Does anyone actually use a VCR anymore? - Page 4

heero_yuy · 07-02-2018, 19:54

Quote:

Quote from Paul M

Our first was the Phillips N1502, in 1976.

We upgraded to a 1700 later (1978 or 1979, not sure now)

I must have got my 1702 in late '76 or early '77 as one of the earliest tapes is about the summer of '76

Dude111 · 07-02-2018, 21:40

Wow 76??

I know VHS came out in 77 . When did Beta come out??

EDIT:

I see it came out in 1975 ..... Why didnt it catch on more?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ta+VHS+history

Hmmmmmmmm

heero_yuy · 07-02-2018, 22:03

Quote:

Quote from Dude111:

Wow 76??

I know VHS came out in 77 . When did Beta come out??

EDIT:

I see it came out in 1975 ..... Why didnt it catch on more?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ta+VHS+history

Hmmmmmmmm

Got to remember when I bought the N1702 vs the other formats I paid £750 for the unit. The rest were much more and I went to a video specialist in South London and viewed the demonstration units for sale. Back-to-back at the time. Nothing on the highstreet.

admars · 07-02-2018, 22:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dude111

Wow 76??

I know VHS came out in 77 . When did Beta come out??

EDIT:

I see it came out in 1975 ..... Why didnt it catch on more?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ta+VHS+history

Hmmmmmmmm

I remember we had one of each, vhs in living room, dining room had the betamax, that dad bought when he took early redundancy from one job, and got another job immediately

There was a video rental place near us, 1 and a half walls were VHS, 1/2 a wall betamax, and a rotating stand for the Video 2000 format!

Betamax was superior in terms of sound and picture quality, but the big boy film studios all got behind JVC and VHS, so there were more films to rent for it, so it was more popular. VHS was also cheaper.

I remember when dad got his first camcorder as well - VHS-C, rather than having to hook the camcorder up to the tv/video, you put the small tape, in a large adapter tape to play in normal VHS VCR

Dude111 · 08-02-2018, 08:24

Ya I saw some VHS-C tapes @ salvation army..... I dont have anything to play those with though...........

tweetiepooh · 08-02-2018, 10:28

Our VHS player stopped working which is a shame as I have films that have never been released on DVD. In once case you could download a US version of the film free from the maker but that's disappeared. (The UK release was better.)

In other cases the DVD version is still over £10 for old black and white movies. When I see films on offer on DVD I get them and dump the tape, many are on Netflix/Amazon prime or not really worth buying.

Stephen · 08-02-2018, 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dude111

Yup thats the only difference. But I have always preferred mono anyway,its a better sound I think....

That makes no sense. It cannot possibly be a better sound than stereo or a great surround system.

Our first VCR was Sony's first front loader. It was still working till 2001 but totally died. Think I still have a few tapes somewhere.

**Paul** · 08-02-2018, 15:19

I still have a working VCR connected to my TV via SCART.

Stuart · 09-02-2018, 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dude111

I see it came out in 1975 ..... Why didnt it catch on more?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ta+VHS+history

Hmmmmmmmm

I suspect there were 3 reasons.

It was expensive.
VHS offered longer tapes
VHS offered a greater variety of content

They are interlinked, to some extent, as had Betamax sold better, the price would have come down, which would have encouraged more sales, and also encouraged more commercial releases on the system, but VHS also had the advantage of longer tapes. If you are looking at recording your TV, and look at the tape prices, what looks like better value? 3 or 4 hours for £10, or 1 or 2 hours for £10.

Dude111 · 09-02-2018, 20:53

Im very confused about NTSC AND PAL Stuart..... You guys watch stuff mostly in PAL.. Is it the right speed???? -- I have heard pal is faster but how about if its played ON A PAL MACHENE?? -- Is it the right speed then? (Video/Audio)

If someone hooked two VCRs together and copied a PAL tape to an NTSC that would be the right speed I think....... (The pal player would play it @ the right speed to the other one)

**Paul** · 09-02-2018, 22:04

Of course its the right speed

They are just two different standards ;

PAL is 25 Fames / Sec, and 625 lines
NTSC is 30 Frames / Sec, and 525 Lines.

You cannot play PAL encoded video on an NTSC machine, or vice versa.
(unless they are dual standard, or have a conversion system).

Neither is "faster" than the other, they just have differing frame rates.

NTSC = Never The Same Colour

daveeb · 10-02-2018, 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Of course its the right speed

They are just two different standards ;

PAL is 25 Fames / Sec, and 625 lines
NTSC is 30 Frames / Sec, and 525 Lines.

You cannot play PAL encoded video on an NTSC machine, or vice versa.
(unless they are dual standard, or have a conversion system).

Neither is "faster" than the other, they just have differing frame rates.

This old thread seems to have burst into life, it must be one of the few on the internet still talking about VCR's

i seem to remember (as you say) that dual standard machines in the UK played PAL and NTSC, most of the ones I had did just that and they weren't high end models except for one quite expensive svideo one I splashed out on. I'm not sure machines across the pond were as flexible when it came to playing PAL content.

NTSC = Never The Same Colour

I seem to remember most UK vcr's played NTSC also (as you say dual standard). I'm not sure the US NTSC machines were as flexible.
It's like being in a time warp in this thread !

heero_yuy · 10-02-2018, 11:21

PAL and the French SECAM TV systems prevent phase shifts in the transmission path from affecting the hue of the colours.

RichardCoulter · 10-02-2018, 16:20

I remember reading that watching Secam on a PAL receiver results in a black & white picture. Why did this happen?

Not sure if the sound was affected.

heero_yuy · 10-02-2018, 16:41

Quote:

Quote from RichardCoulter

I remember reading that watching Secam on a PAL receiver results in a black & white picture. Why did this happen?

Not sure if the sound was affected.

The colour signal processing is different but the black and white part of the picture is very similar. The TV does not recognise the colour component so doesn't show it.

In the UK the sound was on 6mHz (intercarrier FM) whereas on the continent it was on 5.5Mhz. Sometimes the set will have enough "stretch" to render it.