Panasonic AG1980 Info

[braxus]

Just wondering- does the AG1980 have 19 micron SLP/ EP heads like the JVC decks of the day? I can understand if not, since I don't think I've ever seen 19 micron amorphous heads before. Also what is the part number for the remote for this model? Also can this deck do insert editting on both Hifi and linear audio tracks without disturbing the sync track?

When I looked at the specs for the lines per speed, they state SP is 240 lines or better on VHS, and 400 or better on S-VHS. Well my JVC can make VHS look to be up to 290 lines and S-VHS 425 lines. Does the Panasonic do similar, or does it apply any sharpening at all? How does the DNR compare to the JVCs with Digipure?

[braxus]

Got the remote. Its:

PANASONIC Remote Control VEQ1711

[sanlyn]

DNR on both machines is ancient technology, generally full of artifacts and motion blur (more prominent on the JVC), with Digipure having visibly overprocessed color. DNR and TBC can be disabled/enabled separately on the Panasonic. On the JVC both are either on or off. Both of these machines will sharpen, a practice that most videophiles avoid; however, the average viewer finds it impressive.

I've never noticed 90 micron heads making any viewable difference whatosever, but the theory is that it improves slower-speed record and playback. Most people say it's less theory and more marketing. Most quality VCR's from Panasonic, SONY, Toshiba, Mitsubishi, Aiwa, and many others (and even some SHARPs and no-name Emersons, RCA's, and Goldstars) had 19-micron heads. Panasonic's Dynamorphous heads, also found on some Mitsubishi's and Toshibas, are supposedly better quality, more durable, and are roughly similar to the heads on semi-pro machines. You'll find plenty of debate on these issues, and few hard conclusions.

If you think you'll see a difference between the lines of resolution you mention, you're misled. Contrast range, noise levels, playback stability, and other factors have more to do with overall image accutance than a few extra lines of simulated resolution do.

[orsetto]

When I looked at the specs for the lines per speed, they state SP is 240 lines or better on VHS, and 400 or better on S-VHS. Well my JVC can make VHS look to be up to 290 lines and S-VHS 425 lines. Does the Panasonic do similar, or does it apply any sharpening at all? How does the DNR compare to the JVCs with Digipure?

My immediate reaction to this sort of question is usually "Stop! Do Not Pass Go! Do Not Collect $200," because in my experience finicky people who own JVCs have a really vested interest in proving them superior to every other VCR ever made by an order of magnitude. They also tend to be utterly addicted to the very specific "look" that the JVC DigiPure circuit imparts to video. If this describes you, forget that you ever heard of the AG1980, and avoid all the stress and expense involved with buying one, comparing it unfavorably to your JVC, and reselling it at a loss.

If you're serious, and actually willing to entertain the possibility that a VCR without the JVC DigiPure logo could be anything but a steaming pile of crap, then perhaps you might find a Panasonic AG1980 a useful supplement to your VCR arsenal. Before proceeding further, re-read the previous reply by samlyn, because he totally nailed the fundamentals: the TBC/DNR circuit on any of these VCRs, of any brand, always involves compromise. Your question about the 19 micron heads is moot: for SLP/EP tapes it doesn't matter, because the multiplex head design used by every other brand but JVC tracks slow SLP/EP recordings equallly or (usually) better. The same applies on the other side of the drum: the JVC 58 micron SP heads supposedly record "more lines of detail", but since only JVC was obstinate enough to keep using 58/19 heads 20 years after every other consumer VCR in the known universe moved on to multiplex heads, you only get those "extra lines" if you play those 58 micron tapes on a JVC.

The only thing a JVC is good for is playing its own tapes: the 58/19 head design tends to tracking drift and misalignment over time, more so if your JVC model has the ill-conceived fragile "Dynamic Drum" tracking servo. The 58 micron heads will pick up extraneous noise from SP tapes made on any other brand of recorder, which is why they developed the DigiPure TBC/DNR in the first place (heaven forbid they admit they were wrong to insist on keeping the 58/19 heads). Sample variation among older JVCs is immense: thats why you have some people praising them to the skies and others swearing at them savagely. There is no grey area or range of opinion on JVC DigiPure: people either adore it, or think it makes the video look softer than Snooki's brain cells. If you like extremely smooth video with zero color noise and most of the detail scrubbed away, JVC is your VCR and nothing else will do. Its luck of the draw: if your JVC DigiPure is in perfect working order, and you love the quality of its playback, and most of your tapes were made on JVC vcrs, then cross your fingers and hope your JVC DigiPure never breaks down. Because you will hate the output of the Panasonic AG1980 or any other VCR. And your JVC-recorded tapes, esp the slow-speed tapes, will be hell on wheels to track cleanly on any other VCR.

The Panasonic AG1980 was a rugged semi-pro VCR beloved by event videographers. It was very expensive in its time, and ugly as sin to look at on a shelf, so 99% were sold to pro users who wore them into the ground. There are very few "low miles" AG1980 decks available second hand today, most need servicing to the power supply and main board. The AG1980 is also sensitive to power grounding issues that can cause herringbone interference. When properly restored, the tracking stability and range of the AG1980 multiplex DynAmorphous heads will run rings around any JVC, making it a more compatible master deck if you have many tapes made on many different VCRs over the years. The video playback is a bit harsher than JVC DigiPure, because the Panasonic DNR includes a bit of sharpening to compensate for the inevitable detail smoothing. Its a matter of personal taste which you think looks more realistic: both Panasonic and JVC smear the hell out of detail when DNR is enabled, and both create unpredictable random temporal/motion distortions. With a JVC, TBC/DNR are combined: both are on, or both are off. With the AG1980, the TBC can be disabled independently but the DNR is always on and cannot be disabled. This can lead to unpleasant artifacts with some tapes combined with other hardware you might connect. The Panasonic TBC is the strongest ever built into a non-studio VHS VCR: full frame as aopposed to the field TBC in the JVCs. For some poor tapes with really distorted verticals, the AG1980 will be far superior, but in most cases the results are similar with both brands.

Honestly, those who already own a JVC DigiPure don't need a Panasonic AG1980 unless they have quite a large number of tapes that were made on a wide variety of VCR brands and models. If you've owned your JVC DigiPure forever, having bought it new yourself, and most of your tapes were recorded on it, you really won't see a benefit from a Panasonic AG1980. OTOH, if you never owned a JVC DigiPure until you bought one second hand last week, and you don't really remember or know what VCR most of your tapes were recorded on, then its a good idea to own both a JVC and the Panasonic, to cover all your bases. At this late stage, the small variations in alleged specs are less significant than the different tracking performance each brand offers for video and hifi audio. Both are aging rapidly: fine for tape transfer into a DVD recorder or PC capture card, but its not a good idea to think you can use either of them to continue recording new tapes far into the future. SVHS is essentially dead now as a recording format.

The AG1980 can be operated with any random Panasonic VCR remote or universal remote: you don't need the dedicated VEQ1711 remote to do anything but zero the tape counter (and the 1980 will zero the counter when ejecting or loading a tape anyway). The VEQ1711 remote doesn't operate anything but the basic tape motion controls, since the 1980 was designed to be installed in a rack and run by a wired controller. The 1980 has no onscreen menu system to navigate: every function can be run from the front panel of the VCR, including clock set/timer, TBC/DNR and slow-mo.

[lordsmurf]

DNR on both machines is ancient technology, generally full of artifacts and motion blur (more prominent on the JVC), with Digipure having visibly overprocessed color.

Sorry, but I think that's just silly to say. VHS/S-VHS is just as "ancient", but those are the proper tools of the era, made for tapes of that era. There's nothing newer/better -- only worse hardware is available. And most errors are impossible to correct in software, so that's out.

DNR and TBC can be disabled/enabled separately on the Panasonic.

No it's not. It's all/nothing as well.

Both of these machines will sharpen, a practice that most videophiles avoid; however, the average viewer finds it impressive.

The Panasonic is oversharp by default, JVC isn't. Hence the myth that Panasonic VCRs are "sharper".

I've never noticed 90 micron heads making any viewable difference whatosever, but the theory is that it improves slower-speed record and playback. Most people say it's less theory and more marketing.

The larger heads helps with tracking, the end.

If you think you'll see a difference between the lines of resolution you mention, you're misled. Contrast range, noise levels, playback stability, and other factors have more to do with overall image accutance than a few extra lines of simulated resolution do.

This is very true.
Lines of resolution is maximums, too. Recording modes can alter/reduce this, as can the grade of tape.

There are very few "low miles" AG1980 decks available second hand today, most need servicing to the power supply and main board

Virtually all of them have outdated capacitors now. So plan on getting boards tested and caps replaced. Mileage doesn't matter here -- it's all about age. Use just accelerated it.

both Panasonic and JVC smear the hell out of detail when DNR is enabled, and both create unpredictable random temporal/motion distortions

I use several of these VCRs daily, and I've never come across this. I think it's so overly exaggerated to call it "smeary" and "distorted", that I'm reminded of the Affordable Healthcare Act being chastised for having "death panels". It's an extremist criticism for a problem that isn't actually there. It's taken way, way out of proportions.

[swiego]

DNR on both machines is ancient technology, generally full of artifacts and motion blur (more prominent on the JVC), with Digipure having visibly overprocessed color.

Sorry, but I think that's just silly to say. VHS/S-VHS is just as "ancient", but those are the proper tools of the era, made for tapes of that era. There's nothing newer/better -- only worse hardware is available. And most errors are impossible to correct in software, so that's out.

I think what sanlyn is saying is that the DNR algorithms in these players are primitive by modern standards. I think that is a true statement.

I use several of these VCRs daily, and I've never come across this. I think it's so overly exaggerated to call it "smeary" and "distorted", that I'm reminded of the Affordable Healthcare Act being chastised for having "death panels". It's an extremist criticism for a problem that isn't actually there. It's taken way, way out of proportions.

I have several of each as well, and I also have a Sanyo GVR-S950 that near as I can tell did not have any real DNR, and based on my experience with it, I can vouch for my AG1980P and various JVCs not giving me a great deal of detail. I get a much crisper picture from the Sanyo, and if it weren't for the 1980P's excellent tracking and stabilization, I'd do most of my captures on the Sanyo. I think it's a real shame that these units didn't have the ability to disable noise reduction, although at the time the designers would not have anticipated these units becoming part of an archival chain 30 years later, so I can't hold it against them.

[sanlyn]

Oops, I stand corrected by ls and others on the AG1980's DNR/TBC enable-disable issue. Sloppy work on my part.

It's true that most VCR's do a little sharpening (or more) of some kind. Thanks to orsetto's advice I managed to find some mid-1990's VCR's that didn't go in for massive oversharpening/contrast pushing and over-processing. Recent captures look more natural and are much easier to work with. I'm using DVD recorders for line tbc pass-thru, with cleaner results than I've seen from JVC or Panasonic with built-in tbc's. And the pass-thru's don't eat my tapes.

[orsetto]

I'm not sure why disagreement persists about the TBC/DNR controls on the Panasonic AG-1980. I own three of them, along with their twin sister AG5710 models, and all six have the exact same control panel. The TBC can be turned on or turned off with a dedicated switch, end of story (download the instruction manual if you still think it doesn't). The DNR, however, is always active and cannot be turned off: the only control you have over it is with the picture sharpness slider, which is next to useless. The AG1980 is therefore not a good deck to use for tapes that don't "play well" with DNR enabled.

both Panasonic and JVC smear the hell out of detail when DNR is enabled, and both create unpredictable random temporal/motion distortions

I use several of these VCRs daily, and I've never come across this. I think it's so overly exaggerated to call it "smeary" and "distorted", that I'm reminded of the Affordable Healthcare Act being chastised for having "death panels". It's an extremist criticism for a problem that isn't actually there. It's taken way, way out of proportions.

Disagree with you 180% there: the praise and hype over TBC/DNR "benefits" is whats exaggerated out of all sane proportion. Most people are not you, LS: they don't have the developed sense of perception necessary to use the feature judiciously and compensate for what damage it does (and used unwisely, there are many many times when it causes more problems than it solves). The TBC portion is arguably very helpful and reasonably transparent for certain issues, but the DNR is a whole nother ketle of fish. The DNR can cause significant detail loss and motion distortion in facial expressions of actors: anyone who claims not to see this either has stunningly sharp source tapes or has $10,000 worth of compensating processors or software in their video chain. Both JVC and Panasonic suck in this regard, because neither lets you use the TBC without the DNR, and they can interact badly. JVCs are smoother than glass with DNR active, Panasonic initially looks more realistic until you notice all the shifting grain patterns it randomly adds in certain blocks of color or shadow. Consumer-level VHS TBC/DNR is a devils bargain: it fixes some things at the cost of others: there is no getting away from it. The relentless hype for it has caused an unfortunate number of people on forums to piss away more money on more defective half-dead JVCs and Panasonics that should have been in landfills than it has actually helped those people. TBC/DNR is not a panacea and the DigiPure version is not the holy grail.

If your tapes are such a hassle to digitize that you're nosing around decrepit old VCRs in desperation, save your pennies and hire LS to do the work for you instead. Old JVCs and old Panasonics are more trouble than anyone ever anticipates, repairs are an expensive stressful ordeal, and the results frequently disappointing compared to high expectations fostered by forum hype. To truly "improve" bad tapes requires dubbing to a PC with heavy-duty hardware and software tweaks, solid tech skills and lots of time. There's no simple magic pushbutton.

Any discussion of whether a JVC DigiPure is "better or worse" than an AG1980 must take into account the age of the VCRs, whether we're talking original ownership since 1990 or bought last week on Craig's List, and most importantly what VCR your tapes were recorded on. A motley collection of tapes from various VCRs will benefit from owning both brand of VCR, because the tracking capabilities are very different. A tape library consisting entirely of JVC-recorded tapes will usually play best on a JVC, although there can be exceptions in EP/SLP where JVC tends to track poorly compared to Panasonic or Sharp.

[sanlyn]

Ok, I take orsetto's word on the Panny's TBC/DNR. I should get a copy of the manual myself instead of making assumptions. Having owned a couple of JVC's, I have no problem with on/off concerning those.

That leaves little ole me with my tbc pass-thru's and plain vanilla VCR's circa 1995-1998. During the past year I bought 7 of them on eBay. Three were keepers: PV-4651, PV-4662, PV-8664 (the latter's sharpening won't work well for noisy home made tapes). One of the "bad" choices had poor tracking that didn't respond to adjustment. Another had worn heads plus bad caps that generated weird cartoon-like effects on colors. Another was so banged up in shipment, and in such overused condition to begin with, I didn't bother with it. The fourth throw-away from 1995 had video problems, in that the upper midrange brightness was way out of whack with the rest of the image. So figuring in the cost of the four bad buys together with the three good guys, the good guys cost about $75 apiece. Those three look pristine: I don't think one of them was ever used at all! The 4662 tracks so well, I hardly need a tbc with it (the eBay seller stated the unit was serviced, including a new drive belt). I realize that even if clean, old vcr's have old boards, caps and resistors, and belts dry up. But I figure a seldom-used unit wouldn't have been subjected to long periods of heat or other wear.

In any case, I think my story's typical for someone who's already burned up two 2000-era consumer Panasonics; two 1991 SONYs; three 1998 JVC's (two of which developed defects after the first use, the third of which damaged 3 of my prized tapes and then needed a $2 diode no longer available anywhere). So it's a sometimes harrowing venture, digging up old VCR's. That doesn't count the time capturing, post-processing, etc. It would be great to have a $5000 player and $20,000 in associated gear. Not to mention a $10,000 pro video monitor, huge storage servers for digital masters, and so forth. Or paying hundreds for restoration work, when no pro that I know would spend 4 months on a VHS tape. I've owned JVC's, including a brand-new 9911 defective out of the box, which kinda killed my taste for the brand after earlier models ate some tapes. I never owned an AG-1980 but have seen its results. So in my case, I was sufficiently un-impressed by these two premium product lines.

That leaves me and others like me with some old VCR's, Avisynth, VirtualDub, an obsolete version of AfterEffects, lots of learning ahead, and doing what we can with what we have.

Orsetto, where do you and LS keep all that gear? Every time a box shows up here from eBay my wife has a hissy fit.

[swiego]

I was searching online for a thought I wanted to add to this thread and stumbled across this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGx-3t8CJ-k

Not sure it's relevant, but it sure is funny.

[swiego]

And now the serious question, have any of you heard of an effort to capture a digital sampling of a magnetic tape signals directly off the drums? I'm wondering whether with adequate circuit isolation and a sufficiently high quality and high sensitivity ADC, it would be possible to capture a signal directly from the helical scan drum then look at long-term ways to recover the color channels and frames.

[VideoTechMan]

I myself have recently acquired an AG-1980 in the past week and so far for me its working great, with no dim display (which would indicate cap problems). And I also have a JVC S365U unit which don't have TBC nor DNR, but what I have noticed is that in general, the EP tapes I have didn't track well with the JVC whereas the 1980 it did perfectly. After reading numerous older threads on the performances of these machines, I've learned alot over the past two weeks. The JVC seem to do better with the SP tapes as I have observed (not a surprise for most).

Soon I will be the owner of the Feral A4:2:2 TBC in which I will test on several test tapes to see how it will do. The two broadcast decks I have (AG-DS850 and AG-840) already have full frame built in TBC function and proc controls too I believe. If anything its how detailed one's eye can be when it comes to looking for various video problems. I am interested in learning more on how to spot these problems and how to work with them. To me, I can easily spot some problems in video whereas others who aren't into the detail won't really even notice.

At the end its all how the end result will turn out, regardless of what machine you use.

[Deter]

OMG, here we go again, with another one of these posts....About 20 years ago, used to record CD's and Cassette tapes to VHS tapes...I will take any of those sound recorded VHS tapes vs any MP3 any day of the week.....

Sanlyn, have you fixed your M. Jackson video yet or are you still working on it. In that other post I gave you a stock betacam recording and the quality levels were not good enough for you. Now you are saying you use crappy consumer VCR's. Here is the deal, the Higher End JVC decks are 1000% better than any consumer deck. JVC vs Panny Higher End decks is pretty much up to the viewer to decided. Anyone who thinks a low end consumer deck doesn't need a TBC is wrong. Sometimes I used to think my betamax tapes didn't really need one, however after using a TBC on them, the results turned out better than with out.

Pretty much have every thing you speak of above. Your answer to everything is Avisynth.
This is a last resort for damaged videos. It can only do so much and you need to get the problems on the playback and these higher end decks do a good enough job, to at least get you a good enough take to work from.

JVC tends to crop the picture a tad different than the Panny Units.

The 1st step to this entire process is the playback....Next is how you capture the recording, getting the best possible mpeg2 coding and best possible bit-rates.

What deck is the best to use: The AG1980 units will more than likely need to be repaired, see other posts were ever the hell they are.

It really depends on the recording, have a tape from 1992 that looks terrible on a JVC deck, cause it is very old and it basically smears out the people's faces on the video. Have a tape from 98 that looks better on the JVC deck.

VHS or Betacam out of date? Everything that is a MASTER file the source is usually in that format. Was watching the 1981 US Open Tennis match on classic sports, that recording was terrible. You could tell it came from a MASTER tape. It was never restored and had the normal tape damage on the recording.

The digital age is really not that old, and all of a sudden people want to forget about everything from the past 35 years and just watch HD digital recordings...

Tracking problems on tapes? Normally it was caused by the machine it was recorded on. Stock tapes really don't have tracking problems, however some sections can be damaged. Old home recorded tapes tend to have a lot of damage or errors in the picture.

Now I have an AG1980, that has a different alignment, and will pretty much track anything. The unit itself had to be re-built but the alignment was never altered.

From doing this for a while, in my view, the Betamax picture is the best, 2nd Best is PAL VHS, and than finally VHS. Professional VHS players do make a big difference. It is night & day in the results....Maybe that is why you are trying to fix and waste months trying to fix an FLV file of a M. Jackson video.

PS I may sound a little bit pissy in this post, well that is because I am totally sick of people sending me half crocked VHS to DVD recordings and saying can you fix this, when the source VHS is missing or thrown in the trash. If you had the source tape, you can actually get good results than spinning your wheels and wasting your time, trying to fix a damaged recording.

[Seeker47]

I think my story's typical for someone who's already burned up two 2000-era consumer Panasonics; two 1991 SONYs; three 1998 JVC's (two of which developed defects after the first use, the third of which damaged 3 of my prized tapes and then needed a $2 diode no longer available anywhere). So it's a sometimes harrowing venture, digging up old VCR's. That doesn't count the time capturing, post-processing, etc. It would be great to have a $5000 player and $20,000 in associated gear. Not to mention a $10,000 pro video monitor, huge storage servers for digital masters, and so forth. Or paying hundreds for restoration work, when no pro that I know would spend 4 months on a VHS tape.

I've got boxes and boxes and boxes of recorded tapes -- going back to the early 1980s -- that I've not yet gotten around to dealing with. Just inspecting the contents will be quite a chore. I seldom wrote anything directly on the cassette, but tried to include notes on an index card inside most plastic clamshells or cardboard cassette sleeves. (But some of these have since gone missing.) The FIRST questions one has to ask now in this situation are "How rare / important is this tape ?" and "Can it be replaced today -- more easily -- from some other, digital sources . . . from the 'Net or elsewhere ?" On the basis of these, I should be able to toss at least half of this stockpile. Sadly, what with long out-of-print items, rare concerts, obscure films not screened again for the past 20-some years, I'm afraid this will still leave a tremendous job.

And I'm in agreement with Deter about Betamax, particularly if we're talking about good B1s recordings.

[Deter]

Seeker47, basically in the same boat as you. Have tons of home recordings of rare stuff that will never be shown again. Sadly do to the age and the storage of many of these recordings have to deal with a lot of damage to the video itself. Now if you play them on a normal VCR's, they really don't look good at all. Than you watch them on a modern LCD's that can handle and play analog material, you can really see a lot more of the flaws.

In somecases it is better to watch some of this material on older TV's. The JVC decks look really good on old school TV's.

Sadly on my end, I have trained my eye to pick up and look for these flaws in the video, so I see stuff that your brain just filters out and doesn't notice. It is like watching an old film from the 1930ties, you may or may not see all the film damage in the video, depending on what detail you are looking at the picture.

Film in general, has tons of scratches and nicks in the picture, and it gets annoying.

Ghostbusters from 1984, get a copy of the DVD, that movie has tons of white scratches and knicks in the video.

With the betamax stuff, some of the tapes were recorded over and over, maybe 3 or 4 times, plus these tapes seem to have more oxide drop outs on them. The overall picture really does stand the test of time. Professional store purchased VHS tapes or Betamax tapes, stand up, they are like cheating.

As I have stated many times the main goal is to get the best possible playback of these tapes with as little damage as possible. To fully restore them, they need to be edited and some of the damaged fields or frames need to be fixed to get a cleaner or less error filled recording.

(Even created a method to fix and restore old tapes, it is like tape baking but a bit different)

If I would have known about the AG1980 or the higher end decks like 15 years ago, would have used them in a heart beat, however was stuck using a store purchased Pansasonic deck and a Sony VHS Recorder. Never had an SVHS recorder either. People send me tapes all the time, so far nobody has ever set an SVHS recorded tape.

Because many of the broadcast were 3 to 5 hours many of the tapes were recorded in SLP mode. Some are LP or SP. The SP recording if they are not damaged, play back and look amazing on the DS840, which is a $7,000 unit back in the day. It is sad that you need a $7,000 VCR to clean up some of the color bleeding in the recordings were with Betamax recordings you never had the color or chroma bleeding in the videos.

People want to cry about problems with JVC decks or all the issues with these old AG1980 units. Here is the deal these things are old, you need to get them serviced and repaired. In these AG machines the caps dry up or just general use tends to put the machine out of whack. It took me a while, but I learned how to restore and fix these AG units, no I didn't have the service manual either....

There is a reason why the higher end units have more problems than your Sear or K-Mart VCR's, it is kind of like cars in a way, the better the machine the more complex the unit, and the more caps and other things in the circuit board that helps to promote a better picture. These AG units are good VCR's, they just need to be serviced and fixed up as I have stated many times before.

My 3 AG units, all produce a slightly different picture and I need all three for different types of tapes. However one of the units produces a higher quality image than the rest. This is the gem of my collection, however the machine that will track any tape is just as priceless.