Xref: utzoo rec.video:7059 sci.electronics:6906
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr!tektronix!sequent!roc
From: roc@sequent.UUCP (Ron Christian)
Newsgroups: rec.video,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: S-VHS this generation's Beta?
Message-ID: <18565@sequent.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jul 89 23:50:46 GMT
References: <2727@blake.acs.washington.edu> <692@lopez.UUCP> <26267@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Reply-To: roc@crg2.UUCP (Ron Christian)
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc
Lines: 28

In article <26267@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@diablo.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes:
>I have seen Japanese S-VHS VCRs for $600. That's a very reasonable
>premium over the equivalent quality without S-VHS. Remember, you get
>Hi-Fi and a bunch of other goodies too. 

I have a question.  People are going to ask me this, and I want
to provide the correct answer, so don't laugh, ok?

Ok.  These cheap S-VHS decks.  How's the image quality?  Is it as
noticeably better vs. standard VHS as the high priced decks?  If
not, what's the degradation?

I.E., say I had a new $450 VHS deck and went and got one of those new $600
S-VHS decks.  So I have a mid range VHS and an absolutely bottom-of-the-
line S-VHS deck.  What kind of difference am I going to see?

The reason I ask is because of the HQ fiasco.  In some decks it appeared
to be an improvement, and in others it appeared to be a marketing gimmick.

Is S-VHS tied to some standard of image quality (what IS "image quality",
anyway??) or does it mean that the manufacturer has added the minimum
number of componants in order to be able to slap "SUPER VHS!!!" all over
the box?  Or both?




				Ron