Basically dbx would have reduced the noise better than Dolby B but would not have fixed the limited frequency response and wow and flutter. VHS HiFi was so much better and I got my first HiFi deck, a Mitsubishi HS421UR, on April 3, 1987 and it made excellent audio recordings.
I had a friend who constantly complained about being able to hear the horizontal oscillator frequency on many TVs (about 15734 Hz for color, originally 15750 before the color standard). I could hear it when I was a kid and teenager but could tune it out after getting used to it. The 1000 / 1001 factor in the frame rate was to eliminate beats between the color and audio parts of the TV signal and became part of the 1953 color standard.
I've had VHS decks back through the 80s... great decks, and I never knew that Dolby NR was available on the linear track. I think we just skipped from our 1977 RCA top loader to a 1980 Panasonic portable unit to a 1987 JVC HiFi deck... neat! Now, i'm thinking I want to make a stripped down portable VHS deck that only plays back the linear audio track. so ridiculously inconvenient but fun... ;D
the different hiSSSSSSSSSSes of VCRs (digital hissing on Hifi-VCRs was even worse sometimes) was a constant pain in the ears the years i spent in the VHS and BETA repair shop during alignment runs. (the shop was authorized for in warranty repairs for e.g. Sony, Panasonic, Sharp, Philips)
2.56: there is even a shield above the linear head! that helped probably to reduce noise from the drum. (on some machines you had 60/120Hz from the spinning drum in the audio)
I'd argue Hi-Fi Stereo was actually better than CD Quality because its notional frequency ceiling is higher than 44.1kHz and more like the 48kHz of studio recordings at the time - there's not any actual quantization going on, it's just acting like a linear tape deck with a blisteringly fast tape speed.
I also have a linear stereo Video 2000 machine, a VR2340. The sound quality is very loud and clear, but it's clearly slow-speed linear and isn't really much better than optical film soundtracks and is indeed very hissy. More than adequate for going through a TV speaker, but they may as well have just stuck with mono for that. It's not as if there were any pre-recorded V2000 titles by that time, and who ever had any OTA stereo broadcasts to record (although thinking about it they probably did in Germany where more of these machines were sold)?
midrange boosted dramatically with the dbx - I like it for cassette tapes but this might be overkill unless you wanted that heavy compressed sound which could be a cool effect for an audio project, dbx passed drums can sound so good. - someone hard of hearing woudl also benefit from the dbx unit... not so much compression where it's a wall of noise still retains some dynamics
So, Is linear stereo is better than linear mono audio? In quality (frequency response). Freq. response for linear mono is around 100Hz - 10kHz (dependent on VCR) and for Hi-Fi stereo 20Hz - 20kHz. What is the frequency response for linear stereo?
"Pretend it's a tape recorder." Technically it IS a tape recorder. Anyway, I was just wondering if they ever did a VCR with both Linear Stereo and HI-FI on the same deck? I have always wanted one of those ever since I was 10 year old 43 years ago. Personably with DBX sounds less like the speakers are underneath a pillow than non DBX, but I have always hated Dolby noise reduction anyway and never turn it on. As I said, all you need to do is get a pillow and smother the speaker with it. there, you have Dolby Noise reduction.
linear VHS sucked compared to HI-FI, no compare on specs. VHS HI-FI was the best bang for buck on audio in the day, just poor searching on a 6 hr tape. 20-20KHz +, 90+ S/N, 90+Dynamic Range...And that was HI-FI analog.
Is there a way to wire the DBX decoder so that you only need to press the "dbx out" button instead of changing the cable setup? Perhaps you just did it for the demonstration, yes it's easy to understand. Anyway, I was to glad when stereo Hi-Fi VCRs came out, best sound recordings ever before burning a CD was a thing.
i have a dbx 150 type 1 and the in and out buttons just turns the compander on or off, and has nothing to do with switching the inputs and outputs, so if u encode a recording by having the in button pushed, u must also play it back with the in button pushed. the out button bypasses the encode/decode function. if properly connected it remains between the tape deck and console and no wire switching is required, or it could be connected to a dbx 200x switchbox that allows u to use the dbx unit on multiple decks as well as contolling equalizers and other audio processing equipment
Linear sound tracks on VCR's ofen had poor tracking which would kill dbx decoding. Might work great on umatic and type c 1" open real vtr's. I think they ran a 9.6ips.
i have found that dbx type 1 is superior to dolby b,c, and even s if all the levels are properly set, the only drawback to dbx is it is very temperamental and if your levels arent set just right you will get breathing and/or volume pumping
Sounds to me like the dbx wasn't aligned properly. Playback sounds muffled and you can hear the downward expander working, which you shouldn't be able to. It can perform better than this.
L'audio VHS hifi e' indistinguibile dal CD,posso garantirlo,ho delle mie videocassette audio che lo confermano.strano il fenomeno di alcuni videoregistratori che hanno un problema a registrare l'audio se non c'e il segnale video,i miei registrano l'audio senza problemi senza alcun segnale video,tutti
Linear stereo on professional machines wasn't really too dreadful. With higher-quality circuitry, higher-quality heads, and manual level controls, plus Dolby, the sound quality was "reasonably good". The AGC was one of the biggest issues on consumer machines. Forever my most hated "feature" on all audio recording devices! On a JVC Duplicator (BR-7000 or later models) or something like an S-VHS editor, the linear stereo was fairly "good". Certainly far better than any consumer deck. The linear audio on the Sony SVO-5800 is surprisingly crisp (relatively, at least). AFM HiFi stereo, or High Dynamic as Panasonic dubbed it - for reasons best known to them! - (labelled HD audio on early machines) is far better, of course. VHS HiFi audio does actually use a system very similar to DBX, but it's not "advertised" and it's non-switchable - it's just always-on/part of the system. FWIW, Dolby C was used for the linear audio on other VCRs - Umatic-SP and Betacam-SP, (and MII, if I recall correctly). Regarding AGC, on material of fairly constant level, the circuitry almost always sets the level far too low, hence far higher noise levels. On material of widely changing level, it was even more crap, but in different ways!! Thank God for digital 😄
My uncle had a stereo linear vhs deck. I had it at my place for a while back in the day and was really impressed with how good it sounded. If I remember correctly it was just shy of a Type II cassette recording. His deck didn't have DNR, so that might have helped. But then I heard HIFI vhs and I was hooked.
@@jims_junk most pre-recorded tapes had Dolby B, even though hardly anyone had Dolby B decoding on their VCRs - which would've made tapes sound extra clear, but also extra hissy! Once Beta-HiFi and HiFI VHS had been invented, linear audio became somewhat of an afterthought - very little effort went into it. It just had to work. Quality wasn't really a concern 🤷♂️ When VCRs mute the HiFi and switch to linear, on a creased section of tape or whatever, the difference is always "dramatically worse" - it needn't be, but it is. On a pro machine the difference is far less "dramatic". Manufacturers also put very little effort into accurately adjusting audio head azimuth, so straight from factory, most decks were a bit "off". Even HiFi audio got dumbed-down on later machines. No more VU meters, no more recording level controls, or other "nice features". Progress! Lol.
hi have played around like this in the past it's not as good as the hi-fi to all out there liner betacam iis better than any thing you have here and betacam is 4 channel on the betacan 75p decks there's only one bad side betacam you need ear plugs the fan's the betacam A500P can ear the power very good point you made i had to go away from VHS they are all ways going bad with betacam easy to find parts from decks all over the places
Useless experiment. Linear stereo itsef had its limits and was never designed being hifi. Frequency response (at the very best, on a good day) 50 Hz - 12 kHz.
Home made tapes > anything prerecorded. So even if they used DBX, they probably would have sounded like ass, just like any HI-Fi track, or any prerecorded cassette. The high speed duplication just didn't do any favors for anyone that had done any listening of high quality vinyl, CDs, or laserdiscs.
@@spazzman90 most VHS tapes were recorded in real time, on very high quality machines, with far better audio performance than consumer machines. 🤷♂️ Not all duplication facilities kept their machines well maintained though! High speed duplication, like the Sony Sprinter, was a thing, but every plant/facility I worked at was real-time. I think high speed was more common in the US than in Europe.
13:00 That's the sound of half of music videos in 90s TV. 😬 The sound of incompatibility or letting noobs operate the equipment. Your narration sounds bad also, you had better audio for a while after having the low bitrate sound for a long time. But no one actually cares about that, so I guess you can continue using that phone to record it, not worth the trouble.
heaps of jump wires on a PCB just mean the company was too cheap to use a double sided board, there was NEVER a technical reason not to. Theyre ugly to me
@@mycosys First of all in this era, multi layer PCBs were rare and super expensive. Secondly, all wires you see there in the spaghetti are not even interconnects on the same PCB, they connect motors, sensors, the heads on the head drum and more. You've obviously never saw how electronics were made before you were born.
what is your point? Consumer equipment for retail was always built for a price point. if SS-THT is the cost efficient way and the results meets the spec: this is no shame. on the other hand: databits at 2:35 (and @kyoudaiken probably) speak about the 1980ies rats nest of wiring loom. i fully understand why the construction was like that. Manual labor was quite cheap, for assembly and even for outgoing inspections and rework loops. the pain of running the QA for the assembly line for this machine: can't imagine. If you call this "ugly": just skip this video and get yourself a sleek newer machine. e.g. like the ones Funai ran 2003-2006 after they integrated the Philips VCR activity.
