary to keep strictly SP. As time passes and technology changes, we don't realize some of the unconscious adaptations we make. Back in the '80s, we convinced ourselves SLP was "watchable" because we didn't want to go into hock recording everything in SP (esp 1980-1982 when a TDK T120 sold for $14.95). It helped that we were watching 19" or 25" CRTs, which conceal a multitude of video sins. All this talk of detecting "edge enhancement" and "contrast boost" differences between various old VCRs cracks me up: this is only possible now because of forensic PC viewing and todays harsh huge flatscreen TVs- we'd never notice it on a Trinitron.

If the SLP graininess or edge sharpening gimmicks in modern VCRs really bother you, you might have to go much farther back and hunt down a mid-1980s Matsushita (Panasonic, Quasar, Magnavox) two-head VCR. These were the last generation of top loaders, with sleek chassis and touch-button controls. They have large mechanical tracking thumbwheels with wide range, and they're optimized primarily for SLP use. They predate the addition of various cheap enhancement tricks, so their SLP and LP playback is much less harsh. While not large VCRs by any means, they were built like tanks and transports were very durable. Look for models like PV-1220, PV-1265, Magnavox VR8405SL01, and their many many similar variants. If you find a clean one that still works, and can find a tech that still has some clue how to restore them, they make killer LP/SLP source decks.

Yeah, I wish I'd recorded all of my old videos at strictly SP speed. I am sure it was for economical reasons for most of us or not knowing any better, but I think there is also that mentality that everything must be crammed on one tape/disc as well. I was guilty of that myself in my early DVD recordings, trying to cram 4 hours of video onto one disc and expecting good results.

This reminds me, and maybe you have some insight into this -- on hi-fi decks, the hi-fi audio track is reproduced equally as well along the different speeds, but this doesn't seem to be the case with regards to linear audio in SP vs EP modes. I always assumed that since hi-fi audio could sound just as good at any speed (minus the tracking issues of course with EP tapes) that linear audio would be the same deal, but I have a few old tapes where the VCR is switching from SP to EP midway through the program and the drop off if sound quality is huge. I suppose this has something to do with the kooky way hi-fi sound is recorded in the first place, where linear audio is tied more closely to how fast the tape is moving and is more or less is constrained to the same limitations as the picture modes are.

[orsetto]

I suppose this has something to do with the kooky way hi-fi sound is recorded in the first place, where linear audio is tied more closely to how fast the tape is moving and is more or less is constrained to the same limitations as the picture modes are.

Yes, you have it right: the HiFi audio quality does not get perceptibly worse (aside from increased tracking sensitivity) when dropping from SP to LP or EP/SLP because it is FM format still running at the comparatively high diagonal speed of the video tracks. The mono linear track audio quality declines progressively from SP>LP>EP/SLP becuase it is recorded the same way as traditional reel-to-reel audio tape. At EP/SLP, the horizontal speed of the tape is incredibly slow which severely limits frequency range and kills the S/N ration of linear audio track.

(It does seem a bit illogical that the HiFi audio doesn't change much dropping from SP to EP yet the video signal recorded over the exact same diagonal swaths shows noticeable degradation. This is because video uses a much greater bandwidth than audio so dropping the amount of recordable tape area by 66% has much greater impact on video than audio.)

[Mini-Me]

NICE score! The PV-4661 was near top of the 1996 lineup: it was identical to the PV-S4670 but minus the SVHS capability. My PV-S4680 was the exceedingly rare top of the line, essentially a 4670 with the addition of flying erase heads. I picked up the 4680 for $85 a few years ago, near mint in box. Over the years, I've found the small-chassis 4500 and 4600 series of 1995-1996 hold up very nicely. They look like toys because they're small, but construction is actually pretty good (vastly improved over the flimsy 4300 series of 1993 which was so unrepairable they had to swap for new replacement VCRs under warranty). The only real Achilles Heel of the 1995/1996 Pannys is the front loading mechanism, which like every other VCR will fail eventually under hard use. The DynaMorphous metal video heads are nearly indestructible: if a dirty tape clogs them, any competent tech can clean them good as new. You have to be truly hamfisted to damage them.

What's your opinion on the PV-V4660, particularly compared with the AG2560?

I'm having my AG1980's tracking repaired right now, but my VHS-C camcorder has such superior picture quality for my VHS-C tapes (recorded on that camera) that I'm starting to consider getting another VCR entirely. The AG1980's DNR mostly tames the chroma noise, but it does create a lot of smearing, and it almost seems to "scramble noise up" into higher frequency garbage components.

Another problem with my AG1980 is that it tends to desaturate any color below a certain threshold. Cartoons and such with bold colors look rich enough, but live action tapes (like my home movies) have all their more subtle colors desaturated. Fixing nonlinear desaturation like this isn't as easy as bumping up the saturation in a proc amp either, because that just blows out bright reds (and similar colors) without bringing enough saturation back to the lighter shades.

I'm capturing to a PC and doing all my noise reduction in software, so I don't necessarily need an expensive VCR model with built-in DNR; the AG1980 has already burned me there anyway. I also don't need a VCR with a line TBC, because my new DVDR3475 is doing an excellent job as a passthrough TBC.

Instead, I'm looking for a solid VCR with the following characteristics:

• Strong, reliable tracking ability
• Rich color (i.e. richer color than the AG1980, or at least color that's desaturated in a more linear/correctable way)
• Good resolution and detail without a lot of artificial sharpening
• Good audio

Does the AG2560 meet the last three criteria solidly, or are there better (if harder to find) options? What about the PV-S4680, PV-4670, or PV-4661? Does the PV-V4660 (or any other 4500 and 4600 series model) fit into that same category? Price and availability aside, which do you think would better meet my criteria? I know you tend to recommend the Mitsubishi HS-HD2000U pretty often. Is that just for good tracking combined with TBC/DNR, or would it also meet my particular needs better?

If none of those really fit, do you have any other ideas? I understand that some models are unobtanium, but it wouldn't hurt to add some to my ebay search list. Anyone want to part with an SR-W5U, by the way?

[orsetto]

MiniMe, you should probably cross the Mitsubishi HS-HD2000U off your list. I find it better overall for tape transfers than the AG1980, but that is based on my personal workflow which is primarily dubbing old TV and cable recordings to a rack of Pioneer DVD/HDD recorders. The flaws and distortions in my tapes are fairly typical, esp the '90s-era cable degradation, and they respond very well to the combination of Mitsu TBC/DNR and Pioneer built-in sync circuits. I don't use the Mitsubishi for everything, mostly the older cable stuff that needs massive luma noise filtering and line TBC correction of the cable "zipper" distortion on the right side of the frame. While the Mitsu is better than the AG1980 for this type of tape flaw, you probably would not like it any better in your work with VHS-C camcorder tapes and PC capture. The Mitsu does not have nearly the color variation or unpredictable noise shaping of the AG1980, but it does soften the image somewhat that you may find equally unsuitable.

The higher end of the 1996 Panasonic PV-4600 series is really quite good, but you need to keep in mind the caveats I was discussing in earlier posts. This was the final series of VCRs to employ Panasonics earlier color NR technology, which also forms the basis for the more advanced AG1980 DNR. Unlike the AG1980 or other advanced TBC/DNR makes, the 4600 series does not have a complex "active" color NR, its more of a passive circuit. It avoids the "plastic" video look of more advanced VCRs but does nothing to suppress luma noise and isn't always reliable for reducing color noise. The color enhancement is highly dependent on tracking adjustment: if your tapes are way off from standard, as many VHS-C tapes are due to the half-size head cylinder, you may not get a solid enough tracking lock to keep the 46xx color NR spot on. When it drifts, it backfires, especially with large blocks of red which will get bloomier than they would on a non-color-NR model. Mind you, the 4600 series is a good value, reliable mechanically, and good trackers for general purpose tapes. The 4660 is regular VHS with the Dynamorphous Metal Heads, the 4670 is the same but adds SVHS, the rare 4680 is SVHS with flying erase heads (not necessary for our purposes). If you fear you might get interference from the Panasonic color filter, look for model 4650 and below as they do not have that feature (or the DM heads).

I have explained my use of the Panasonic AG2560 earlier in this thread. I find it to be an excellent video and hifi audio tracker, the transport is very well made, and it strikes a nice PQ balance of color and detail. It does have a lower-end color processor similar to the 4660, but in this case it is not so tracking-dependent and it does not bloom as easily in the reds. I have been so pleased with the predictable decency of the AG2560 that I bought six of them (at only $30-40 apiece, why not?) after selling off all my AG1980s save the last.

Again please note my opinions of PQ are based on my gear, my DVD/HDD workflow and my specific tapes. I do very little PC dubbing with attendant histogram checking and other detailed processing. Those who do rely on various measuring techniques have stated they feel the Pansonic 4600 series and the AG2560 do use a small degree of sharpness peaking, which means they aren't utterly transparent. I frankly do not see this at all with the AG2560 unless I invoke the peaking boost button on the front panel (which I never do). I do not see it in the 4600 series, either, but then I was forced to live with the horrifically over-boosted Panasonic 7000, 8000, and 9000 series of 1997-1999 and have nightmares of what truly bad sharpness spiking looked like. To my eye, the AG2560 and PV-4600 series aren't remotely that bad. (For dodgy VHS-C tapes, I would probably look for any clean Sharp brand VCR because their tracking range is usually much wider and accommodating.)

[robjv1]

Just for fun, here are a couple of screenshots to compare the Panasonic PV-9451 to a couple of other VCRs with a real tape. I may have messed up the cropping on a couple of pictures, but they are all the same frame.

It's pretty easy to see how pumped up the sharpness is and the grain that results in even a relatively noise-free image. The noise distribution is really apparent upon zoom-in in the upper right hand corner of test5.bmp.

I'll try and do an EP tape later to show the oddly large amount of dropoff in the PV-9451 image in respect to the other decks.

[Mini-Me]

Thanks for your insights, orsetto. I'll cross the HS-HD2000U off my list...which should make my list significantly less intimidating for my wallet! I'm happy playing back my VHS-C tapes in the camcorder that made them, since it offers very good quality (aside from noise, which I can correct in software, and some soft light halos...but not nearly as bad as the light and dark ones the AG1980 can create). My problem right now is actually finding a good VCR for my full-sized VHS tapes, which were made on some other full-sized VHS camcorders that I no longer have access to.

Since we're talking about full-sized VHS tapes, does that change your outlook on the Panasonic 46xx series? I was under the impression the DNR circuit wouldn't be too much of a hurdle, since you stated earlier that, "This is very annoying in the earlier 4300 and 4400 series, slightly better in the 4500 models and is almost perfect in the 4600 series," and, "The filter/tracking interaction was finally cured in the entire 4600 series, then dropped altogether after 1997 except in the semi-pro AG1980." Aside from noise processing, where do these stand in terms of basic picture quality (detail and color presentation) relative to the AG1980 or AG2560?

I understand that the AG2560 is a great tracker, and you say it strikes a good balance of detail and color. I hold the opinion that the AG1980 drains the life from colors, but I'm not sure whether you agree, or what predictable decency means to you. Since this is very subjective, could you tell me where the AG2560 stands relative to the AG1980 in terms of color saturation and detail? Is it a significant step up in saturation, or will it present a similarly cold/drab image, just without the heavy DNR? You also mention Sharp brand VCR's. Where do they stand here, relative to the AG1980?

It's funny...before I bought my AG1980, I noted that its color presentation in Ice Age test images was somewhat colder than that of JVC decks. I figured that was no problem, and I could just boost it with a proc amp...but I was wrong, because of the nonlinear nature of the desaturation. Really bright colors are plenty saturated, but the rest of the image looks almost like it came from Gears of War. I'm hoping to find something with more consistent/linear/natural saturation.

I'm also curious about your comment on transparency: If the AG2560's detractors say it's not transparent, what VCR's would they actually call transparent? I wouldn't mind checking one of those out. That said, I'm not religious about "absolutely no processing" or anything. My DVDR3475 adds some noise and sharpens the image somewhat, but it isn't excessive, and it's worth the excellent passthrough TBC. I'd love to have an ideal picture that's perfectly sharp, detailed, noiseless, colorful, and which cooks me breakfast in the morning. Realistically though, I would prefer a soft but genuinely detailed picture over a VCR that substitutes artificial sharpness for actually tracking the details of the signal. For instance, my VHS-C camcorder is soft but detailed (and it leaves it to me to sort the detail from the noise), whereas my AG1980 scrubs out a lot of real detail with its DNR and sharpens what's left. I'm looking for a VCR for full-sized VHS tapes with a presentation more like my VHS-C camcorder's. Aside from a colorless picture and destructive processing, I'm afraid of getting a VCR with heads that simply cannot resolve detail from the source tape.

[sanlyn]

The higher end of the 1996 Panasonic PV-4600 series is really quite good, but you need to keep in mind the caveats I was discussing in earlier posts. This was the final series of VCRs to employ Panasonics earlier color NR technology, which also forms the basis for the more advanced AG1980 DNR. Unlike the AG1980 or other advanced TBC/DNR makes, the 4600 series does not have a complex "active" color NR, its more of a passive circuit. It avoids the "plastic" video look of more advanced VCRs but does nothing to suppress luma noise and isn't always reliable for reducing color noise. The color enhancement is highly dependent on tracking adjustment: if your tapes are way off from standard, as many VHS-C tapes are due to the half-size head cylinder, you may not get a solid enough tracking lock to keep the 46xx color NR spot on. When it drifts, it backfires, especially with large blocks of red which will get bloomier than they would on a non-color-NR model. Mind you, the 4600 series is a good value, reliable mechanically, and good trackers for general purpose tapes. The 4660 is regular VHS with the Dynamorphous Metal Heads, the 4670 is the same but adds SVHS, the rare 4680 is SVHS with flying erase heads (not necessary for our purposes). If you fear you might get interference from the Panasonic color filter, look for model 4650 and below as they do not have that feature (or the DM heads).

I might be on the right track, then, replacing some used-up VCR's with new acquisitions off eBay. I managed to find a clean PV-4662. The seller noted the unit had been "serviced". That could mean any number of things, but apparently the seller knows VCR's pretty well and publishes a long of apparently refurbed units. I think the seller might have adjusted tracking rather well, because the color problems you mentioned look minimal to me. Just yesterday a clean PV-4561 arrived -- with the wrong remote, by the way, but the PV-4662's remote worked OK. The 4561 also claims to be "serviced". I think just the heads were cleaned, but tracking SLP and SP seems right on (only 2 pixels of head switching noise at the bottom of the frame, too! I'm used to seeing 8 to 16 pixels down there). The 4561 does have some smearing on motion, so I suspect the DNR has something to do with that, but it's rather mild.

I mentioned elsewhere that I managed to get a pristine PV-8661 some time back. Mine must be an unusual sample. It does have that late 90's sharpening, but otherwise it's doing a really nice job on every tape I load. I tried to duplicate that experience with another used 8661, and lately an 8662. Both units displayed the kind of image corruption orsetto mentions, to the point where I just don't use them. At least, they were bargain priced, make good rewinders, and would be suitable for really crappy, damaged tape.

I'd advise staying away from 1995-96 Pannies where the seller lists higher than mainstream prices but offers no return, doesn't seem to know much about VCR's, refuses to answer email questions about the product, and has something like 40 complaints over the past year. Your dealing with 14 years or more of use. Even if these machines do tend to hold up well, I just don't trust the kinds of listings I described.

[orsetto]

I'm also curious about your comment on transparency:[...] what VCR's would they [other VH members] actually call transparent? I wouldn't mind checking one of those out.

You may have noticed there is quite the "JVC cult" here on VH. Those who drone on endlessly about "transparency" are almost always comparing every other VCR to some mythic individual JVC SVHS they bought with their own two hands from a store fifteen years ago, that miraculously still works as perfectly as the day they bought it. You will probably never hear of any other VCR being used as the reference standard on VH aside from the late 1990s JVC SVHS models. What they thrill over as "transparency" primarily consists of the DNR processing of these decks. This PQ is more akin to the Mitsu 2000 than the AG1980, with much less of the unpredictable artifacts of the 1980. But it is still processed, i.e. softened, which I think would bother you in your workflow, MiniMe. Given your dislike of some processing effects of the 1980, you likely would be unimpressed by the Mitsu or the much-hyped JVCs. TBC/DNR is a compromise, none is actually "transparent," and in JVCs case if the TBC/DNR is turned off you're left with a none-too-nice VCR that is far from transparent and tracks like a dog. If you are very curious to know what is being held up as the "transparent standard" you should perhaps buy one of these JVCs just to calibrate your expectations: if it doesn't suit, you could always resell it immediately at little to no loss (the cult following props up their value).

I should clarify there is a HUGE difference between the "typical" svhs JVCs bandied about in AV forums and the amazing WVHS models robjv1 has been fortunate enough to acquire. The JVC WVHS were insanely expensive state-of-the-art showpieces designed to make analog HDTV recordings from the early Japanese analog HDTV broadcasts. These WVHS models originally sold for $5000+, which you can imagine bought you a level of build quality and electronics purity you would not find in the commodity SVHS models. You wanna talk "transparency," you want one of these babies. Sadly, they are very rare, difficult to find in USA, and the parts/repair situation is hopeless. If you're interested, robjv1 has posted much valuable info on how he managed to make one of these functional, and the beautiful PQ he gets from standard VHS played on the JVC WVHS deck. Search for his posts.

Re your other questions, its hard for me to precisely compare AG1980 to AG2560 based on your very specific needs. There appears to be wide sample variation among the 1980s, for example: not unexpected given their ubiquity and the non-stop use most were given by their original "pro" owners. I have in the past owned seven AG1980s and four of the "twin sister" AG5710 (same VCR minus the tuner with serial PC interface). All were bought used from eBay between 2006-2009. Each tracks a bit different from the others and has a different spin on the TBC/DNR effect. What I did not see is the effect that bothers you most with your own AG1980: cooler, desaturated colors. Mine were all borderline oversaturated and varied from slightly warm to slightly cool. The AG2560, in contrast, does not seem artificially saturated or unsaturated, drab, cool or warm, soft or sharp, it seems "just right" with most any tape I play in it. Here and there I do miss the TBC/DNR feature, esp with some older second-gen tapes with inherent blooming: I've learned to either tolerate this or use the Mitsubishi for those tapes. The earlier 4600 Panasonics give playback very similar to the 2560 (medium saturation/color temp/detail) but have more sensitive tracking relation to color: not a problem, you just need to be aware of tracking. I never think about tracking on the 2560 beyond the obvious video/hifi basics. Please note samlyn's recent post re his positive opinion of the PV-4662 he just bought: I would say we agree.

Some of our subjective opinions of VCR playback are extremely difficult to put into words that would convey the "look" of the video to another person who can't watch the same monitor with us: I fear I'm hitting that wall here. I don't know if this will mean anything to any of you, but to me the 4600 series plays tapes with a more "dated" PQ quality similar to the classic early "DX4" hifi decks like the PV-1730. This is the PQ Panasonic had for the longest amount of time and was known for: it was good, but not fantastic. Clean, clear, but doesn't really jump out at you. Under todays standards for plain VHS, it would be considered very neutral and likely a good base for later processing. Sadly, the extraordinary regular-VHS VCRs of the late '80s like the Minolta/Hitachi barely survived into the 1990s, with none in operational condition today. Those were the finest VHS I've ever used, with almost 3D color and realistic detail that leapt off the screen, even with second generation dubs (SVHS offered no advantage over these VHS units). A few regular-VHS JVCs of the period came close to this performance, but suffered similar reliability issues and are now long forgotten. The Panasonics, while not being especially striking, did survive intact so have ironically become the median standard in second-hand VCRs today. Within that context, the 4660 has good "old fashioned" output, the AG1980 has what became the typical noiseless but overprocessed look, and the 2560 falls in between: PQ is a bit more "punchy" than the 4660, but not oversharpened and no color processing to speak of.

I have been using VCRs since 1981, a very long time: mostly Panasonic and variants (Canon, Quasar, Magnavox), some JVC and variants (TEAC), Hitachi OEMs (Minolta, RCA), Mitsubishi, and NEC. Experience with all of these brands was consistent over time (positives/negatives in reliability, tape handling, PQ) *except* for Panasonic, which varied dramatically in the decade of the 90s. From 1991-1994 you never knew what you'd get, performance varied widely from year to year and models within that year, esp once the ill-conceived "amateur" color NR became pervasive. 1995 and 1996, Panasonic took a breath and returned to consistency across the model range (even keeping the same cabinet from bottom to top). 1997-1999 we went back to horror show, with insanely oversharpened output on all the full-size models and a plethora of "affordable" compacts no two of which had the same PQ. Some of the late '90s compacts were quite nice, on par with the 4600 series, many were dreadful, and the model numbering scheme so chaotic its almost impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff now. After 2001, nearly the entire Panasonic range became bottom-feeder blatantly-Chinese-OEM compacts, even the SVHS models, except a small handful that were re-branded JVCs. During the1990s, the AG series mostly floated above the fray, using separate chassis and often different color circuits. This is why the AG1960, 1970, and 1980 were relatively consistent while the consumer models were all over the place. The AG2560 was the last "classic" Panasonic holdout, surviving until 2001: after that even the "prosumer" AG series got crappy.

Of the commonly available AG decks you can buy today, the AG2560 is the best all-rounder if you just want a basic affordable reliable VCR. (The Sharp brand VCRs have PQ similar to the 2560 with an even broader tracking range) The old AG1970 has now dropped to the $50 range and can make an interesting supplemental VCR if you have many overexposed or soft tapes: it has a crude TBC which is uniquely effective within a certain narrow range of tape issues (tho the 1970 PQ is much too grainy overall for daily use). The AG1980 has killer TBC/DNR wihich is very helpful with some tapes, a wider tracking range than most other SVHS in EP mode, and excellent jitter control. Unfortunately it is not neutral at all, the DNR noise shaping cannot be disabled, and the TBC can be flummoxed by overexposed camcorder signals (the 1970 handles those better). The 1980 was more fragile than the 1970 and more likely to need repair, esp to its chintzy power supply module. Finding a workable AG1980 today at a non-inflated price can be a challenge.

[robjv1]

Don't sell your influence short, Orsetto. I definitely agree that there has been a historical tendency on VH to discard the thought that anything other than a JVC SVHS could be viable for these types of conversion, but I think your contributions on here have definitely brought the conversation back to the center. Many of us defer to your knowledge of the whole spectrum of decks out there and if anything you've raised awareness about a lot of VCRs people would have never considered, notably the Mitsubishi SVHS model and the Panasonic AG-2560 / AG-5710 models. I don't think that anybody gets across the idea that there is no one perfect VCR for every job better than you do -- you are always as objective and realistic about these machines as someone could be, be it the good, the bad, or the ugly side of each of these models.

[Brad]

orsetto - just curious, how was it that you went through so many different VCRs and brands over the decades?

[Mini-Me]

You may have noticed there is quite the "JVC cult" here on VH. Those who drone on endlessly about "transparency" are almost always comparing every other VCR to some mythic individual JVC SVHS they bought with their own two hands from a store fifteen years ago, that miraculously still works as perfectly as the day they bought it. You will probably never hear of any other VCR being used as the reference standard on VH aside from the late 1990s JVC SVHS models. What they thrill over as "transparency" primarily consists of the DNR processing of these decks. This PQ is more akin to the Mitsu 2000 than the AG1980, with much less of the unpredictable artifacts of the 1980. But it is still processed, i.e. softened, which I think would bother you in your workflow, MiniMe. Given your dislike of some processing effects of the 1980, you likely would be unimpressed by the Mitsu or the much-hyped JVCs. TBC/DNR is a compromise, none is actually "transparent," and in JVCs case if the TBC/DNR is turned off you're left with a none-too-nice VCR that is far from transparent and tracks like a dog. If you are very curious to know what is being held up as the "transparent standard" you should perhaps buy one of these JVCs just to calibrate your expectations: if it doesn't suit, you could always resell it immediately at little to no loss (the cult following props up their value).

Wait...people call the JVC 7600-9911 units transparent? I've seen countless blurry picture comparisons and heard of a case where a JVC took the eyes off a person's face! More importantly, I've taken your warnings to heart about them being voracious tape eaters and secret degaussers. I won't let my home movies touch them with a ten foot pole. I'd much rather go for a similar HS-HD2000U for its better tracking, reliability, and tape safety...but it sounds like that's not what I need anyway. As robjv1 says, don't sell your influence short: I actively seek out your VCR posts on both VideoHelp and AVSForum (your style is unmistakable ). Aside from the mythical W5U/W5/W7U/W7, I'm not touching a JVC.

I should clarify there is a HUGE difference between the "typical" svhs JVCs bandied about in AV forums and the amazing WVHS models robjv1 has been fortunate enough to acquire. The JVC WVHS were insanely expensive state-of-the-art showpieces designed to make analog HDTV recordings from the early Japanese analog HDTV broadcasts. These WVHS models originally sold for $5000+, which you can imagine bought you a level of build quality and electronics purity you would not find in the commodity SVHS models. You wanna talk "transparency," you want one of these babies. Sadly, they are very rare, difficult to find in USA, and the parts/repair situation is hopeless. If you're interested, robjv1 has posted much valuable info on how he managed to make one of these functional, and the beautiful PQ he gets from standard VHS played on the JVC WVHS deck. Search for his posts.

I keep an eye out for robjv1's posts too. There was actually an ebay auction for one of these that ended during the Super Bowl. It was presumably in tip-top shape, since it was just let go by a retired video professinal liquidating his inventory...but the listing showed no details about the condition, and I had to contact the seller to find that out. I was hoping that nobody else noticed the auction, or the blank listing scared everyone else into assuming it was broken...but every single bid occurred in the last minute, and all but one occurred in the last ten seconds. Apparently, I wasn't the only one who knew how to bid on ebay, and just one other person had deeper pockets. Hopefully he's happy with the one he gets and sits out of the next auction.

Re your other questions, its hard for me to precisely compare AG1980 to AG2560 based on your very specific needs. There appears to be wide sample variation among the 1980s, for example: not unexpected given their ubiquity and the non-stop use most were given by their original "pro" owners. I have in the past owned seven AG1980s and four of the "twin sister" AG5710 (same VCR minus the tuner with serial PC interface). All were bought used from eBay between 2006-2009. Each tracks a bit different from the others and has a different spin on the TBC/DNR effect. What I did not see is the effect that bothers you most with your own AG1980: cooler, desaturated colors. Mine were all borderline oversaturated and varied from slightly warm to slightly cool. The AG2560, in contrast, does not seem artificially saturated or unsaturated, drab, cool or warm, soft or sharp, it seems "just right" with most any tape I play in it. Here and there I do miss the TBC/DNR feature, esp with some older second-gen tapes with inherent blooming: I've learned to either tolerate this or use the Mitsubishi for those tapes. The earlier 4600 Panasonics give playback very similar to the 2560 (medium saturation/color temp/detail) but have more sensitive tracking relation to color: not a problem, you just need to be aware of tracking. I never think about tracking on the 2560 beyond the obvious video/hifi basics. Please note samlyn's recent post re his positive opinion of the PV-4662 he just bought: I would say we agree.

Thank you! It was extremely helpful getting your view on the image variations in different AG1980 decks. Maybe my particular AG1980 is just peculiar in terms of its color balance? It pushes bright colors brighter (so it's plenty saturated there) but understates everything else. Either way, it sounds like the AG2560 and 4600 series would be very good bets for me to make.

Some of our subjective opinions of VCR playback are extremely difficult to put into words that would convey the "look" of the video to another person who can't watch the same monitor with us: I fear I'm hitting that wall here. I don't know if this will mean anything to any of you, but to me the 4600 series plays tapes with a more "dated" PQ quality similar to the classic early "DX4" hifi decks like the PV-1730. This is the PQ Panasonic had for the longest amount of time and was known for: it was good, but not fantastic. Clean, clear, but doesn't really jump out at you. Under todays standards for plain VHS, it would be considered very neutral and likely a good base for later processing. Sadly, the extraordinary regular-VHS VCRs of the late '80s like the Minolta/Hitachi barely survived into the 1990s, with none in operational condition today. Those were the finest VHS I've ever used, with almost 3D color and realistic detail that leapt off the screen, even with second generation dubs (SVHS offered no advantage over these VHS units). A few regular-VHS JVCs of the period came close to this performance, but suffered similar reliability issues and are now long forgotten. The Panasonics, while not being especially striking, did survive intact so have ironically become the median standard in second-hand VCRs today. Within that context, the 4660 has good "old fashioned" output, the AG1980 has what became the typical noiseless but overprocessed look, and the 2560 falls in between: PQ is a bit more "punchy" than the 4660, but not oversharpened and no color processing to speak of.

I don't recognize the DX4 or PV-1730 reference, but I think I understand your meaning about a dated, "neutral" presentation. That's probably close to what I would call "transparency," relative to what's actually on the tape. In terms of color, I don't need extreme saturation right away...just a natural color curve, so that I can tweak the saturation in a proc amp to make the understated colors look alive without completely blowing out the bright reds/purples/oranges/etc. In terms of detail, all I really want is what's on the tape, and then denoising/sharpening/contrast enhancement/etc. can come later.

When you refer to the late 1980's Minolta/Hitachi decks, do you think they actually contain more detail in the image, or did they just emphasize it better for immediate viewing? For my purposes, I don't need the detail to "jump out" from the get-go: I just want it all to be present in the image and recoverable by software.

If the late 1980's Minolta/Hitachi decks actually did contain more underlying detail altogether, do you have any model numbers on the tip of your tongue from that era? I understand that none are likely to have survived intact, but it can't hurt to keep an eye out for a barely used miracle from someone's basement too...unless they're not only broken but harmful to tapes, like JVC's?

I have been using VCRs since 1981, a very long time: mostly Panasonic and variants (Canon, Quasar, Magnavox), some JVC and variants (TEAC), Hitachi OEMs (Minolta, RCA), Mitsubishi, and NEC. Experience with all of these brands was consistent over time (positives/negatives in reliability, tape handling, PQ) *except* for Panasonic, which varied dramatically in the decade of the 90s. From 1991-1994 you never knew what you'd get, performance varied widely from year to year and models within that year, esp once the ill-conceived "amateur" color NR became pervasive. 1995 and 1996, Panasonic took a breath and returned to consistency across the model range (even keeping the same cabinet from bottom to top). 1997-1999 we went back to horror show, with insanely oversharpened output on all the full-size models and a plethora of "affordable" compacts no two of which had the same PQ. Some of the late '90s compacts were quite nice, on par with the 4600 series, many were dreadful, and the model numbering scheme so chaotic its almost impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff now. After 2001, nearly the entire Panasonic range became bottom-feeder blatantly-Chinese-OEM compacts, even the SVHS models, except a small handful that were re-branded JVCs. During the1990s, the AG series mostly floated above the fray, using separate chassis and often different color circuits. This is why the AG1960, 1970, and 1980 were relatively consistent while the consumer models were all over the place. The AG2560 was the last "classic" Panasonic holdout, surviving until 2001: after that even the "prosumer" AG series got crappy.

Wow! It sounds like someone really needed to be fired...

Of the commonly available AG decks you can buy today, the AG2560 is the best all-rounder if you just want a basic affordable reliable VCR. (The Sharp brand VCRs have PQ similar to the 2560 with an even broader tracking range) The old AG1970 has now dropped to the $50 range and can make an interesting supplemental VCR if you have many overexposed or soft tapes: it has a crude TBC which is uniquely effective within a certain narrow range of tape issues (tho the 1970 PQ is much too grainy overall for daily use). The AG1980 has killer TBC/DNR wihich is very helpful with some tapes, a wider tracking range than most other SVHS in EP mode, and excellent jitter control. Unfortunately it is not neutral at all, the DNR noise shaping cannot be disabled, and the TBC can be flummoxed by overexposed camcorder signals (the 1970 handles those better). The 1980 was more fragile than the 1970 and more likely to need repair, esp to its chintzy power supply module. Finding a workable AG1980 today at a non-inflated price can be a challenge.

It's interesting that whenever you bring up Sharp decks, you simply list the brand name without any model numbers or even any general production eras. I usually take your comments about brand consistency as a contrast with Panasonic's volatility, but are thirty years worth of Sharp decks really so consistent that it doesn't matter which you pick up? You also say their picture quality is simlar to the 2560 with an even broader tracking range; is there a quality reason you commonly recommend the AG2560 first, or is it really just a matter of simplicity?

[orsetto]

As you may have noticed from my- er- "extended" posts, vaporeon800: I'm as obsessive as anyone else here.

In my early twenties (which coincided with the early '80s) I split my time between working as an intern in video postproduction houses, and working in a ultra-ritzy high-end Manhattan video store which only sold tapes, never rented them. (Believe it or not, such no-rental "video salons" catering to the wealthy did exist in all major cities for a very brief period between 1979-82, the one I worked at even had a Wall Street IPO.) Thirty years ago, VCRs were still selling at $900+ for the BetaMax, $799 for the archaic piano-key VHS, and the "next generation" 4-head, soft-button, wireless remote models had just become available for $1299. Understand, a $1299 item would be close to $3000 in todays dollars. So a few firms sprang up that would rent VCRs by the month for $30-50, allowing you to trade models every three months. I did this for quite some time, until the average purchase price of 4-head wireless remote models dropped to $600. By then I had managed to open my own video rental store, which gave me enough added cash flow between 1985-1994 to indulge my OCD video habits.

The Granada vcr rental agreement let me sample the entire range of Matsushita (RCA, Magnavox, Panasonic) VHS during its rapid evolution from 1981 thru 1984, without a huge upfront cash outlay. After that, when I had some actual income, I pretty much spent all of it on VCRs and blank tape (while my friends blew it on cars, beer, girls: I often wonder who had more fun...) Twice a year, mfrs would totally rewrite the VCR playbook, and I jumped on every trend and every format looking for the "holy grail." This was fueled in part by my being one of those kids who were raised by a television set and lived in a movie theater: for me, the invention of the VCR with its ability to to create a home library of TV and movies was like Charley being dropped in Willy Wonka's chocolate factory.

I started with VHS, because it was the only VCR you could rent. It was OK for direct off-air recording, but second-gen dubs looked terrible except on the new TDK High Grade tapes, which in 1981 cost an astounding $19.95 each. I kept hearing the BetaMax was much better for dubbing, when Beta competition peaked around 1983 I tried every Beta vcr I could lay hands (I must be one of the few here who actually owned the Toshiba and NEC BetaHiFi decks, which were totally original to those companies and nothing like the Sony/Zenith/Sanyo models). Beta was indeed much better for dubbing, so I recorded most off-air stuff on VHS and dubbed selected portions to Beta. The trouble with Beta is they were hopelessly unreliable: I spent more money repairing them than I did on buying them. When all the mfrs but Sony dropped Beta, I saw the writing on the wall and grudgingly went back to VHS (I did keep my SL-5200 BetaHiFi). By 1985, with the success of the VHS HiFi knockoff, every brand name in the world wanted in on the VHS action. They all contracted with the same handful of Japanese OEMs, but each added some little bit of distinction to make them different or interesting.

Minolta, for instance, was the only brand name to ever convince Hitachi to fix their horrendous "rolling glitch" problem, where every Hitachi-based VCR would lose its tracking focus every fifteen seconds (even after stealing RCA from Matsushita, Hitachi still had this issue). The Minolta-Hitachis were a revelation, in the process of finally nailing down their tracking subsystem Hitachi gifted Minolta with PQ that was truly worthy of their high reputation in photographic gear. Best PQ of any VCRs I've ever owned.

Canon very cleverly obtained an exclusive contract to sell Panasonic AG-series semi-pro models as the Canon consumer line. By doing this, Canon got the reliability and features of Panasonic while appearing to sell their own exclusive designs (unlike every other Matsushita clone). In those days, absolutely no one outside pro video circles even knew a separate Panasonic AG line existed.

Sansui, Teac and other audio firms went with JVC designs, which were often tweaked to be better than the source model. Pioneer opted to go with Sony and Beta, which worked very well for them in the Japanese home market but zip in the states (the Pioneer 900 is still highly sought after). Zenith eventually jumped ship from Beta and went VHS with JVC: the initial Zenith VHS were beautiful-looking VCRs with PQ outclassing most similar JVCs, esp in SLP/EP where the first Zenith set a benchmark for quality. NEC was the only company to simultaneously make VHS and Beta VCRs that looked alike and straddled both markets (Sanyo made crappy Betas but sold their crappy VHS under the Fisher brand).

Sooner or later, though, every VCR in those days would break and then not be cost-effective to fix. I would take the opportunity to move up to the next wave of machines. (Often the production suites I worked for would go thru consumer VHS decks like Kleenex, I would grab the used up ones at a firesale price) Eventually all the specialty brands dropped out of the business, leaving just JVC, Panasonic, Mitsubishi and Hitachi. Hitachi got lousy again, Mitsubishi was outrageously overpriced thru its exclusive dealer chain, this left just JVC and Panasonic. I went back and forth with these for 20 years: the Panasonics were reliable, but the PQ just never grabbed me, while the JVCs had great PQ, and horrendous reliability issues. I have had more irreplaceable tapes ruined by more JVC vcrs than I care to think about. I kept buying them because no other VCR had equal PQ, until finally in the mid-90s JVC reserved that great PQ for their top-price models and the low- to mid-range JVCs became no better than Panasonic. It was also in the mid-90s it became impossible to get a non-SVHS with flying erase heads and manual audio level control: two features I depended on. The only brand still offering those features for under $500 was Mitsubishi, which finally broadened its dealer base and brought prices down to earth. When my last really good RCA/Hitachi editing unit could not be fixed, I went with Mitsubishi for my main deck while keeping a couple good Panasonics as backups.

These carried me into the DVD era, when everything got shook up again because the VCRs with the worst rep as VCRs became the standard for dubbing to digital. Once again I got sucked in by JVC, and once again they screwed my tapes to death. When Mitsubishi licensed the JVC TBC/DNR system for their last-ditch DVHS model HS-HD2000, I grabbed a few of them on closeout and never touched a JVC again. Between the Mitsu DVHS, a Panasonic AG1980, a flock of AG2560, a couple old Quasars and a lone Sony SL-360HF, my dubbing rack is staying undisturbed until I finish my digitizing project (oh yeah, all those VCRs were running all that time I owned them: 3400+ tapes in my library).

BTW, I closed my video store in the mid-90s as interest in VHS was waning but mere moments before the introduction of DVD would have given me a few more profitable years (DOH!). I never did gain enough marketable skills in post-production to make a solid career of it (I was always one generation behind the current technology curve, deadly when competing with people half your age). Most of my "disposable income" went to VCRs, vcr repairs, blank tapes, photo gear, stereo components: so you might say my retirement funding is more than a little shaky.

[orsetto]

When you refer to the late 1980's Minolta/Hitachi decks, do you think they actually contain more detail in the image, or did they just emphasize it better for immediate viewing? For my purposes, I don't need the detail to "jump out" from the get-go: I just want it all to be present in the image and recoverable by software.

If the late 1980's Minolta/Hitachi decks actually did contain more underlying detail altogether, do you have any model numbers on the tip of your tongue from that era? I understand that none are likely to have survived intact, but it can't hurt to keep an eye out for a barely used miracle from someone's basement too...unless they're not only broken but harmful to tapes, like JVC's?

The Minoltas were only available for a brief period, circa 1984-1987 I think (it's been a long time). The best was the first, model MV-70S. It had the "true" four head design with 58m SP heads and the smaller dedicated 19m heads, along with the HiFi audio heads and a flying erase head. The recording quality on this vcr was mind-blowing better than any VCR of either format I'd ever tried before or since, when viewed on a CRT Proton or Trinitron monitor back in the day. You have no idea how unrealistically picky I was about PQ then: the MV70s was the only consumer VCR I've ever seen that made recordings indistinguishable from a live broadcast, and 2nd-gen dubs looked nearly as good. I picked up two, they lasted about five-six years until 1990 or 91. Apparently I wore the heads out, and Hitachi had long since stopped supplying replacement discrete seven-head drums. These Minoltas would be of little interest today: they were astoundingly good recorders but twitchy players (I used them exclusively for recording even then). The 58m heads were incompatible with the smaller 37-44m heads every other VCR had moved to, picking up extraneous noise when played on the Minoltas. They also couldn't track hifi recorded on other VCRs if their lives depended on it. I've had an eBay account since 2003, and have never once seen a Minolta MV-70s offered. They were not common, you pretty much had to buy them from NYC camera dealers, and as I mentioned they became unrepairable by 1990. Fortunately RCA had picked up Minolta's baton, and the top RCAs with hifi and flying erase heads came very close to MV-70s quality (albeit with smaller SP heads) until RCA dropped Hitachi to go with Funai/Philips in 1993 or so. My 1991 RCA served me well until its audio channels went out one after the other in 1996.

It's interesting that whenever you bring up Sharp decks, you simply list the brand name without any model numbers or even any general production eras. I usually take your comments about brand consistency as a contrast with Panasonic's volatility, but are thirty years worth of Sharp decks really so consistent that it doesn't matter which you pick up? You also say their picture quality is simlar to the 2560 with an even broader tracking range; is there a quality reason you commonly recommend the AG2560 first, or is it really just a matter of simplicity?

I don't recommend specific Sharp models because there are so many, and I did not personally use a fraction of them compared to how many other brands I've owned. We had many Sharps in places I worked, which bought them specifically for their EP and HiFi tracking abilities. No one today will find a very old functioning Sharp, just as no one is going to find a functioning old Minolta. Practically speaking, most 4-head hifi Sharps you'll see on Craigs List, eBay or thrift shops will be recent models from the last fifteen years. Most of these look alike: compact black chassis, similar in size to the Panasonic 4500/4600 series, with a faux jog/shuttle dial on the right front panel. If it looks clean, and the owner seems cool, most remain in good functional condition (although many are missing their remotes which can be a bit of a pain). I don't own a Sharp because I haven't particularly felt the need for one: I have very few EP tapes and my existing VCRs do a decent job tracking hifi. I check the "for sale" listings now and then, just to see whats still out there, but it always seems to be a slow week and all I find are the lower-end 2-head Sharps. Those would probably be great for EP playback, if you need that.

[robjv1]

I should clarify there is a HUGE difference between the "typical" svhs JVCs bandied about in AV forums and the amazing WVHS models robjv1 has been fortunate enough to acquire. The JVC WVHS were insanely expensive state-of-the-art showpieces designed to make analog HDTV recordings from the early Japanese analog HDTV broadcasts. These WVHS models originally sold for $5000+, which you can imagine bought you a level of build quality and electronics purity you would not find in the commodity SVHS models. You wanna talk "transparency," you want one of these babies. Sadly, they are very rare, difficult to find in USA, and the parts/repair situation is hopeless. If you're interested, robjv1 has posted much valuable info on how he managed to make one of these functional, and the beautiful PQ he gets from standard VHS played on the JVC WVHS deck. Search for his posts.

I definitely think that they are top performing decks, but obviously not without their faults. I think there is probably a little bit of the "drinking your own Kool-Aid" mentality among owners of these decks -- which is not surprising I guess, given what you have to put up with to get a good one. I was instantly sold on the hyperbole of them right off the bat ("reference level picture quality") and willing to drop untold sums of money into getting a good one (and I sure did, none of them cost me less than ~$500, although they seem to be down to about half that now, probably due to all the complaints for the poorly shipped ones) but I had few responsibilities and a healthy disposable income at that point too. It's definitely a deck you have to be prepared to gamble on and lose -- servicing them appears to be hopeless at this point. If you're going to buy one, you have to ask the seller pointed questions to make sure they even know what it does, at the minimum. I think a lot of clueless people stumble across them, Google the model name, find all the glowing posts about then and figure they have a goldmine on their hands without ever really evaluating the condition. They seem to start high, go unsold, and come down slowly. If you read the manual (available online at a few places, including DigitalFAQ) there are features that only apply to WVHS tapes, so you could ask them how those work with regular VHS tapes. If they say "great!" then you know they have no idea and you can move on.

After having owned a couple for a few years now and evaluated all of the features and pitfalls, I definitely stand by the statement that they have a sharper, much more predictable video signal than all of the other JVC SVHS decks I have tried across both SP and EP tapes, with a somewhat gentler DNR that is less likely to scrub away fine details. It is sort of like a marriage between the Panasonic AG-1980 and the JVC 7000/9000 series.

What I appreciate the most about them though is that you don't have to babysit them in the same way you do some other decks. The picture is incredibly stable with the TBC engaged -- I've never seen one in working condition exhibit image tearing, rolling, or top of the picture flagging. It does still suffer from the TBC-induced jitter for some tapes though.

The bane of my existence for the longest time was dealing with Hi-Fi audio tracks. With my other decks, you might suddenly and inexplicably get noise in one or both of the channels -- which never happens on these WVHS decks unless the tape itself is physically damaged. It has some sort of circuit or algorithm to deal with dropping from the Hi-Fi to the linear mode (or pumping it out of the left or right channel temporarily until it passes the problem spot) without making it outwardly apparent -- unlike most other decks the audio level doesn't come down dramatically on the switch. That was a big selling point for me, as I have a ton of late 90s EP Hi-Fi recordings made on cheap tapes that have intermittent noise in both channels and thus can't track worth a damn. For 95% of those tapes, this deck plays them very well.

At the end of the day though -- you're paying (well, at least a few years ago) 300% more for a deck that performs 20% better. Is that worth it? Maybe it is if you want "the best" or if your problems are addressed by its strengths, but for most people the answer is no -- you can get 80% of the way there for a lot less money and hassle. I still run into tapes (as evidenced by my recent post about LP tapes) that it doesn't like and have to look at turning the TBC off and running it through an Panasonic ES10/Phillips DVD recorder or using another VHS deck.

I think one of the big problems with the mid to end of product life VCRs (pro and otherwise) is the same issue that seems to affect all electronics as sales start to slow but profit margins are still expected to be high -- it becomes a "boom-box" mentality where everyone wants to shove all of the cool features into one tidy deck, without the need for any peripheral equipment. I'm sure one of the reasons those early decks pumped out a neutral, balanced, and unenhanced looking signal was because if you wanted to use them for dubbing, they were intended to be part of chain of equipment of specialized devices.

As you move down the product line though, the look of the picture begins to change in order to replace this auxiliary equipment. People don't want to have to buy TBCs, proc amps, detailer, etc, so the VCR has to be a "jack of all trades" and as a result you lose that natural, neutral picture quality and some flexibility in the process. Somehow, along the way that becomes the new standard and every model is playing catchup to cram all of those features in their product line. The WVHS line is a great example of that mentality actually -- No need to buy a full-frame TBC, it's built in! Color-registration errors? we've got a toggle switch for that! It records Analog HD, it plays VHS, SVHS, and WVHS tapes, all in the same form factor and transport, it slices, it dices, it purées. It's amazing it works at all, really.

[Mini-Me]

I definitely think that they are top performing decks, but obviously not without their faults. I think there is probably a little bit of the "drinking your own Kool-Aid" mentality among owners of these decks -- which is not surprising I guess, given what you have to put up with to get a good one. I was instantly sold on the hyperbole of them right off the bat ("reference level picture quality") and willing to drop untold sums of money into getting a good one (and I sure did, none of them cost me less than ~$500, although they seem to be down to about half that now, probably due to all the complaints for the poorly shipped ones) but I had few responsibilities and a healthy disposable income at that point too. It's definitely a deck you have to be prepared to gamble on and lose -- servicing them appears to be hopeless at this point. If you're going to buy one, you have to ask the seller pointed questions to make sure they even know what it does, at the minimum. I think a lot of clueless people stumble across them, Google the model name, find all the glowing posts about then and figure they have a goldmine on their hands without ever really evaluating the condition. They seem to start high, go unsold, and come down slowly. If you read the manual (available online at a few places, including DigitalFAQ) there are features that only apply to WVHS tapes, so you could ask them how those work with regular VHS tapes. If they say "great!" then you know they have no idea and you can move on.

You say the W5U's seem to be going for about half of ~$500 now. Have you seen any that actually sold in the ~$250-300 range without being obviously broken, or are those just the starting bids? The one that sold on Super Bowl Sunday went for $457.99 + $30 shipping, and God only knows what the winner's maximum bid was. (Maybe he's on this board, and he could tell me. ) The last time I thought to look for one, I saw a W7U with an outrageous Buy It Now price of $2000 or so. (What's the difference between the W5U and W7U anyway?) If you're more familiar with their typical going prices, it would be very helpful to know that working models are occasionally touchable for < $500, even if you're gambling on return shipping costs for broken units.

What I appreciate the most about them though is that you don't have to babysit them in the same way you do some other decks. The picture is incredibly stable with the TBC engaged -- I've never seen one in working condition exhibit image tearing, rolling, or top of the picture flagging. It does still suffer from the TBC-induced jitter for some tapes though.

That's actually why I'm having my AG1980's tracking looked at right now...the jumpiness has gotten completely out of control. We exchanged a few PM's back in July about an Avisynth filter I was working on for this; it's still in the works, but I've been sidetracked by other things lately.

The bane of my existence for the longest time was dealing with Hi-Fi audio tracks. With my other decks, you might suddenly and inexplicably get noise in one or both of the channels -- which never happens on these WVHS decks unless the tape itself is physically damaged. It has some sort of circuit or algorithm to deal with dropping from the Hi-Fi to the linear mode (or pumping it out of the left or right channel temporarily until it passes the problem spot) without making it outwardly apparent -- unlike most other decks the audio level doesn't come down dramatically on the switch. That was a big selling point for me, as I have a ton of late 90s EP Hi-Fi recordings made on cheap tapes that have intermittent noise in both channels and thus can't track worth a damn. For 95% of those tapes, this deck plays them very well.

At the end of the day though -- you're paying (well, at least a few years ago) 300% more for a deck that performs 20% better. Is that worth it? Maybe it is if you want "the best" or if your problems are addressed by its strengths, but for most people the answer is no -- you can get 80% of the way there for a lot less money and hassle. I still run into tapes (as evidenced by my recent post about LP tapes) that it doesn't like and have to look at turning the TBC off and running it through an Panasonic ES10/Phillips DVD recorder or using another VHS deck.

You know, I've always been impressed by the rich color balance of the W5U in all of the pictures you've posted. Since you actually have one (two) to compare other VCR's to, are you aware of any other VCR's that do as well in this particular area, even if they don't have any fancy DNR features? Do you know if orsetto's recommendations manage this, or is the W5U totally unique in terms of color balance as well?

I think one of the big problems with the mid to end of product life VCRs (pro and otherwise) is the same issue that seems to affect all electronics as sales start to slow but profit margins are still expected to be high -- it becomes a "boom-box" mentality where everyone wants to shove all of the cool features into one tidy deck, without the need for any peripheral equipment. I'm sure one of the reasons those early decks pumped out a neutral, balanced, and unenhanced looking signal was because if you wanted to use them for dubbing, they were intended to be part of chain of equipment of specialized devices.

As you move down the product line though, the look of the picture begins to change in order to replace this auxiliary equipment. People don't want to have to buy TBCs, proc amps, detailer, etc, so the VCR has to be a "jack of all trades" and as a result you lose that natural, neutral picture quality and some flexibility in the process. Somehow, along the way that becomes the new standard and every model is playing catchup to cram all of those features in their product line. The WVHS line is a great example of that mentality actually -- No need to buy a full-frame TBC, it's built in! Color-registration errors? we've got a toggle switch for that! It records Analog HD, it plays VHS, SVHS, and WVHS tapes, all in the same form factor and transport, it slices, it dices, it purées. It's amazing it works at all, really.

Hahaha...I know exactly what you mean. I greatly prefer modular integration of components, because it gives you so much more flexibility. It's a shame the whole electronics industry has moved so far away from Unix design principles like "do one thing, and do it well." The "do it all" pieces of hardware with inseparable functionality always seem to either have a fatal flaw or be prohibitively expensive.

At least the W5U isn't the only deck that slices, dices, and purees though. Apparently, the rest of the JVC decks do the exact same thing to your tapes.

[robjv1]

You say the W5U's seem to be going for about half of ~$500 now. Have you seen any that actually sold in the ~$250-300 range without being obviously broken, or are those just the starting bids? The one that sold on Super Bowl Sunday went for $457.99 + $30 shipping, and God only knows what the winner's maximum bid was. (Maybe he's on this board, and he could tell me. ) The last time I thought to look for one, I saw a W7U with an outrageous Buy It Now price of $2000 or so. (What's the difference between the W5U and W7U anyway?) If you're more familiar with their typical going prices, it would be very helpful to know that working models are occasionally touchable for < $500, even if you're gambling on return shipping costs for broken units.

I like to check on the auctions intermittently and my general impression has been that a lot of them have been going for closer to $300 than $500 these days, but I may be off base. I have definitely seen a few good looking ones go for under $400 in the last year or so, but you're right -- there is one for $450 sold from someone located in Portland (which is actually not far from where I am).

As far as the differences between the SR-W5U and SR-W7U and VHS/SVHS performance, from what I've been able to gather from what little documentation there is online and the one person I know that owns a SR-W7U -- they are identical. The SR-W7U does use BNC connectors, has an RS-422 serial interface and does fix one issue in the hardware design of the SR-W5U regarding the video and audio connectors -- it's possible to separate them from the board they are connected to just by pulling too hard. I'd still love to mess around with a SR-W7U of course to see if there are any other more small differences -- I'm not sure how closely together they were released. I did read on one forum that the SR-W7U has better recording quality for analog HD signals than the SR-W5U, so that may account for the difference in original stick price. I almost never see them pop online for sale, the W5U is by far the more ubiquitous model. Another deck that is even more rare that I'd like to look at is the first US deck in that line, the SR-320U. I believe the SR-W5U/7U were marketed as stripped down, component reduced, "affordable" versions of that deck. Based on some information outlined in the SR-W5U technical manual, I surmise that the SR-320U actually had a more jitter prone TBC than the later decks. Still -- I'd love to try it out for myself. I've seen exactly one of those for sale on eBay in the past 2-3 years. There are some photographs of the Japanese version on this page: http://movie.geocities.jp/w_vhs/w-vhs_museum/3f/SR-W/SR-W320/b.html

That's actually why I'm having my AG1980's tracking looked at right now...the jumpiness has gotten completely out of control. We exchanged a few PM's back in July about an Avisynth filter I was working on for this; it's still in the works, but I've been sidetracked by other things lately.

Oh wow, I didn't realize that was you! I am very excited for that by the way (no pressure, haha). It's sort of the last big stumbling block for me.

You know, I've always been impressed by the rich color balance of the W5U in all of the pictures you've posted. Since you actually have one (two) to compare other VCR's to, are you aware of any other VCR's that do as well in this particular area, even if they don't have any fancy DNR features? Do you know if orsetto's recommendations manage this, or is the W5U totally unique in terms of color balance as well?

I don't know of any other decks, but I really want to see screenshots of the DVHS deck in action. I know they are supposed to have quite a different look than the other JVC line in terms of TBC/DNR performance and I wonder if they are more like the WVHS decks in terms of TBC performance and overall look.

And I totally agree with you about the modular integration of components. In my eyes, most people with a large collection of tapes that spans a couple of decades could probably put them into a handful of different categories of issues. Having standalone equipment that does one task allows you to try out different combinations of workflows and get the best out of each category of tapes. Compromises still have to be made, but you can make the best compromise available.