BETA looks better than VHS?

So claim the Beta-supporters, but I just looked at the specs:

Betamax=240-250 lines horizontal
VHS == 240 lines horizontal

Troy.Heagy...

.

No I used the proper terminology. "lines horizontal" refers to the
number of visible lines across the screen. Like so:

videonovels...

.

Let's ignore the digital formats for now, and just focus on the analog.
YOUR NUMBERS ARE WRONG. Sorry for shouting, but I'm hoping to grab
your attention so you will listen. On the image above, the "number of
visible lines" counting one-by-one, left-to-right are:

Beta = 240-250 visible lines left-to-right
VHS = 240-250 " " "
cabletv = 300-330 " " "
laserdisc = 400-425 " " "

videonovels...

.

Okay. NTSC has 525 scanlines (486 visible) like so:

These numbers can be verified across multiple websites as accurate.

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

archang...

Hmm. Whoops. I apologize.

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VHS/Beta can display approximately 240 distinct lines in the horizontal
resolution. LaserDisc is 425. DVD is 720. Bluray is 1920. (Assuming
ideal conditions.)

They are essentially the same quality.

jayembee...

You wouldn't say that if you actually looked at the two side by side.
I have. Beta was definitely superior. The transport mechanism was
also far superior to VHS. And Beta's Hi-Fi scheme was much, much
better than VHS's.

Troy.Heagy...

VHS Hi-Fi achieves CD-quality, so isn't that good enough?

jayembee...

No, it isn't, because it wasn't "CD-quality".

videonovels...

"hi-fi VCRs add higher-quality stereo audio tracks (20Hz-20Khz with
more than 70dB S/N ratio at SP).. The excellent sound quality of hi-fi
VHS has gained it some popularity as an audio format in certain
applications; in particular, ordinary home hi-fi VCRs are sometimes
used by home recording enthusiasts as a handy and inexpensive medium
for making high-quality stereo mixdowns and master recordings from
multitrack audio tape." - wikipedia

"sharp-eared videophiles were dismayed to discover the problem of
"Hi-Fi buzz," technically known as 60-cycle intercarrier
interference, where slight visual tracking instabilities were decoded
by the audio circuits as a nasty, ever-present hum in the stereo

So... VHS = 70db signal-to-noise ratio and CD-quality frequency
response (20-20,000), but Beta suffers from a buzzing noise. VHS
Hi-fi is definitely better.

As for transport mechanism, Beta's was a terrible design. They had a
hard time making it work during laboratory development. And when it
finally worked, it put a LOT of stress on the tape, and prevented beta
from using the super-thin tape that VHS can use. No super-thin tape =
no way to squeeze more time in each cassette.

jayembee...

Again, I've used both. Beta had a superior transport mechanism.
Faster start, cleaner edits. And I never, NEVER had a problem
with stressed tapes, whereas I've had plenty with VHS.

videonovels...

Anecdotal. I've never had any problem with VHS either, but the
experience of just ONE person proves nothing. Here are the FACTS:

"By late 1978, Sony unveiled two more defenses in the battle for video
speed supremacy: the first was the thin 16-micron L-750 tape, which
allowed a 50% longer recording than conventional 20-micron L-500
cassettes. This was a major breakthrough, and one about which they felt
particularly keen. A year later, they followed with the L-830, a
delicate, tissue paper-like tape only 13-microns thick, which provided
5 hours of recording at BIll, the even-slower speed that debuted in
mid-1979. Sony engineers knew that the VHS transport's M-load design
placed considerably more stress on the tape load path during playback
and recording, and would probably wreck a thin tape in a matter of

So I was wrong.
Beta had the simpler transport mechanism.

VHS was able to use super-thin tape to extend recording from 6 to 9 to
11 hours..... but Beta's mechanism could not handle it.

jayembee...

And almost everyone who uses the "super-thin" VHS tape says that
it has problems. I've known people who wouldn't use the T-160s
(8-hour) tapes because their decks couldn't handle it, let alone
9- to 11-hour tapes.

.

(And just for the sake of completion)

archang...

(SuperBeta = 325 lines)
(SuperVHS = 425 lines)
(LaserDisc = 425 lines)
(BetaPro/ED = 500 lines)

(DVD = 720 lines w/ no compression)

jayembee...

That's really good crack you're smoking. The only reason DVD has
the capacity it does is because it is *seriously* compressed.
Laserdisc wasn't compressed, either for audio or video. DVD
compresses both (except for the odd DVD that uses uncompressed
PCM audio instead of Dolby Digital or DTS).

Anim8rFSK...

Excuse ne?

DVD has the stuffing compressed out of it.

(bluray = 1920 lines w/ no compression)

Anthony Cerrato...

It is indeed the tape speed and probably details in
optimization we don't even know about--whatever, it all
makes a very big difference in picture quality! Too bad Sony
didn't win the VCR race. :(( ...tonyC

Deke...

And that would be Sonys fault, since they initially refused to allow anybody
else to build Beta vcrs. JVC on the other hand, let anybody who could pay
the licensing fee build a vhs deck. By the time Sony decided to let others
build Beta decks, JVC's vhs format had taken over the market.

videonovels...

First off, FPS is the same in both standards: 60 fields per second
(ntsc).

jayembee...

You're assuming that he means "Frames Per Second". He might be
talking "Feet Per Second".

Second, I don't see the relevance of tape speed? Why would that
matter? Both pictures have the same 240 horizontal lines, as the
end-result.

trike...

Tape speed makes a big difference. Compare the images you get with SP
and EP modes on your VHS tape.

jayembee...

Resolution isn't the only factor affecting quality of recording.
Speed *does* matter, which is why VHS-SP recordings are of higher
quality than VHS-EP recordings (and Beta-I vs. Beta-III).

archang...

Also, Troy has mixed up horizontal and vertical resolution for the
digital formats; DVD has 480 horizontal lines and I believe Blu-ray 1080.

Troy.Heagy...

No I used the proper terminology. "lines horizontal" refers to the
number of visible lines across the screen. Like so:

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

VHS/Beta can display approximately 240 distinct lines in the horizontal
resolution. LaserDisc is 425. DVD is 720. Bluray is 1920.

(Note these are ideal cases. Actual quality can vary depending on the
speed. For example, VHS-SLP is only 100-120 lines horizontal.)

Anim8rFSK...

He is at least using the same number in both cases. DVDs are (usually)
720x480, and bluray is 1920x1080, but with MPEG2 or VC-1 compression. I
don't know where he's getting 'no compression' for DVD or Bluray.

videonovels...

.

Apology accepted. And thank you. :-)

videonovels...

.

Sorry for not being clearer. Try this version:
(DVD = 720 lines w/ no compression / fewer lines with compression)
(bluray = 1920 lines w/ no compression / fewer lines with compression)

archang...

Do you take advanced classes to be this wrong, or is it a natural
gift?

Anim8rFSK...

He does seem to be working awfully hard at it, doesn't he?

pv+usenet...

Feh. Troy doesn't have to work hard to be an ignoramus - it's what he does. *

videonovels...

No I didn't. In ALL cases I used "visible lines measured horizontally"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

videonovels...

.

And for the sake of completion: "visible lines measured vertically"
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------

sm2000...

beta/ vhs = 240 lines interlaced
NTSC = 525 lines interlaced
PAL = 625 lines interlaced
SDTV digital/ dvd = 480 lines interlaced or progressive
HDTV digital/ bluray = 720 lines or 1080 lines interlaced or
progressive

And since you seem to love throwing your credentials around, I ALSO
used to work in a television studio and have been a semi-professional
videographer since 1987, so I most definately know what I'm talking
about. Being fully aware of the maximum available resolution in any
given format is an essential skill no videographer should be without.

- Sean

videonovels...

.

No I didn't. In ALL cases I used "visible lines measured horizontally"
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

videonovels...

.

And for the sake of completion "visible lines measured vertically"
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------

NTSC/ beta/ vhs/ laserdisc = 486 lines
SDTV digital/ dvd = 480 lines
HDTV digital/ bluray = 720 lines or 1080 lines

Everything I wrote above is accurate. I'm an engineer and used to work
in a television studio.... I know what I'm talking about.

NTSC/ beta/ vhs/ laserdisc = 486 lines
SDTV digital/ dvd = 480 lines
HDTV digital/ bluray = 720 lines or 1080 lines

Everything I wrote above is accurate.

jayembee...

The numbers are completely irrelevant, since DVD and Blu-Ray are
both compressed. And the resolution has nothing to do with
compression anyway. The quality of the picture is affected by
compression, but the resolution of the image is the same whether
the data is compressed or not. The only difference is whether
you have a 720x480 clear image or a 720x480 less-clear image.