What's new

DVD ETC. MAGAZINE ASKS: DVD versus D-VHS? (1 Viewer)

John Knowles

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 17, 1999
Messages
174
Location
Twin Cities, MN
Real Name
John
For me, I'd offer no argument that DTheater/DVHS is a superior viewing experience to DVD--I think that's a given. As much as I like to see a superior format succeed, I just can't get excited about it since it's tape. Even if you don't think DVHS tape is realistically prone to deterioration, it only takes a malfunctioning load mechanism on a deck to destroy a $30-40 movie. Also, out of the entire list quoted above of now-released or upcoming titles, there were maybe 2-3 I'd think of buying (Sound of Music? Does this mean Fox has done a new transfer or is this a HD version of the same problem one that we have on DVD?) and not all the studios are even supporting it. It's hard enough getting them to release less mainstream titles on DVD, let alone a niche format like DVHS.

As an owner of a HD set, I want a HD format as much as anyone, but so far, this isn't cutting it for me.
 

DaveN

Grip
Joined
Sep 17, 2001
Messages
18
I will be staying with my DVD setup until HD-DVD comes out. Even then, I will not replace my DVD's but will add on with the new format.

In spite of the obvious improvement in video quality, I firmly believe that D-VHS will not take off with the American Public. The reason is that people must be compelled to change formats. DVD took off like wildfire because there was pent-up demand to own and watch movies at home....AND...There was a huge jump in quality and durability over the existing format (VHS).

It would seem reasonable to use the same test on the D-VHS question.

Is there pent-up demand for quality movie ownership and home viewing? Not really. DVD pricing and availability enables most families to own a nice collection.

Is there a huge jump in quality and durability from DVD to D-VHS? Picture quality? Absolutely. But is it the night-and-day difference like VHS to DVD? Not really. Folks like us appreciate it but I doubt that the average consumer will see enough of a difference to warrant the trauma of a format change. Couple that with the not-too-distant memories of eaten or stretched video tapes, and you have a recipe for a non-event.

It is the apathy (or relative satisfaction) of Joe Sixpack that will doom D-VHS. That being said, D-VHS really does produce a great picture. It really makes me antsy for HD-DVD!

David
 

Seth_S

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 12, 2001
Messages
335
No matter how high the resolution is, a bad film will continue being a bad film.

For the same reason that it's hard to get excited about SCAD, it's difficult to become enthusiastic about D-VHS because of the non-existent selection of titles. On Troy LaMont's list of available/coming soon D-VHS titles, there are maybe 2 films that I would buy. To put it simply, I'm not going to buy a film I don't like just to be able to enjoy it in High Definition. One of the reasons I bought a DVD player back in 1998, was because of the number of great films available at the time (Vertigo, Psycho and Amadeus), and the number planned to come out. Until something other than predominantly 2 star action films are released on D-VHS, I have no interest in the format.
 

AndrewA

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 2, 2000
Messages
58
I've seen first hand the quality of D-VHS through in-store demos, I've seen first hand the quality of HD broadcast through HBO-HD and OTA HD broadcasts through my HDTV and my STB, they are impressive and I love the HD format.

However I will not consider buying D-VHS over DVD's at this time. Since the inception of the VCR the only tapes I ever bought were of Starwars and Indiana Jones. Contrast that to DVD's I have over 450 in my collection.

For me tapes are just bulky and the quality degrades after multiple viewing, I can't stand watching the six tapes I still own in my Home Theater, and I've disconnected my VCR from my rack since I've used it only for recording TV programs, but with the purchase of TIVO, I have no need for any tape based media.

I see D-VHS as three step forward and two back. I see DVD's, with it's inherent properties for chapter stops, quick browsing, and menu driven programming, as an equal in the broader sense with D-VHS, regardless of the superior picture quality that D-VHS provides at the first viewings, after a few donzen, pq starts going...

Andrew
 

Eric_R_C

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
254
FWIW, D-Theater VHS is important in many ways.

1) It is, without a doubt, the best home-video version of the movies you can have, in terms of video and audio. Nothing except studio masters comes close (and there's little discernible difference between those.)

2) For those of you putting it down as a niche product, remember that DVD's (with all their wonderful features ) evolved from laserdisc (not VHS). It's rare to have a truly evolutionary product, and sometimes we have to support the in-between technology (though I am certainly not predicting a short life for this format.) The wonderful thing about D-Theater is that...

3) It raises the bar for HD-DVD. DVD's suffer from the committee effect (everyone puts in their two bits, not all standards are achieved equally, there are many hardward/software incompatibilities.) D-Theater was made to be the best video presentation possible, with no unnecessary compromises. For HD-DVD to be truly accepted, all involved really need to get serious about good transfers, accurate recordings, and providing the best features possible. You can put in any D-Theater tape, and it plays, everytime. Now, I love the extra stuff (commentaries, documentaries, etc.), but sometimes I just want to watch the movie. This is the pinnacle and epitome of home theater for some years to come.

This is not to say that DVD is worthless, as it does have many advantages. But to condemn D-Theater completely due to its medium is ridiculous. I've recently purchased a laserdisc player and the Star Wars Definitive Collection laserdisc set so that I can watch the unaltered Star Wars trilogy in the best possible medium. Yes, the discs are unwieldy, but the picture and audio are the best that can be had (those with bootleg DVD's are most assuredly watching copies of these LD's. I like having the "masters.")
I like sitting in my home theater and watching this film in its "superior" format. Anything else is gravy.

A final note: Recordability is another important point to many people, including myself. Many consumer burners are still difficult to use beyond simple features, and we have three competing (and largely incompatible) DVD-RW standards. This is unacceptable, and is a perfect example of point number three. Market share has become more important than presentation. My VCR's will do me fine for some time. Any tape I put in them will work, and I can take that tape to anyone else's VCR and be assured that they can watch it. This is how it should be. This is what HD-DVD should be. It certainly has the potential. It's up to the committees...
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2002
Messages
31


I don't think anybody is disputing the fact that HD-VHS has higher picture quality, at least at first, than DVD. So it doesn't matter that DVDs were mastered off of tapes. The problems people have with tapes are 1) they degrade over multiple viewings, and 2) they are a less convenient medium for watching (ie, no instant skip to chapter stops, etc). Neither of these are relevant to where the masters came from, so I don't see why it is important that DVDs are mastered from tape. The fact that tape is seen to be the best medium for storing masters has nothing to do with whether or not it is an acceptable medium for home theater.

TiVo has nothing to do with tape. It stores the data on hard drives. If it used tape it wouldn't have most of the advantages that tivo has, which are instant easy access to any of the recorded programs, pause/rewind live tv, etc. Without the random access features of hard drives, these features would not be possible.
 

Troy LaMont

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
849
based said:
As I stated in another thread on this issue, the fact that the studios would allow their multi-million dollar productions to be stored on what you said is 'the best medium..' and for consumers to knock this format for home use is truly ironic and a slap in the face to the studios. You're saying to me (and them) that 'although you (the studios) find tape to be the best of the best when it comes to the preseveration of quality in the format, I won't use it because it's not convenient for me'!
Convenience is putting a movie in and pressing play and D-Theater/D-VHS has that. If you have to take a break, press pause, it's that simple. So what if if takes 12 seconds longer to go to the next chapter. You can't even skip, rewind, pause or start over a movie in the theater. Those people who put convenience before quality of the presentation aren't after the true home theater experience and have lost focus on what matters most, quality presentation of the highest level.
Also to add, my primary reason for getting into home theater was to reproduce, as closely as possible, the actual theater experience visually and sonically. D-Theater/D-VHS does this 100 fold vs. DVD, IMO regardless of whether it's tape or not.
Two new software announcements;
  • Spy Game - 11/19/02
  • Bone Collector - 11/19/02
Troy
 

Neil Joseph

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 16, 1998
Messages
8,332
Real Name
Neil Joseph
I will keep my comments short.

One of the things I first loved about DVD when it became available was the ability to jump to chapters immediately, something not at all possible with D-VHS. I would never consider a D-VHS unit as a part of my own HT but will wait patiently until HDVD comes along.
 

Troy LaMont

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
849
Oh, also the quality of D-Theater/D-VHS movies has been consistently high in comparison to even current DVD trends. That's a big plus for me as well because I don't like the "wait and guess what the transfer is going to look like" game with DVDs. It's a shame, because even after 5 years of pressing, we still get sub-par picture quality on new releases.:confused:
Because it's HD, it's already mastered at the current highest standards and there's no downconverting neccessary. Which eliminates most of the anomalies associated with DVDs (extensive MPEG artifacts, digital noise, EE, etc).
Color and black levels are consistently accurate and stable across the board as well with D-Theater/D-VHS.
D-Theater isn't perfect by any means but it's much better than DVD for me.
Troy
 

Brian Perry

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 6, 1999
Messages
2,807
The audio quality is on par with or beats most DVDs (based on my personal experience, experiences with other forum members and some additional Webzine, magazine reviews).
I don't see how "beats" would be possible if we're talking about the same DD or DTS 5.1 tracks (unless the D-VHS tracks are the laserdisc mixes that seem to have many fans).
 

Eric_R_C

Second Unit
Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
254
Brian, D-VHS "beats" DVD soundtracks because almost every single tape has been recorded at 576 kbps, or at least 500+. D-VHS carries more bandwidth than HDTV, and substantionally more than DVD will ever be capable of. It is because of this bandwidth than the video is so fantastic, because the level of compression is ridiculously low, and the black levels are astounding.
 

Brian-W

Screenwriter
Joined
Feb 8, 1999
Messages
1,149
One of the things I first loved about DVD when it became available was the ability to jump to chapters immediately, something not at all possible with D-VHS.
While not instantaneous like DVD, D-VHS tapes (pre-recorded) do in fact have chapter stops, and hitting the 'chapter forward' button on the remote jumps the movie to the specified chapter.
 

Lars_J

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
200
Troy LaMont wrote:
magnetic based said:
A 100-fold? Surely you are exaggerating... Does D-VHS have 100 times the bandwidth of DVD? Does D-VHS have 100 times the visual detail of DVD, or 100 times audio quality of DVD? Clearly not.
As for my own thoughts on D-VHS vs. DVD:
For me, moving to DVD, DVD offered two major advantages over VHS: 1) Improved video and audio quality, and 2) Interactive and non-linear playback. Personally I think the last point is what makes DVD so special for me, to instantly be able to go to any part of the movie, and to be able to go through menus and watch small videos/featurettes and other interactive content. D-VHS clearly has a video/quality edge, but its linear playback is in my opinion a HUGE step backwards.
Many of you must remember the old times when computer hard-drives were rare, and all data was stored on tape. Would you feel comfortable to move back to that, even if your CPU got a little faster? (Do you want to load a specific program? Hold on, you have to let the tape drive and rewind or fast-forward to the appropriate starting point, and then let it load.) No way...
 

Glenn_Jn

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Messages
160
I've never experienced D-VHS, so a couple of questions to those that have. Do you get multiple audio tracks (commentaries etc)? Do you get other special features like documentaries & featurettes. What about seamless branching for dual version films like The Abyss. What about White Rabbit type features? What about multiple angle features? Surely D-VHS suffers the same GIGO problems that DVD does!
 

Troy LaMont

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
849
Brother Lars,
A 100-fold? Surely you are exaggerating... Does D-VHS have 100 times the bandwidth of DVD? Does D-VHS have 100 times the visual detail of DVD, or 100 times audio quality of DVD? Clearly not.
That wasn't a statement of fact, try not to take those things that clearly aren't, so literal. It was succeded by IMO which means In My Opinion, FYI. But, in case you were interested, D-Theater does have 3 times the bandwidth, 6 times the visual detail and an 80% increase in the encoded audio bitrate.
New title announcement;
  • From Hell
Troy
 

Troy LaMont

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 11, 1999
Messages
849
I've never experienced D-VHS, so a couple of questions to those that have.
  • Do you get multiple audio tracks (commentaries etc)? Yes on multiple audio tracks. Right now the flavors are DD 5.1(EX) and PCM 2.0. DTS has been mentioned but neither software or hardware support it yet. No commentaries as of yet.
  • Do you get other special features like documentaries & featurettes. No.
  • What about seamless branching for dual version films like The Abyss.No.
  • What about White Rabbit type features? No.
  • What about multiple angle features? No.
  • Surely D-VHS suffers the same GIGO problems that DVD does! ? You lost me on this one. What's GIGO?
High definition 1080i video and high quality audio are the only options.
Troy
 

Glenn_Jn

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 14, 2002
Messages
160
Troy thanks for the answers.

GIGO = Garbage In Garbage Out

No matter how good a certain format can reproduce a movie if the master used is bad (scratches etc) it's going to look bad.
 

Rob Tomlin

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2000
Messages
4,506
The tape might look better the first time you play it, but it won't after repeated viewings.
That is an assumption. And just how many repeated viewings would it take before there is any discernable signs of deterioration? 100 viewings? Since this is digital tape, wear should not be a significant factor at all.

D-VHS D-Theater provides the best possible video in true High Definition (exceeding the over the air HD broadcast specs). While I would prefer having HD movies on DVD for the convenience that format offers (especially smaller size) the criticism that D-Theater gets for being a "lowly tape format" isn't at all justified.

I have seen the difference between DVD and D-Theater. The difference is substantial, with D-Theater giving a much more detailed picture and better color fidelity.

If people want to wait another 3 or 4 years for HD-DVD, so be it. But people who want "the best of the best" when it comes to video and audio presentation, and want it "now", D-Theater is definitely the way to go!

Yes, it is an interim solution. Nobody disputes that. Even supporters of D-Theater don't dispute that fact. If we had a choice, we would have HD movies on HD-DVD. Again, since that doesn't exist, D-Theater is the only solution for HD movies. In addition, having the ability to record High Definition programs from over the air is another big advantage of the JVC D-Theater VCR.

Bottom line: if I had to choose between either D-Theater tapes in true High Definition, vs. Anamorphic DVD's, and I had a big screen HDTV (which I do), I would choose D-Theater for its superior video and audio quality. This choice is even more clear for those who are using a projector with a large 100 inch or bigger screen!

Rob Tomlin
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,551
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top