Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!ron
From: ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Re: Stereo vs. Hi-Fi\
Message-ID: <7751@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 27-Jan-85 16:45:59 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.7751
Posted: Sun Jan 27 16:45:59 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 11:33:33 EST
References: <266@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 11

> 
> Many VHS VCRs, but not "almost every", are indeed low-fi stereo that is
> far worse than audio cassettes.  The only Beta stereo VCRs are also
> Hi-Fi.  Only Beta Hi-Fi multiplexes the audio with the video - VHS uses
> separate heads to record the audio information separately.
> 
VHS doesn't encode the HI-FI on the video head.  If this is true that
explains why Sony kept claiming it would be impossible for VHS to do
HI-FI without degrading the video.  Anybody know for sure?

-Ron