Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!dyer
From: dyer@wivax.UUCP (Stephen Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Re: Help with basic video questions
Message-ID: <18905@wivax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Oct-83 21:29:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: wivax.18905
Posted: Sun Oct 23 21:29:25 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Oct-83 21:09:58 EDT
References: <176@rna.UUCP>
Organization: Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, Ma.  01879
Lines: 20

Though the particular tape and tape deck you use are factors, in general
a recording made at EP (6 hour) is going to be of lower quality than the
same made at SP (2 hour), regardless of the tape.  I often spent the
extra bucks for the "ultra-fine" Maxell tapes, though I  frankly didn't see
much difference.  Then, I noticed in video mags that plain old Scotch
video tape was consistently rated the best (better than that Maxell, and even
better than Scotch's high-end brand!)  The Scotch brand is often available
at reduced prices or with rebates, so you might want to try a cassette.
Another factor arguing against EP speed, especially as it regards MTV,
is that frequency response and wow and flutter are much worse at the EP
speed.  (You want hifi, maybe you should have gone with Beta HiFi.)
SP extracts about the best you can out of the medium, about 30-10khz
response, which is worse than a $100 cassette deck.

Me, I use SP whenever I want archival tapes, and the program fits in 2 hours.
For quick "time shift" uses, where I don't care too much about the quality,
I use EP for economy.

/Steve Dyer
decvax!bbncca!sdyer