VCR Audio specifications

[Jackie]

What audio specifications would one expect from a Sony, 6 head Hi-Fi
VCR? (EZ725). Not in manual.

Jackie

 

[amstereo-matt2]

20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is ~ 0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use log play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it and play
it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.
--
i 1197am the new sound of Brisbane
(a proud listener)
"Jackie" <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3F29B89B.1010805@bigpond.com...

What audio specifications would one expect from a Sony, 6 head Hi-Fi
VCR? (EZ725). Not in manual.

Jackie

 

[Jackie]

amstereo-matt2

What about a standard VCR's audio specifications?
Just curious!

Jackie

amstereo-matt2 wrote:

20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is ~ 0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use log play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it and play
it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.
--
i 1197am the new sound of Brisbane
(a proud listener)
"Jackie" <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3F29B89B.1010805@bigpond.com...

What audio specifications would one expect from a Sony, 6 head Hi-Fi
VCR? (EZ725). Not in manual.

Jackie

 

[amstereo-matt2]

your standard mono VCR has an audio quality that an am radio can surpass.
that is because in mono, the audio is stored on a liner track under the
video track , and becasue video tape runs at half the speed of a audio
cassette , your quality is not very good. the price difference between a
mono and hifi VCR is about $50 - $70 i don't see why mono vcr's are still
sold, and with hifi vcr's you get a stereo TV tuner as well which means all
tv shows* are dolby pro-logic decodable (dolby surround). You'de have at
most of 12kHz of usable audio before noise gets too great, also, i found
alot of Videos actually play back destorted using the linear track (which is
also a stereo feed for older stereo -pre-hifi VCR's - usually accompanied
by dolby noise reduction enabled - don't help much)

the linear track is 'ok' but nothing more.

I don't own a stereo TV, so a stereo hifi VCR works best.

*all refers to the 99% majority

--
i 1197am the new sound of Brisbane
(a proud listener)
"Jackie" <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3F29D0DC.9050109@bigpond.com...

amstereo-matt2

What about a standard VCR's audio specifications?
Just curious!

Jackie

amstereo-matt2 wrote:
20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is ~
0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use log
play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it and
play
it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.
--
i 1197am the new sound of Brisbane
(a proud listener)
"Jackie" <noreply@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3F29B89B.1010805@bigpond.com...

What audio specifications would one expect from a Sony, 6 head Hi-Fi
VCR? (EZ725). Not in manual.

Jackie

 

[Tony Pearce]

"amstereo-matt2" <amstereo@optus n e t dot c o m dot a u> wrote in message
news:3f29bfc7$0$1212$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is ~ 0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use log play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it and
play
it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.

Possibly but you forgot to mention the wideband 2:1 compression/expansion
can cause artefacts, as can the head switching. I also see quite a bit of
residual stereo carrier in many units.

Definitely Not CD quality, but a *HUGE* improvement on non Hi-Fi VCR's.

TonyP.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2cd756$0$14563$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"amstereo-matt2" <amstereo@optus n e t dot c o m dot a u> wrote in message
news:3f29bfc7$0$1212$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is ~
0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use log
play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it and
play it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.

Possibly but you forgot to mention the wideband 2:1 compression/expansion
can cause artefacts,

** It is not 2:1.

as can the head switching.

** "Can" and "does" are seperate words - fuckhead.


I also see quite a bit of

residual stereo carrier in many units.

** "See" and "hear" are two seperate words - fuckhead.

Definitely Not CD quality,

** Your wrong opinion.




.............. Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Rob Judd" <judd@ob-wan.com> wrote in message
news:3F2D7E69.9CB3B6C7@ob-wan.com...

Phil Allison wrote:

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2cd756$0$14563$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"amstereo-matt2" <amstereo@optus n e t dot c o m dot a u> wrote in
message
news:3f29bfc7$0$1212$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
20 hz - 20'000 hz , 0.05 tdh @ 1 Khz, W&F i dot no, my panasonic is
~
0.6%
W&F

either way, it is a stereo hi-fi track that as long as u dont use
log
play
will, have an all but perfect sound output. record a CD track to it
and
play it back u'll be hard pressed to hear the difference.

Possibly but you forgot to mention the wideband 2:1
compression/expansion
can cause artefacts,

** It is not 2:1.

as can the head switching.

** "Can" and "does" are seperate words - fuckhead.

I also see quite a bit of
residual stereo carrier in many units.

** "See" and "hear" are two seperate words - fuckhead.


Definitely Not CD quality,

** Your wrong opinion.

............. Phil

Phil,

Go take a cold shower.

** Go to hell.


I've heard every audio argument under the sun,

but disbelieving the instruments goes beyond the pale. He's not claiming
golden ears here.

** Yes he is.

If you listen to everything through PC speakers, of course there's no
difference. But that neither makes you an expert nor gives you the right
to behave like the above.

** WTF are you on about ??

Make sense when you post - it helps.

The same Pearce idiot has been posting absolute garbage on aus.hi-fi
simultaneously last night with the above message - hence my use of the
expletives.




.............. Phil

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f2dbef3$0$4189$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Rob Judd" <judd@ob-wan.com> wrote in message
news:3F2D7E69.9CB3B6C7@ob-wan.com...
Phil Allison wrote:

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2cd756$0$14563$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Possibly but you forgot to mention the wideband 2:1
compression/expansion
can cause artefacts,

** It is not 2:1.

What is it?

as can the head switching.

** "Can" and "does" are seperate words - fuckhead.

Yes, and your point is?

I also see quite a bit of
residual stereo carrier in many units.

** "See" and "hear" are two seperate words - fuckhead.

Yes, and your point is?

Definitely Not CD quality,

** Your wrong opinion.

No, just fact supported by measurements, unlike your opinion.

I've heard every audio argument under the sun,
but disbelieving the instruments goes beyond the pale. He's not claiming
golden ears here.

** Yes he is.

Where exactly?

The same Pearce idiot has been posting absolute garbage on aus.hi-fi
simultaneously last night with the above message - hence my use of the
expletives.

The garbage is all yours, and the expletives are your normal style, as
thousands of posts on Google show.
As usual you disagree but provide no evidence for anything other than your
lack of sanity.

TonyP.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2df320$0$10354$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f2dbef3$0$4189$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

** It is not 2:1.

What is it?

** Don't you know - fuckhead ?

Definitely Not CD quality,

** Your wrong opinion.

No, just fact supported by measurements,

** What measurements ?? You did not post any.

The claim that hi-fi audio VCRs have CD level sound quality is valid.

I've heard every audio argument under the sun,
but disbelieving the instruments goes beyond the pale. He's not
claiming
golden ears here.

** Yes he is.

Where exactly?

** Idiot question. There cannot be an "exaclty" with your stupid and
unsupported assertions.

The same Pearce idiot has been posting absolute garbage on aus.hi-fi
simultaneously last night with the above message - hence my use of the
expletives.

The garbage is all yours, and the expletives are your normal style, as
thousands of posts on Google show.

** Every one of them thoroughly deserved - especialy by a piece of
autistic NG excrement like you.

As usual you disagree but provide no evidence ....

** Of what ?

Only arseholes post non specified complaints.





......................... Phil

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2dfdbf$0$10359$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

93 dB SNR, > 0.001% THD? Show me the measurements.

That should be greater than 93 dB SNR, and less than 0.001% THD for CD, but
not for Hi-Fi VCR.
His claims are wrong as even his limited measurement capabilities should
show.
However I have never said that HiFi VCR is not adequate for most purposes,
despite Phil's rhetoric.

TonyP.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2dfdbf$0$10359$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f2df54f$0$28118$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

** Go look it up - it is NOT 2:1.

** What measurements ?? You did not post any.

So where are yours?

** You made the claim so the onus is on you to support it with facts and
reasoning.

The claim that hi-fi audio VCRs have CD level sound quality is
valid.


93 dB SNR, > 0.001% THD? Show me the measurements.

** The phrase was "CD level sound quality" - you have no clue what
that means if you think the specs must match.

Where *approximately* did I say I had golden ears?

** It was implicit.

As usual you disagree but provide no evidence for anything.

** Of what ?

Of anything.

** What an asinine response.


You need to provide *your* evidence first.

I will not be drawn into a trap contesting a non-existent case.



............... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2e0080$0$10354$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2dfdbf$0$10359$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
93 dB SNR, > 0.001% THD? Show me the measurements.

That should be greater than 93 dB SNR, and less than 0.001% THD for CD,
but
not for Hi-Fi VCR.

His claims are wrong ......

** Post names - don't be misleading.




.............. Phil

 

[budgie]

On Mon, 04 Aug 2003 07:28:09 +1000, Rob Judd <judd@ob-wan.com> wrote:

Phil Allison wrote:
(snip the customary Allison abuse)

Phil,

Go take a cold shower. I've heard every audio argument under the sun,
but disbelieving the instruments goes beyond the pale. He's not claiming
golden ears here.

If you listen to everything through PC speakers, of course there's no
difference. But that neither makes you an expert nor gives you the right
to behave like the above.

You really have to learn to ignore Phyllis. She gets this type of PMT
at the drop of a hat - must be that time of the month perpetually.

She thinks she's the Roddles of aus.electronics. The key difference
is that Roddles knows what he's on about most of the time.

 

[Phil Allison]

"budgie" <budgie@nowhere.cantech.net.au>


( Snip the usual Budgie Bullshit )

You really have to learn to ignore Phyllis.

** This drivel is supposed to be advice ??

She gets this type of PMT at the drop of a hat - must be that time of the
month perpetually.

** Of course this is quite friendly.

She thinks she's the Roddles of aus.electronics.

** Now that is good old, plain abuse.

The key difference is that Roddles knows what he's on about most of the
time.

** Well, that complete stupidity blows Budgie out of the water for ever.

What a boring macaroon.



................ Phil

 

[Tony Pearce]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f2e0193$0$28117$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

** Go look it up - it is NOT 2:1.

So tell us what it is, and why no compression/expansion artifacts will
exist?

** You made the claim so the onus is on you to support it with facts
and
reasoning.

Just like you do (NOT!

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you Phil, and would not admit you're
wrong no matter what facts are posted. So why would I waste my time trying
to convince you?

Others can make up their own mind.

** The phrase was "CD level sound quality" - you have no clue what
that means if you think the specs must match.

Your right! But the Original phrase you responded to was "Not CD quality"
if that makes any difference.
If they are inferior, how can it be called "CD quality". Just another case
of you making up your own rules as usual.

TonyP.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Tony Pearce" <TonyP@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2f66ec$0$4190$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

"Phil Allison" <philallison@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:3f2e0193$0$28117$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

** Go look it up - it is NOT 2:1.


So tell us what it is, and why no compression/expansion artifacts will
exist?

** It is 1.5 :1 - you need to show audible artifacts exist.

** You made the claim so the onus is on you to support it with facts
and> reasoning.

Just like you do (NOT!

** The onus in on you - you are making the claims.

You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you Phil, and would not admit you're
wrong no matter what facts are posted. So why would I waste my time trying
to convince you?

** As I thought , you have no case at all.

So there is nothing to debate.

** The phrase was "CD level sound quality" - you have no clue
what
that means if you think the specs must match.


Your right! But the Original phrase you responded to was "Not CD quality"
if that makes any difference.

If they are inferior, how can it be called "CD quality".

** Easy - high quality CDs can be transfered to hi-fi VCR with no audible
loss.

The OP was right.

OTOH you are a fuckwit.



.............. Phil

 

[Steve]

So where are yours? I'll post some if you do.

OH PUHHHHLEEEEEEEEEZZZZZEEEE!!!!!!

Mine is bigger than both of yours put end to end!

Shit-God-Damn people. GET OVER IT!

WWWIII is gonna start on Usenet, I can tell. It'll start with an
innocent question about how Astras compare to Civics, some people will
post some personal opinions claiming them to be facts, arguments ensue
and BA'BOOM! T2-dream-sequence-style death for all!

I know it's tempting to lie a bit in order to win pointless, boring
arguments with complete strangers over petty, inconsequential
things... but you've gotta draw the line somewhere!

nifty

 

[Rob Judd]

Phil Allison wrote:

"Rob Judd" <judd@ob-wan.com> wrote in message
news:3F302B3F.D61B0BE8@ob-wan.com...

Phil,

The average "hi-fi" VCR has a s/n in the range 48 to 70dB, which is -
compared to 95dB for CD's - about 7 times louder at the very best. If
you can't hear that you're a deaf cunt.


** Dunno where your figures come from - some budget priced Chinese POS
??

IME ( with an early Philips Hi-Fi VCR ) the dynamic range was around 85
dB , response 20 Hz to 20 kHz +/- 1 db , THD typically 0.05 % at full
level , W&F less than 0.005 % rms.

Easily good enough to dub any CD onto with no audible loss.

Nakamichi cassette recordings ( Dolby C etc) had very obvious
deterioration on the same CD programme material as was tried with the hi-fi
VCR.

That one sounds like the exception. I checked many specs on the internet
before sying what I said, and I stand by it.

Rob