[net.audio] Comments on recent news

mwicks@sun.UUCP (08/25/86)

>  
> > Your best bet, I feel, for a Stereo VCR is the one that I got which is
> > the Sears model.  It has a wireless remote with HQ picture, DOLBY stereo,
> 
> Also, the VHS HQ is mostly a gimmick that yields minimal, if any, 
> improvement in picture quality.  If absolute video fidelity is required, 
> Super Beta is far and away the best.  Of course, if you want to be able 
> to rent tapes, then go with VHS for availability.
> 
> Bob White
> Power Conditioning Advanced Development
> Digital Equipment Corporation
> Maynard, Massachusetts, USA
> 
  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
  20. I am now able to buy 'regular grade' tape for recording and the
  results are superior to the recording done before on 'High Grade' tape
  without HQ. As far as Hi-Fi Stereo goes HiFi IS superior to normal stereo
  but only if you record music from a high quality source. I have Dolby NR
  with streeo now and I find the results more than pleasing. If I want 
  HIGH quality sound I listen to a disc.

  Michael L. Wicks 

doug@cbosgd.UUCP (Doug Scofea) (08/28/86)

In article <6529@sun.uucp> mwicks@sun.UUCP writes:
>>  
.....
>> 
>> Also, the VHS HQ is mostly a gimmick that yields minimal, if any, 
>> improvement in picture quality.  If absolute video fidelity is required, 
>> Super Beta is far and away the best.  Of course, if you want to be able 
>> to rent tapes, then go with VHS for availability.
>> 
>> Bob White
>> Power Conditioning Advanced Development
>> Digital Equipment Corporation
>> Maynard, Massachusetts, USA
>> 
>  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
>  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
>  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
>  20.  ...
...
>
>  Michael L. Wicks 

Lately, I have been amused with the Toshiba M-4500, which features HQ Pro.
What is HQ Pro? It is HQ with the addition of a switch to turn HQ off! :-)

I couldn't believe it, but it's true. See Video magazine, August 1986,
in the New Products column, p. 18. 

How great can HQ be if one can make a Pro(fessional?) machine
by turning it off ? :-) If this isn't a gimmick then ...:-)

-----------------------
Franco Barber, guest of Doug Scofea

caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) (08/28/86)

In article <6529@sun.uucp> mwicks@sun.uucp (Michael Wicks) writes:
:> Also, the VHS HQ is mostly a gimmick that yields minimal, if any, 
:> improvement in picture quality.  If absolute video fidelity is required, 
:> Super Beta is far and away the best.  Of course, if you want to be able 
:> to rent tapes, then go with VHS for availability.
:  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
:  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
:  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
:  20. I am now able to buy 'regular grade' tape for recording and the

It isn't that simple.  First, there is no exact definition as to what HQ
requires in the way of circuitry.  Secondly, much of the picture improvement
attributed to HQ is really due to 1) Better recording technology, 2) Fresh
video heads, and 3) Placebo effect.

I have a JVC 2650 VCR, many years old.  I went through three HQ recorders
before settling on a JVC 756.  The first HQ recorder had a terrible picture
at EP.  The next two had lousy tuners.  The 756 is more nearly satisfactory.

The main advance in picture quality is at EP speed, which is now more or less
acceptable on a large screen set, at least for causal viewing.  But I don't
think the quality at SP is much better than the old JVC 2650.

My own hit is that HQ adds little to to the quality at SP, at least
on a decent 4 head machine.  A two head meachine or EP recording still
needs all the help it can get, but in that case not even HQ can repair
the damage.

BTW, I am fairly satisfied with the new JVC, except for its high $$$ and
lack of automatic Hi-Fi playback, a major cretinism.

mwicks@sun.uucp (Michael Wicks) (08/28/86)

> :> Also, the VHS HQ is mostly a gimmick that yields minimal, if any, 
> :> improvement in picture quality.  If absolute video fidelity is required, 
> :  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
> :  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
> :  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
> :  20. I am now able to buy 'regular grade' tape for recording and the
> 
> It isn't that simple.  First, there is no exact definition as to what HQ
> requires in the way of circuitry.  Secondly, much of the picture improvement
> attributed to HQ is really due to 1) Better recording technology, 2) Fresh
> video heads, and 3) Placebo effect.
> 
       I do NOT believe this to be true. I'm sure there are some video 'techs'
  out there who have some idea on what HQ circuitry is and what it adds or
  subtracts from a VCR. 

> I have a JVC 2650 VCR, many years old.  I went through three HQ recorders
> before settling on a JVC 756.  The first HQ recorder had a terrible picture
> at EP.  The next two had lousy tuners.  The 756 is more nearly satisfactory.
>       
       My opinion is that if you have a lousy recorder in the first place then
  HQ won't help your situation anyway. I'm sure the places that make quality
  VCR machines add HQ for the 20% higher resolution in the picture quality.

> My own hit is that HQ adds little to to the quality at SP, at least
> on a decent 4 head machine.  A two head meachine or EP recording still
> needs all the help it can get, but in that case not even HQ can repair
> the damage.
> 
> BTW, I am fairly satisfied with the new JVC, except for its high $$$ and
> lack of automatic Hi-Fi playback, a major cretinism.

       It looks like we're both only talking about a couple different VCR
  machines here. Does anyone else have experience or knowledge of HQ circuitry
  and its effect on picture quality with other machines???



  Michael L. Wicks
    Sun Microsystems, Inc. 

jerryc@tekigm2.UUCP (Jerry Carathers) (08/29/86)

>        My opinion is that if you have a lousy recorder in the first place then
>   HQ won't help your situation anyway. I'm sure the places that make quality
>   VCR machines add HQ for the 20% higher resolution in the picture quality.

I think you have HQ and SuperBeta mixed up. SB truly gives a
resolution increase of 20% while VHS HQ merely provides slight detail
enhancement. The best HQ circuitry brings VHS up to a level almost as
good as standard Beta.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a head-strong videophile who's had nothing
but Beta. In fact, my first VCR was a 1977 model RCA VAT400 VHS and I
own two stereo VHS decks now as well as two Beta's. The truth of the
matter is that SuperBeta is by far the best half-inch format and VHS
HQ, HQ PRO or HQ SUPER-DUPER WISH-IT-WAS-AS-GOOD-AS-BETA PRO will
never compare.

Before the flames come rolling in, I still must admit that for
compatability purposes with friends and video rental stores, VHS is
the only deck to buy. However, Beta is the the only one I do all my
network time shifting with.


			  Just Standing On My Soapbox,

			  Jerry Carathers
			  Tektronix, inc.  ...tektronix!tekigm2!jerryc

jimb@tekigm2.UUCP (Jim Boland) (08/30/86)

In article <2489@cbosgd.UUCP>, doug@cbosgd.UUCP (Doug Scofea) writes:
> 
> Lately, I have been amused with the Toshiba M-4500, which features HQ Pro.
> What is HQ Pro? It is HQ with the addition of a switch to turn HQ off! :-)
> 
> I couldn't believe it, but it's true. See Video magazine, August 1986,
> in the New Products column, p. 18. 
If you read the article in the same issue about HQ, you will see that Toshiba
puts the PRO designation on their top end models which use all four methods
of HQ.  In other words, Toshiba HQ PRO machines are *real* HQ machines....
Whatever that implies.  
HQ means nothing without the explanation of which of four(?) types and methods
are employed.  In other words, with HQ, you may not be getting what you think
you are.  And to further complicate matters, most VHS manufacturers don't
want to tell you or let you know what they are doing.  
Now, when a beta machine claims it is Superbeta, you know exactly what you are
getting.

ben@catnip.UUCP (Bennett Broder) (08/31/86)

In article <6645@sun.uucp> mwicks@sun.uucp (Michael Wicks) writes:
>> :> Also, the VHS HQ is mostly a gimmick that yields minimal, if any, 
>> :> improvement in picture quality.  If absolute video fidelity is required, 
>> :  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
>> :  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
>> :  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
>> :  20. I am now able to buy 'regular grade' tape for recording and the
>> 
>> It isn't that simple.  First, there is no exact definition as to what HQ
>> requires in the way of circuitry.  Secondly, much of the picture improvement
>> attributed to HQ is really due to 1) Better recording technology, 2) Fresh
>> video heads, and 3) Placebo effect.
>> 
>       I do NOT believe this to be true. I'm sure there are some video 'techs'
>  out there who have some idea on what HQ circuitry is and what it adds or
>  subtracts from a VCR. 

Sorry Mike, but what you believe to be true does not alter what is true.
VHS HQ is a generic name for four distinct circuit/circuit mods in the
recorder.  Many machines on the market that boldly display the "HQ" moniker
have only one or two of these implemented.  Perhaps the reason why people
have such a wide range of views about how much quality is added by HQ is
because the HQ machines they have seen lacked the more expensive HQ
circuits.



-- 

Ben Broder
{ihnp4,decvax} !hjuxa!catnip!ben
{houxm,topaz}/

ronc@fai.UUCP (Ronald O. Christian) (09/02/86)

In article <6529@sun.uucp> mwicks@sun.uucp (Michael Wicks) writes:
>  If HQ is a "gimmick", then it's a pretty good one as I've had VCR's with
>  (Emerson VHS HI-FI Stereo VCR), and without (HITACHI VHS Stereo w/ Dolby
>  and HQ) and the HQ DEFINITELY improves the picture quality by a factor of
>  20.

Whether HQ is an improvement is largely a matter of taste.  If you look
closely at the picture from your two decks, assuming there's nothing wrong
with your Emerson (a questionable brand, in my opinion) you would see that
although the signal from the non-HQ deck has more noise, it also contains
more picture information.  HQ trades off video bandwidth for noise reduction.
Some people find the effect pleasing, others do not.


				Ron
-- 
--
		Ronald O. Christian (Fujitsu America Inc., San Jose, Calif.)
		seismo!amdahl!fai!ronc  -or-   ihnp4!pesnta!fai!ronc

Oliver's law of assumed responsibility:
	"If you are seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it."