U-matic Recorder Vs Editor quality

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

I would like to know if there's a difference in the *recording quality*
between a U-maticSP Recorder (such as the SONY VO-9600) and an Editor (such
as the BVU-950).

I don't care about playback quality nor editing capabilities, since I'm
planning to use the U-maticSP VTR *only* to record fully edited programs off
a NLE suite directly into U-maticSP.

Would the recorded video be of inferior quality if I choose to buy a VO-9600
instead of a top-of-the-line BVU-950?

I don't need Insert, Assemble, TBC, TC, Audio dub features that the BVU has.
I just need a "record button". HOWEVER, the recorded quality, must not be
compromised in any way.

At this community station, they have a BVU-920 for playback with TBC and NR.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

There are differences. It strikes me as funny to speak of 'quality' and
UmaticSP in the same breath, but that's another discussion.

The 950 has a DT head, used for recording 'off-speed' material. Not
that you would have use for this, but it _does_ make the record head
better even than a 900. A similar distinction exists on the BetaSP
side (BVW vs. VO, 70 vs. 75), and also points up the fact that the
signal recorded is, ultimately, different. Also, any of the BVUs will
edit more accurately than the VOs (and, for the life of me, I can't
understand why this is not a concern to you. If your material is headed
for air, you're gonna need something better than a 'crash record' from
your NLE.

I'm old school. Get the best signal you can on tape, go for the 950.

Regards,
Geoff.

Joseph Brown wrote:
> I would like to know if there's a difference in the *recording quality*
> between a U-maticSP Recorder (such as the SONY VO-9600) and an Editor (such
> as the BVU-950).
>
> I don't care about playback quality nor editing capabilities, since I'm
> planning to use the U-maticSP VTR *only* to record fully edited programs off
> a NLE suite directly into U-maticSP.
>
> Would the recorded video be of inferior quality if I choose to buy a VO-9600
> instead of a top-of-the-line BVU-950?
>
> I don't need Insert, Assemble, TBC, TC, Audio dub features that the BVU has.
> I just need a "record button". HOWEVER, the recorded quality, must not be
> compromised in any way.
>
> At this community station, they have a BVU-920 for playback with TBC and NR.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

"Vida Brevis" <gasbag@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:RJqoc.119592$G_.38685@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> There are differences. It strikes me as funny to speak of 'quality' and
> UmaticSP in the same breath, but that's another discussion.
>
> The 950 has a DT head, used for recording 'off-speed' material. Not
> that you would have use for this, but it _does_ make the record head
> better even than a 900. A similar distinction exists on the BetaSP
> side (BVW vs. VO, 70 vs. 75), and also points up the fact that the
> signal recorded is, ultimately, different. Also, any of the BVUs will
> edit more accurately than the VOs (and, for the life of me, I can't
> understand why this is not a concern to you. If your material is headed
> for air, you're gonna need something better than a 'crash record' from
> your NLE.
>
> I'm old school. Get the best signal you can on tape, go for the 950.
>
BVH was the Broadcast line of 1" equipment

BVW was the broadcast line of SP and non-SP Betacam equipment
PVW was the professional line?? of SP Betacam equipment
UVW was the industrial line of SP Betacam equipment

BVU was the broadcast line of 3/4" equipment (SP and non SP)
VO was the industrial line of 3/4" equipment

As far as I know, the VO series 3/4" do not edit, but some can record

The main thing that the addition of DT heads brings you on a piece of
used equipment is a bigger bill when it's time to replace the heads (if you
can still get 3/4" heads. the BVU-850 and BVU-950 had DT heads, as do
the PVW-2650 and BVW-75 beta decks

The usefulness of DT (Dynamic Tracking) heads is that you can do
minor slow/fast motion in real time. You can even do variable speed
sequences with an edit controller (perhaps even when using the front
panel as an edit controller). DT decks are nicer for editing because
you don't get that noise bar when shuttling at 2X or below.

If the spots that come in from the cable networks are any indication,
crash recording out of an NLE is not much of an issue anymore.

If I had to buy a 3/4" deck, I would probably go for the 950, but a
VO series deck might be fine for what you want. I would hate to
see anybody invest a lot in old analog equipment at this point (most
especially 3/4" equipment). Everything is moving to digital, and even
the consumer DV format stomps 3/4". It can be argued that Betacam SP
and 1" are better than DV in some ways.

David


David

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

The message <306fbe7b1ce34868de23a22e33a70f6f@news.teranews.com>
from "Joseph Brown" <spam@nospa3m.edu> contains these words:

> I would like to know if there's a difference in the *recording quality*
> between a U-maticSP Recorder (such as the SONY VO-9600) and an Editor (such
> as the BVU-950).

> I don't care about playback quality nor editing capabilities, since I'm
> planning to use the U-maticSP VTR *only* to record fully edited programs off
> a NLE suite directly into U-maticSP.

> Would the recorded video be of inferior quality if I choose to buy a VO-9600
> instead of a top-of-the-line BVU-950?

> I don't need Insert, Assemble, TBC, TC, Audio dub features that the BVU has.
> I just need a "record button". HOWEVER, the recorded quality, must not be
> compromised in any way.

> At this community station, they have a BVU-920 for playback with TBC and NR.

They would have the same spec if they are both Umatic-SP. The difference
is in the build quality, but even that is relatively minor. The BVU is
the broadcast version that is designed to work all day, day after day,
year after year. I have a BVU 850P must be some 15 yrs old and still
going like a good'un.
Better solution would be a Betacam or BetacamSP machine. More expensive
but the best that analogue video has ever got.

--
Robin. 0)
Isle of Wight. UK.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

"david.mccall" <david.mccallUNDERLINE@comcast.net> wrote in
news:xwroc.78017$kh4.4501931@attbi_s52:

>
> "Vida Brevis" <gasbag@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:RJqoc.119592$G_.38685@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
>> There are differences. It strikes me as funny to speak of
>> 'quality' and UmaticSP in the same breath, but that's
>> another discussion.
>>
>> The 950 has a DT head, used for recording 'off-speed'
>> material. Not that you would have use for this, but it
>> _does_ make the record head better even than a 900.

>
> The main thing that the addition of DT heads brings you on
> a piece of used equipment is a bigger bill when it's time
> to replace the heads (if you can still get 3/4" heads. the
> BVU-850 and BVU-950 had DT heads, as do the PVW-2650 and
> BVW-75 beta decks
>
> The usefulness of DT (Dynamic Tracking) heads is that you
> can do minor slow/fast motion in real time. You can even do
> variable speed sequences with an edit controller (perhaps
> even when using the front panel as an edit controller). DT
> decks are nicer for editing because you don't get that
> noise bar when shuttling at 2X or below.
>

>
> David
>
>
> David
>
>
>

I thought it was only the BVU870 and BVU920 that had the DT
heads??

I still edit on BVU's, but then I'm only a full time
professional when the mood takes me!<G> In this part of the
world, we do whatever earns a buck at the time.

I shot some footage on DVCam with a PD150 that was needed for a
court case. This was edited on BVU then dumped back to DV. The
edited tape was then taken to a local production company to get
it copied to VHS as my machine was down. The editor remarked on
the wonderful sharpness of DV! I did not spoil her day by
telling her it had gone through BVU SP -- twice!<G>

Another program was shot and edited entirely on BVU SP but I had
a sale to a European cable company provided I could give them a
master on Beta SP. My agent said to dump the BVU footage to beta
and that they'd never know the difference. He was right!<VBG>

Derry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

"Derry Argue" <derry(delete)@adviegundogs.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns94E7DFF1FA638derryadviegundogscou@130.133.1.4...
>
> I thought it was only the BVU870 and BVU920 that had the DT
> heads??
>
You may be right. I'm not great with numbers :-(

> I still edit on BVU's, but then I'm only a full time
> professional when the mood takes me!<G> In this part of the
> world, we do whatever earns a buck at the time.
>
Where might that be? I think many of us do what we have to to make a buck.

> I shot some footage on DVCam with a PD150 that was needed for a
> court case. This was edited on BVU then dumped back to DV. The
> edited tape was then taken to a local production company to get
> it copied to VHS as my machine was down. The editor remarked on
> the wonderful sharpness of DV! I did not spoil her day by
> telling her it had gone through BVU SP -- twice!<G>
>
Very funny. I think I would see the diference, but you never know.
I had two BVU-800s and used to edit with them. I still keep one
of them for the occaisional 3/4" tape that comes in. Those were
not SP and were fuzzy as hell, I'm sure 3/4" SP was much better.

> Another program was shot and edited entirely on BVU SP but I had
> a sale to a European cable company provided I could give them a
> master on Beta SP. My agent said to dump the BVU footage to beta
> and that they'd never know the difference. He was right!<VBG>
>
That happens all the time. Most of the time the engineering folks
don't really look at the content, they mostly look at sync levels,
timing, and such. It's just more convenient if you give it to them in
their chosen format.

David

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

> I thought it was only the BVU870 and BVU920 that had the DT
> heads??

The BVU 970 U-maticSP editor also has DT heads. The BVU 970 is a rare
machine. Call it a collector's item.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

"Larry Jandro" <usenet1@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94E7CA81B39Blarryathome@68.6.19.6...
> Waiving the right to remain silent, "david.mccall"
> <david.mccallUNDERLINE@comcast.net> said:
>
> > As far as I know, the VO series 3/4" do not edit, but some can
> > record
>
> The VO-9800 and 9850 are editors.
>
That's right. Thanks Larry

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

The message <xwroc.78017$kh4.4501931@attbi_s52>
from "david.mccall" <david.mccallUNDERLINE@comcast.net> contains these words:


the BVU-850 and BVU-950 had DT heads, as do
> the PVW-2650 and BVW-75 beta decks

Not so I'm afraid. The BVU850 is not DT. I have one and it is a plain SP
edit machine.

--
Robin. 0)
Isle of Wight. UK.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production (More info?)

"david.mccall" <david.mccallUNDERLINE@comcast.net> wrote in
news:FMwoc.79005$kh4.4597576@attbi_s52:

> Where might that be? I think many of us do what we have to
> to make a buck.

About 100 miles south of the top of mainland Scotland. Or about
600 miles north of London if you are coming up hill!

Derry