Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcb!speaker
From: speaker@ttidcb.UUCP (Kenneth Speaker)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Re: Super-BETA vs HQ VHS
Message-ID: <546@ttidcb.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Nov-85 16:45:33 EST
Article-I.D.: ttidcb.546
Posted: Wed Nov 13 16:45:33 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Nov-85 20:00:34 EST
References: <1240@ihuxe.UUCP>
Reply-To: speaker@ttidcb.UUCP (Kenneth Speaker)
Distribution: net
Organization: Transaction Technology, Inc. (CitiCorp), Santa Monica
Lines: 48
Summary: 

In article <1240@ihuxe.UUCP> newlin@ihuxe.UUCP (Doug Newlin) writes:
>Recently, VCRs have improved their picture for the first time since they
>became available in 1975.  BETA was first (as usual) with their 20%
>frequency response improvement (aka "Super-BETA").  VHS later announced
>their "HQ" improvements, mainly achieved through improved filtering (i.e.,
>they improved their Chroma and Luminance noise levels by adding two
>adjacent lines together giving them twice the signal strength (amplitude)
>whereas the noise (which is considered random) is only increased by the
>square root of two (1.4). Hence, an improved Signal/Noise.  HQ also raises
>the White Clip level to approx. 200% (although this is still reportedly
>lower than BETA's white clip level).
>
>Now, what I would like to know is has anyone been able to compare the
>Super-BETA picture with the HQ VHS ?  My understanding is that JVC has 
>already released some of its VCRs with the White Clip improvement, and will
>soon release the "full" HQ "package".  

Not yet, but by this weekend I will be able to compare my SL-HF900 with 
a JVC xx566 which has the full HQ package.  I will report back.  

>I would think that BETA would be
>able to incorporate the HQ improvements quite easily, whereas I have heard
>that VHS cannot raise their frequency response and be compatible with
>present VHS machines.  If this is true, has anyone heard of any plans by
>the BETA group to incorporate any/all of the HQ improvements ?
>
Yes, these "improvements" could be made -- but note:  The whiteclip of
beta is already higher than that of VHS-HQ.  The noise reduction also
REDUCES RESOLUTION.  Any "averaging" scheme will reduce the resolution
while giving better S/N.  Thus, this will NOT improve a super-beta picture.

>Also, as a footnote, the HF-900 Super-BETA is completely compatible with
>non-Super-BETA VCRs that I have encountered.  That is, non-Super-BETA
>recordings play perfectly on the Super-BETA VCR and Super-BETA recordings
>play perfectly on non-Super-BETA VCRs.  Of course, I could not test out
>every BETA VCR, but the ones I did test played just fine.

You mentioned the 2700/2710.  The compatibility is essentially perfect with
any beta-HiFi machine.  The carrier was raised between beta and beta-HiFi
to allow the room for the audio sub-channels.  However compatibility back
to a non-HiFi beta is less perfect.  That is, a super-Beta tape played back
on a non-HiFi beta deck does produce overmodulation noise.  That is the
reason the carrier frequency was not raise more than it was to create a
30-40% resolution increase -- the result would have been unplayable on 
non-HiFi beta, and marginal on beta-HiFi.


--Kne