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

[Rob T]

D-VHS is like taking a step backwards to take a step forwards. I'll stick with DVD for now.

 

[Glenn_Jn]

I spend $4 for a blank tape to get my occasionally compromised compositions with superlative image quality

It's a bit more than that isn't it. What about the cost of your player (at least twice that of a decent DVD) and the HD tuner and the subscription to HDHBO etc.

Nobody is denying that HDVHS has better picture quality than DVD. I haven't seen it myself, but the meer fact that it is Hi Def means it will be better. It goes without saying. HD-DVD will be better than DVD. But most of us can't afford to buy into HDVHS right now and the fact that it is tape based just reinforces that. I doubt if I will even buy into HD-DVD when it first comes out (unless the sets sell for less than $500 and there's a decent amount of titles to choose from). The way you talk anybody would think DVD is worse than VHS. Sure some DVD's look bad, but that has more to do with the source material and the equipment you watch it on (very few of my DVD's show EE on my setup) The majority of them, especially newer films and restored films look just fine to me. I'm sure they will look better in HD but that doesn't mean they don't look good now. For the amount of money I spend on DVD's I get a nice looking film, nice extras and some nice packaging to keep them in.

Why don't the HDVHS supporters just accept that the rest of appreciate that it IS better, but would prefer (for one reason or another) to wait until HD is available on DVD. Forcing your point too strongly won't change anybody's mind. In fact it (might) come across as bragging ... maybe.

BTW....92" screen ?? Jeez, do you live in a field or something!!! (just kidding)

 

[Jay Sylvester]

I have a 92" screen, and my theater room is only 18' x 9'. I could never go back to watching a TV; front projection is where it's at if you want that true theater-like presentation. The beauty of it is that it's not as expensive or as difficult to set up as you might think.

When I was watching DVDs on my 32" Wega, I was as happy as a pig in slop. I couldn't imagine movies looking any better. Blow that image up to 92", and it's not so pretty anymore even with high-end playback equipment. Even the best DVD transfers are lacking at that size. Closeups look exceptional, but far shots simply don't have the resolution necessary to resolve detail, making the image look blurry. Bad transfers become unwatchable.

Another argument I see cropping up is in regards to the many options provided by disc technology, such as multiple audio tracks, seamless branching, and instantaneous chapter skips. Commentary tracks? Sometimes interesting, but usually a bore. Multiple languages? I only speak one. As for chapter skips, doesn't anybody just sit down and watch the damn movie anymore? Seamless branching is admittedly cool for alternate cuts such as T2, but not many titles make use of it. Just give me the movie in HD with full bitrate DD (or hopefully DTS someday soon) and I'm happy. I'd trade all of the special features on my Phantom Menace 2-disc set for a clean, EE-free D-VHS version.

Is D-VHS a last-ditch profit machine for JVC so they can make a few more bucks before consumer video on VHS finally goes belly up? Of course. That doesn't really bother me though, because they're giving me a way to record and play back HD now, while the studios and other manufacturers continue to squabble over HD-DVD--which is still years away, no matter what you read or hope for. Recordable HD-DVD is even further off. No way the studios are going to throw away the MASSIVE cash cow that DVD has become by introducing HD-DVD so soon. Assume by some miracle that HD-DVD reaches shelves by the end of 2003; the first decks will cost $1500 easy, and the software will be in the $30-$40 range. And who will get the ball rolling? All of the enthusiasts who bought into D-VHS, the same folks that the D-VHS detractors are laying into now for their enthusiasm over a new format with superior performance.

Let the masses have their shiny 5" discs, and let the enthusiasts have their film-quality recordings. On tape, if necessary. And when HD-DVD finally arrives, as long as the studios and manufacturers get it right with 1080p and 24/96 MLP, we enthusiasts will gladly snatch up the decks and the discs.

This whole debate is silly. DVD vs D-VHS? They're not even competing formats. They're different technologies with different consumers in mind. Different capabilities and different price points for consumers with different priorities.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I have always looked at any new format that comes out. And have no trouble spending the money on the next best thing. I have bought LP's, Cassettes, VHS, Laser Disc, DAT, CD, DVD and SACD. Now that we have had DVD with alot of extra's and the ability to have dual digital audio formats. Why would I go back to a format that rely's on a flawed tape media? But the fact that D-VHS is on tape is not the only reason I will not be purchasing D-VHS. There is no choices with D-VHS, meaning you get what ever the studio gives you! Also the fact that Dolby Digital is the only choice for digital surround sound. Then paying $1000 for a machine using a tape format is a bit much! Then there is the lack of D-VHS material and the fact that it is not easy to find D-VHS movies. There are not many places to buy D-VHS movies and I have not even seen the blanks for D-VHS anywhere. The movies might be mastered off tape but I feel there is a differance between the professional comercial masters and what we consumers are given. A standard D-VHS that consumers buy will not stand up to heavy use. Just like standard VHS tape did not. D-VHS is not like DVD, if you spill something on DVD it can be cleaned. If you spill somthing on a D-VHS tape then, oh well that is aprox. $50 down the toiltet. And what if that is a video that you can not replace? I feel the only reason D-VHS was offered at all was to limit our choices and to eliminate piracy. DVD is not a secure format. The studios are trying to find a way to keep piracy of there movies and music from happening. I agree that they should have a secure media to market to the public. IMHO taking choices away from the consumer is not the way to go. I will wait for HD-DVD to come out and I hope that they will still include DTS & DD tracks on the HD-DVD as well.

 

[Mark_Mac]

In fact it (might) come across as bragging ... maybe.

With all the negative comments on DVHS you might think some are jealous....I hope not. DVHS has been out for awhile...its just when Hollywood started to actually release HD movies is when this all started. I think it was more that people were excited that Hollywood actually released something to the public in HD that we could purchase. Most complaints against DVD are not against the medium....its what hollywood has done with it.

 

[Jerome Saliga]

The way you talk anybody would think DVD is worse than VHS. Sure some DVD's look bad, but that has more to do with the source material and the equipment you watch it on (very few of my DVD's show EE on my setup) The majority of them, especially newer films and restored films look just fine to me.

That's a fair point. Naturally, the experience is relative to your setup. I agree that the problems with DVD have less to do with the format per se as a storage medium and has more to do with the mastering and video standard used. In addition, the size of your screen and your seating distance from it has a lot to do with perceived image quality. The best looking DVDs in my collection look pretty good on my 50" Toshiba widescreen RPTV. High definition still looks considerably better on that set but the differences are not quite so stark with average recorded HD material from SAT. D-Theater is a different story. On the other hand, DVD does not scale so well to the very large screen in my front projection setup.

I can't say that I agree with you on newer DVD releases. Up until a couple of months ago (when my DVD buying tapered off considerably) I was still buying new releases that disappointed me where the image was concerned. I have gotten to the point where DVD watching is largely relegated to my 50" RPTV where it can look its best. My projector is fed a steady diet of HDTV from the D-VHS deck.

--Jerome

 

[VicRuiz]

Quote:

Why is it that people insist on propagating misleading information? Are they afraid their case is weak otherwise, or are they just too lazy to do the research and quote the proper figures instead of just repeating what they hear?
If you want your case to be credible you better use accurate data. The current price of the deck is $750 and the average movie costs $25, NOT $1000 and $50!

 

[Dave Moritz]

Please tell me then if your kid or yourself accedently spills a beer or soda on a D-VHS tape. And the luqiud gets into the cassette, how are you going to clean the media? Do you not think that this will not affect the playback in anyway? Do you not think that the machine could grab the sticky tape and eat it? Thus destroying the tape basically! Disc's can be cleaned and wiped off, you can not say the same for tape unless the outside of the cassette is the only thing affected. Why is it as soon as anything negative is said about something. Some people act like they are personaly being attact if they bought the item in question? This is the point of this forum, for people to express there veiws and opinions. And yes information is based on fact and not always on opinion. It was never stated that D-VHS did not provide a good picture or good sound. But what I think others are saying is that tape is to delicate to provide long term relyable playback. I have a DAT player and some of the tapes are loosing there time code. And these DAT tapes are not heavily played. I can not beleive that D-VHS will be any different. This may be a debate that may never be agreed apon, just like the DTS vs DD debate. Just one last thing, if someone nocked 8 track? Would there be people here that would act offended of the statements? Just a thought.

 

[Dave Moritz]

Ok as far as the price of the tapes, for some reason I thought I rememered the price being $50 :b. My prices are from dvhsmovieguide.com.

Backdraft Price: $39.99
Behind Enemy Lines Price: $31.99
Big Momma’s House Price: $31.99
Bikini Destinations: On Location In Lake Powell With TheBikiniNetwork.com Price: $29.95
Bikini Destinations: On Location The Bahamas Price: $29.95
Don’t Say A Word Price: $31.99
End Of Days Price: $39.99
Entrapment Price: $31.99
Fight Club
Price: $31.99
GalaxyQuest
Price: $39.99
Haunting, The - 1999
Price: $39.99
Independence Day
Price: $31.99
Men Of Honor
Price: $31.99
Peacemaker, The
Price: $39.99
Searching For Beauty: Bikini Destinations
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 1: Naples, the Amalfi Coast, Rome)
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 2: Venice, Genoa, Italian Riviera)
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 3: Florence, Italian hill towns)
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 4: Paris, Provence)
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 5: London, Out of London)
Price: $29.95
Smart Travels: Europe (Tape 6: Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark)
Price: $29.95
Terminator 2: Judgment Day
Price: $31.99
U-571
Price: $39.99
War On Terrorism, The (Reports 1 Through 3)
Price: $29.95
X-Men
Price: $31.99

I live in Southern California and the main D-VHS unit I have seen in the stores. Is a mitsubishi and they are asking $999, basically $1000 especially after taxes. I have not seen any prerecorded D-VHS tapes in any stores that I have been in. And I have yet to see blank D-VHS tapes as well. I have also been in a few big HT stores from Ultimate Electronics to Good Guys to Audio Concepts. And no one I have been into has D-VHS set up to demo. HD-Satalite is setup in alot of places. HD-VHS is not easy to see set up anywhere. Maybe this is different where some of you live but not were I do.

 

[Jay Sylvester]

I think they should have called this debate "DVD vs D-Theater," because D-VHS is really a generic term. D-VHS decks like the Mitsubishi are useless for playing back prerecorded D-Theater tapes because they aren't compatible with the format. Only the JVC model supports prerecorded D-Theater tapes.

In chain stores like Best Buy and Circuit City, the JVC deck sells for $999, but you can easily find it online for $750. I was checking one out at Best Buy yesterday, and compared to the cheap construction of standard VCRs, this thing is built like a champ. Seems like a solid unit. I will concede that it is difficult to find the D-Theater tapes for sale anywhere except on the net and in big cities. I haven't seen any yet either.

I'll admit that the longevity of tape is a concern for me. When I was a kid, all the other kids were saving up for boomboxes and buying tapes. I was holding out for a CD player. When I was 13, I finally managed to get the money together for a CD player; it was a Technics 5-disc carousel. I hooked it up to an old receiver and speaker set my mom had stored in the attic, and it was great. I knew that my patience had paid off.

I sometimes think I should exercise the same patience with D-VHS and HD-DVD, but I have more money now than when I was 13, and I'd rather enjoy what's available than wait for The Next Big ThingTM. I have A/V equipment that far exceeds what DVD is capable of, so I'm hungry for something that will push my system to its limit. D-Theater is the best thing out there at the moment for this purpose, so I'll take it, despite its inherent risks and flaws.

 

[Eric_R_C]

Dave Moritz

taking choices away from the consumer is not the way to go

At what point were you told that you CAN'T continue buying DVD's? D-VHS IS ANOTHER CHOICE!!! Apparently, you are CHOOSING not to buy into it, and that's fine, but don't act like something's been taken away from you. I wanted the original, unaltered Star Wars trilogy in the best video/audio format possible, so I bought an LD player and the Star Wars Definitive Collection. Big disks?..yes, Lots of flipping?...yes. Great picture and sound?...yes.
I'm not trying to say that your comments aren't worthy, but they aren't necessarily the death-knell for D-VHS either. You have a very strong opinion towards D-VHS. Fine, but every format has advantages and disadvantages. For good video,sound, and supplements (of which I am a great fan,) DVD reigns. For the Ultimate watching/listening home theater experience, D-VHS reigns. It depends on what your priorities are.
I'll tell you this much, you better thank the home theater gods that D-VHS is here. If/when HD-DVD comes out, you may get the "choice" of MPEG-4 video! How would you like that? (Keep in mind that Beta was technically better than VHS, but this didn't help in market share.) What would you choose then? D-VHS will certainly keep HD-DVD honest, and hold it to a much higher standard than DVD would. For all of DVD's advantages, there are still many poor decisions and inconsistencies being made concerning content and transfers. Look at the whole ET debacle!
Now, before you think I'm trashing DVD, please realize I'm spending way more on it than my wife would care to know. However, it can be improved. If I could afford a D-VHS deck, I'd buy it in a heartbeat (along with a projector, etc.) My choices are limited only by my budget. Until then, I'll do DVD on my TV. In all actuality, I'd do both formats, for supplements and great video. Think about it--how many times do you invite your friends over to listen to the Fight Club commentaries? Sometimes, we just want to watch the movie!

 

[VicRuiz]

No wonder, you're quoting full retail prices from the "official" website. Who pays full retail (or MSRP) price on anything nowadays? Just as with DVDs, there are other retailers that will have the items at substantially lower prices. These are the prices from www.bestprices.com :
Terminator 2 $22.11
Behind Enemy Lines $24.03
Big Momma's House $24.03
Don't Say a Word $24.03
Entrapment $24.03
Fight Club $24.03
Men of Honor $24.03
X-Men $24.03
Backdraft $33.25
End of Days $33.25
Galaxy Quest $33.25
The Haunting $33.25
The Peacemaker $33.25
U-571 $33.25
As for the player, you can now get the JVC deck for $749.00.

 

[Bob Black]

Anytime there is a discussion on DVHS, the same handful of people who have bought into the format swarm to repeatedly defend their purchase and disparage DVD.

I have a high-end system like many of those who have purchased D-Theater. But I do not see any reason to purchase a DVHS deck at all! Here are the reasons:

1. TAPE FORMAT - 'Nuff said! I haven't owned tapes for 15 years now. It was LD and then DVD for me. I am a collector of pre-recorded movies. I see no use in recording movies from HBO because I own over 1100 (and growing) pre-recorded movies on DVD! I want the film with the original packaging, supplemental materials, commentaries, etc. Tape wears, degrades, collects internal dust, breaks inside the cassette, etc. DVD is compatible with CD's and computers, offers instant-access to scenes, and offers many important features and supplemental material not found on DVHS!

2. TITLE AVAILABILITY - In trying to make his argument for this format, a member listed the titles available and announced for DVHS. There were about 18 titles available now, and not all of those were even feature films! Was that list supposed to blow our socks off? This format has been out for over a year now, and this is what they offer for pre-recorded HD media? Warner Brothers, alone, had more titles available on DVD in its initial roll-out of the format (and the titles were a better offering than U571 and Backdraft!)

3. PRICE - Obviously, the cost for a D-Theater deck is considerably more than even a high-end, progressive scan DVD player. And pre-recorded media (what few titles there are available) are about twice as much as DVDs. Despite the recent price drop, expecting even the most die-hard videophiles to rush out and buy a tape-based format with no worthwhile titles available is inane.

4. QUALITY - The selling point of the new format - improved picture and sound quality! I have seen demonstrations at my local Tweeter AND at Environmental Technology Center (where I purchased my CRT projector and other gear) and have seen head-to-head comparisons of the two formats. Is the picture an improvement over DVD? Of course it is, but I don't find the improvement as dramatic as others have alleged! Comparing the two versions of Terminator 2 (which, by the way, is about the only decent title even available on DVHS) shows very subtle differences AT BEST on the CRT system I viewed.

A member here was comparing screenshots of "The Right Stuff" - one from the DVD release and the other taped from HD-HBO with DVHS - and showed the sharper details on the tape format. He failed to mention that "The Right Stuff" DVD was released by Warner in the first year of the DVD format! Dramatic improvements in DVD have advanced the format considerably over the past six years. Try comparing current DVD releases such as "Lord Of The Rings", "The Matrix", "The Fifth Element", "Die Hard", "Speed" - you'll be hard-pressed to find dramatic differences in current releases!

Also, pro-DVHS members like to discuss poorly-mastered DVDs in comparison to D-Theater titles which are stellar. If there were over 10,000 titles available on DVHS rather than 18, I'm sure we could find some problems with certain releases on that format as well! If the format ever went mainstream like DVD (FAT CHANCE) I'm sure you would see just as many poorly-mastered titles on DVHS as well!


FINAL THOUGHTS - If you are looking for a format allowing you to record HD programming from television, I guess DVHS is worthwhile. For any other reason, I see no reason to purchase the format. There are new reports that claim HD-DVD could arrive as early as 2003! Even if this is an optimistic report, HD-DVD is certainly on the near horizon! And DVD quality on my CRT system is breathtaking! I can hardly wait for "Spiderman", "Star Wars Episode 2" and "Lord Of The Rings Director's Cut"! Or I could run out & buy a DVHS deck instead and show my eager guests "Backdraft" and "U571" 37 times...

 

[Jerome Saliga]

Quote:

That's probably because one doesn't have to look very long and hard to find a poorly mastered DVD. I won't deny the fact that there are a lot of good looking DVDs to be had. Heck, I probably own most of the discs the majority of videophiles consider to be of reference quality. I can still watch and enjoy them on my projector. But HD looks better. HD has more visual detail, HD has better dynamic range, HD has richer colors, and HD is more film like. This is all well established fact but if it helps I will add the words "In my opinion" so as not to offend the sensitivities of people who feel threatened by high definition in general and for D-VHS haters in particular.
The big problem I have with DVD is the uneven quality found in many current releases. Some really impress such as Training Day and the Pledge. Others are major disappointments, like Tombstone Vista Series and The Phantom Menace. Others are complete disasters like The Mothman Prophecies. Supposing for a moment that every DVD the studios cranked out had the benefit of the best mastering and authoring available, EE was a distant memory, filtering was a thing of the past, noise floor was no longer an issue, and high bitrates were assured: I would still prefer a 1080i version. 720 x 480 cannot compete with 1920 x 1080 where the most accurate representation possible of film is a goal.
So far my experience with HD on SAT has been very even and predictable where image quality is concered. I know in advance of a viewing that it is going to look very good. I don't have to refer to a dozen review sites on the web to get a sense of what the PQ will be. So at the very least HD takes all the guess work out of it for me and that is something I place a great deal of value on. If there would be one thing I would change it would be HBO's policy on cropping. If Showtime can air all of its HD content OAR so can HBO.
I think whatever useful discussion this thread might have offered has probably already occured. Both camps are firmly entrenched in their positions (myself included) and aren't likely to find the other side's arguments to be very persuasive.
--Jerome

 

[Jason Harbaugh]

Mark_Mac,

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. Can it work in the same way that a dvd drive does in a pc if you send it to a projector using custom resolutions and refresh rates?

Seth_S,

Just so I'm clear, when I meant HTPC I meant that I use that as my player/scaler to go out to my front projector and not just to watch it on a pc monitor. I agree with the rest of your comments especially those on college students. 0.00001% will ever connect a D-VHS deck to their pc but if their pc comes preinstalled with a DVD drive or in the future, an HD-DVD drive then they will more times than not go out and purchase some movies.

 

[Brian-W]

The same could be said about the people who come in to trash the format because it's tape. Don't be a hypocrite Bob, you've slammed D-VHS a number of times in other topics about it.
And none of the D-VHS proponents are slamming DVD and suggesting to go to a tape format. We're saying why deny yourself a phenomenal picture just because you have issues with the medium it's stored on. Additionally, no one (including my friend who has a library in excess of 1,000 tapes) is abandoning DVD. But when it comes time to view a movie, and you have an optical 480p version vs. a 1080i (or 720p in some instances), which would you choose?
If I'm demoing my theater, I may throw in the DVD just to jump around quickly. But when watching a movie where I'm not always pressing the chapter skip button, tape is more than satisfactory.

 

[Eric_R_C]

AMEN, Brian!

 

[Mark_Mac]

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. Can it work in the same way that a dvd drive does in a pc if you send it to a projector using custom resolutions and refresh rates?

I have my DVHS connected to a hardware HDTV card called MYHD. It has multiple resolutions to choose from but I use 1920x1080i. This card is awesome, besides being able to record and playback HD, it can also scale DVD files to 1920x1080.

 

[Lars_J]

Mark_Mac,
Thanks for posting those comparison shots. The Gladiator difference is indeed amazing, but the Fellowship of the Ring difference is much more subtle. IMO. (I suspect part of the reason is that Gladiator was pan'n'scanned for HD 16x9, while FOTR was not, so the vertical resolution difference doesn't seem to be as great)

 

[John Berggren]

DVHS is a superior video format to DVD. Although it is on a tape based format, the video is markedly superior - HD quality. The only failing of DVHS is content. There are very few titles available, and of them, very few are excellent films.

If there were more studio support for DVHS I could be more excited for it. Currently I own one film - Terminator 2. I have not seen the 2 others that I'd like (X-men and Fight Club) at B&M stores. There are many titles that could make me a happy DVHS supporter that are not announced. Star Wars alone would make me thrilled to have my DVHS player.

Another problem is the inability to record an HD stream. Currently I have Time Warner cable, and they use a Scientific Atlanta 3100HD Cable box for passing the HD signal. Unfortunately, this box does not have a firewire (IEEE) output. This output is required for HD recording to the JVC DVHS player. Until which time as it's available, I had a really nice VCR with only one film that fully takes advantage.

Therefore, although DVHS is superior, DVD is still better. DVD offers me a wealth of titles that can't be beat. Additionally, the optical format and bonus features will keep me coming back. I hope the day when the HD-DVD standard comes along will be sooner rather than later.

John Berggren