#1  
07-12-2024, 05:19 AM
npbrown82 npbrown82 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 8
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Hi All - Long time listener, first-ish time caller (although admittedly I have a few posts over the years). Looking for input from the community:

I'm working on a comprehensive video project putting various mid to high-end JVC VCRs that I rebuild and sell in a head-to-head comparison. Why JVC? I run a business and mainly sell JVC models. It's what my customers want, and I commonly get the question: what is best for me? I'm from the great state of Missouri, the "show me state," so I'm on a mission to show, not just tell. This is my mission: show how these VCRs perform in direct head-to-heads.

To ensure the accuracy and reliability of this project, I am seeking peer review and input from the community. And not just now, but throughout the process. Here's an overview of my approach and considerations:

Scope and Purpose:

Objective: Provide an accurate, unbiased comparison of video and audio quality across different JVC VCR models, focusing on key performance metrics.
Audience: People looking to digitize, playback, and archive their old VHS tapes.

Selected VCR Models: JVC SR-VS30U, HR-DVS3U, HR-S7600U, HR-S9500U, HR-S9600U, HR-S9800U, HR-S9900U, HR-S9911U, HR-S3900U, SR-101US, HR-S3800U, HR-S3600U, HR-S5900U. I also hope to include a Panasonic AG-1980P since it's often referred to as the "king of VCRs" (although what a nightmare to work on...). Why these models? These are the models my customers ask for, and I have.

Condition: All VCRs will be in optimal working condition, with documented repair histories.

Test Material:

Test Tape: A family VHS tape from 1993 with a variety of scenes (day, night, dusk, water, skies, storms, CU of people, scenic vistas, motion, still - also just the best of the Western United States on a family trip I took growing up). This type of tape is representative of what many customers are looking to digitize old family tapes. I will also compare bars and tone, and an alignment tape I use. For this specific video I won't do commercial tapes due to copyright, although I am a former commercial producer from the ad agency DDB and I have footage of mine shot on many formats including 35mm and Super 16MM, along with Red Digital Cinema.

Consistency: Same set of tapes for all tests to minimize variability. For example, I will use the exact physical tape from summer 1993 for all tests, strategically selecting scenes that put a VCR through its paces.

Testing Environment:
  • Capture Device: Blackmagic Intensity Shuttle via S-Video (I know, I know this is old...but I've used it for years for testing). The key here is CONSISTENCY in terms of a capture test across all tests. I don't want to introduce other variables. FYI, many of my customers use Elgator's solution readily available on Amazon. There is a least common demoniator factor that I ust consider.
  • Connections: High-quality S-Video and RCA cables.
  • Settings: Consistent capture settings across all tests. I'm using DV50 as my capture codec, but open to other suggestions. 25 years ago I was all about Digital Betacam and DVCPRO50, so it's a format I'm familiar with and I personally used it to great success using Hybrid for deinterlacing and Topaz AI Video for upres to 1920x1080

Testing Process:
  • Environment Control: Controlled environment free from electromagnetic interference and other variables.

Data Analysis:
  • Video Quality: I am considering a vectorscope, but there are some things I need to figure out on workflow here (showing analogue scope in sync with playback).
  • Video Quality Part 2: I will likely post in original deinterlaced format but considering deinterlaced examples using Hybrid, which I just discovered for excellent de-interlace capabilities.
  • Audio Quality: Evaluating audio clarity, noise levels, and fidelity using audio analysis software. (I'm amazed by the line noise VCRs put out from model to model. All can be fixed in post, but it's interesting to discover.)
  • Documentation and Presentation:

Visual Comparisons: Side-by-side video comparisons. I will need to test the best way to do this in editing.

Audio Comparisons: Audio samples and visual representations like spectrograms. These VCRs I've found really vary, especially around signal-to-noise ratio and sometimes just a "hum". All of these things can be corrected in post, but it's good to know.
Metrics: Quantifiable metrics such as signal-to-noise ratio, color accuracy percentages, and sharpness scores.

Scientific Method Rigor:
  • Control Variables: Ensure all variables, except the VCR model, are controlled.
  • Randomization: Randomize the order of VCR testing to minimize bias.
  • Blinding: Use blinding techniques for unbiased result analysis.
  • Repeatability: Detailed documentation for future repeatability.

Additional Considerations:
  • Footage Types: Indoor (low light, artificial lighting), outdoor (bright sunlight, mixed lighting), high motion (action scenes), low motion (static shots), colorful scenes (vibrant colors, skin tones).
  • Test Patterns and Reference Clips: Standard test patterns or color bars for baseline measurements. BTW, I have numerous test patterns I use, which will be included in this test.

Request for Input:
I am looking for suggestions and feedback on this approach from the community. Are there any additional factors I should consider? I am very open to all feedback. Any specific testing methods or tools you recommend? Your insights will be invaluable to ensure this project meets the highest standards and really is meaingful.

Thank you in advance for your help!

PS This may be a "MVP" of something like this. Right now I am laser focused on the needs of my customers, however I thought may others on this form may be posted on seeing head-to heads as they consider the many options out there.

Last edited by npbrown82; 07-12-2024 at 05:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
07-12-2024, 12:34 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,465
Thanked 2,624 Times in 2,233 Posts
Welcome back.

Blinding has no place here, not useful. You need to know deck weaknesses before going in. It needs to be pointed out, so it's not overlooked. Being oblivious is too often caused from blinding, but it reveals itself at a later time ("I didn't see that then!"). You need a wide understanding of what you're seeing and hearing. It only colors opinion if you're not scientific. Those are the tests you run for low-knowledge morons, not researchers, not potential buyers of gear.

Gravity takes a toll on VCRs over time. Realignments are needed. To me, this is a gaping hole in what I'm reading above. Scoping will help, but it's not necessary. In fact, sometimes the scope isn't accurate to what you'll see with yuor own eyes. There is some art to perfect tracking ranges beyond mere SP.

When it comes to VHS tests, you need nth gen lossy tapes. Never use retail tapes, as those are often augmented by anti-copy, and were often not created by recording (but rather the contact duplication method). A deck quickly underperforms when LP/SLP/EP or any quality loss due to signal or tape condition. A "good" deck can quickly be reveal as a POS deck.

Otherwise, yes, basic stuff I see here: variations in color, exposure, audio.

But you need to address and understand concepts, not hide them with "blinding", such as a linear vs. HiFi, mono vs. stereo, TBC vs. no TBC (and why rarerly a TBC sometimes amplifies damage), etc. You cannot treat everything the same, not as if all are equal quality. And you should also point out what precisely the test is showing. Otherwise you'll get truly stupid opinions, based on criteria not in the test. But also have an open-ended portion, to note anything not in the questions. You don't want leading questions, but you also don't want meandering thoughts (or even ignorance).

Just as an example, if a sample clip is of babes at a beach, that clip will both be "better" and yet also not truly paid attention to (meandering thoughts). Yes, both by men and women, though not necessarily for the same reasons. The same is true of "cute kids/babies", scenic shots, etc. It's so easy to create bad samples due to content. And yet, if you make it purposely boring, not engaging, you also will not extract opinions needed. So you have to be careful with chosen sample videos.

It's too easy to have content and tape condition color deck performance. So all must be considered.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #3  
07-12-2024, 02:41 PM
npbrown82 npbrown82 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 8
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Thanks your reply. I want to make sure I'm understanding what you are suggesting, so I have bulletted out your points for your review. Does the below bullets capture it? Just want to understand your input fully. Thanks again!

Importance of Recognizing Weaknesses: Emphasize the importance of understanding the weaknesses of VCR decks,rather than "blinding" oneself to them. Being unaware of these weaknesses can lead to problems later on. A wide understanding and scientific approach are necessary, not superficial tests for novices.

Gravity Effects and Realignments: Over time, VCRs are affected by gravity, requiring realignments. Scoping can help but isn't always necessary or accurate.

Tape Selection for Tests: For VHS tests, use nth generation lossy tapes, not retail tapes, due to anti-copy measures and differences in creation methods. Poor-quality tapes can quickly reveal a deck's weaknesses.

Conceptual Understanding: It's crucial to understand and address concepts like linear vs. HiFi, mono vs. stereo, and TBC vs. no TBC. Tests should clearly show what they are meant to demonstrate.

Sample Clips: Choosing sample clips is important. Engaging content can distract from the test's purpose, while boring content might not yield useful opinions. Balance is key.

Comprehensive Evaluation: All factors, including content and tape condition, must be considered to avoid biased results.

Thanks again!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
07-12-2024, 02:43 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,465
Thanked 2,624 Times in 2,233 Posts
That seems to summarize it.

I may have more thoughts later, but must digest the post, and free time to respond again.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #5  
07-12-2024, 02:46 PM
npbrown82 npbrown82 is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Posts: 8
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Ok cool, thanks. Really appreciate your input. Very helpful.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
07-12-2024, 09:54 PM
aramkolt aramkolt is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 691
Thanked 111 Times in 103 Posts
I've wanted to do similar testing or create a "standard" for testing one's own VCRs and compare to others with results posted from an identical starting source. I've proposed that the hardest part of such a test would be the source material used because no one will have the same analog tape to use. I think ideally you should be able to cram all of the test patterns into under 1 minute to fully evaluate how the VCR performs.

My solution to this would be to put out either a 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 NTSC relatively short visually lossless file type such as ProResHQ in a Davinci Resolve timeline that can be either played back via a "monitor" device such as a Blackmagic Ultrastudio Monitor 3G which can then be converted from SDI to S-Video with something like the Brighteye BE16 and then recorded to a VHS tape.

It is important that the test patterns start out in a digital form so that no errors are "baked in" from an analog capture. Many pattern generators can output SDI which is digital and those would be ideal to be sourcing the test patterns from. There are also test pattern DVDs out there that have a few useful patterns, but I don't know if there's copyright issues to borrowing 5 second clips from those for a different DVD like this. This is not a DVD that anyone would sell, but it is still unclear to me if this falls under fair use, since fair use usually allows copyrighted content to be used to test other devices rather than to be actually consuming the content of the video itself for entertainment purposes.

The more accessible route would be to create the same test material and make it into a playable high-bitrate DVD, but with the disadvantage being that the source now would use a 4:2:0 chroma subsampling. The DVD can then be recorded to a VHS tape. The slightly downside to that is that DVD players will vary a bit as far as how hot the luma levels are on output. Usually they are within 10%, but generally that output is going to be fairly reproducible with minimal cost involved as opposed to what I mentioned above.

If you wanted to introduce more significant timebase errors while recording the VHS tape from the DVD, there'd have to be some sort of vibration or tapping introduced to the VCR as it is recording (but that's pretty hard to make a reproducible across tapes for different users, but might be worth experimenting with later).

Since it isn't possible to reproduce poor quality tapes out of thin air like you can with a downloadable DVD and a DVD player, that's basically impossible to use as source material "standard" for people to try on their own machines.

The material itself, in my opinion, should be mostly test patterns that accentuate various flaws in how analog video can be handled, such as deinterlacing problems, automatic gain control issues, color bars, dynamic range/luma sweep, sharpness, visual resolution etc. Some short test videos that started out as digital can be used as well. The purpose of using digital test patterns and video is that you know exactly what the source looked like and your goal would be for the captured file to look closest to that source as possible. If going the DVD route, the "source" would actually be the DVD's MPEG files and not the uncompressed files that it was created from.

I have examples of most of the VCRs you mention and I do want to pit them against each other (along with testing various capture cards and chains) and making that DVD to VHS I think is the route I'll be going myself. I do have the ultrastudio monitor 3G and BE16, so I'll also probably try that and see how much difference there is in the higher bitrate and higher chroma subsampling.

In terms of crowdsourcing opinion on what visually looks "the best" or closest to the original source, I think randomization, or at least non-labeling of the result video files initially is important to throw out biases of those ranking the order. Yes, you'd want a key that later reveals which VCRs were which after a bunch of voting has occurred.

ProResHQ or lossless AVI would probably be a more widely supported format to capture into over DVC50. Standalone Blackmagic and AJA recorders tend to be able to capture into ProRes, and editors are widely compatible as well.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
07-12-2024, 10:14 PM
timtape timtape is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 700
Thanked 134 Times in 121 Posts
I've also found it hard to find a succinct list of the specific strengths and weaknesses in terms of video and audio performance of such a list of VCR's, so like Aramkolt I support the general aim of your project.
I have a special interest in audio on such tapes partly because I see it often regarded as the poor relation re the picture and not given the status it receives in dedicated audio circles. So thanks for giving audio it's proper place in the equation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by npbrown82 View Post
[*]Audio Quality: Evaluating audio clarity, noise levels, and fidelity using audio analysis software. (I'm amazed by the line noise VCRs put out from model to model. All can be fixed in post, but it's interesting to discover.)
Perhaps the first thing to be said is that by no means can "all be fixed in post". If it could, life would be so much simpler. But yes in post some things can be fixed or partially so.

The problem with using a typical VHS home movie tape as a test is the audio recording may not be severe enough of a test. One tape's own noise floor may be high enough to mask the deck's noise floor. Often a loud passage of audio track masks the deck's audio noise but in a quiet recorded passage on the same tape, the VCR's noise is exposed and becomes an annoyance or even masks the wanted speech, music etc.

Take audio playback noise in linear playback (you referred to "line noise") from the VCR itself, a common complaint from people who care about good audio playback. I made up my own VHS test cassette with no video, just a reference audio tone for comparison purposes, and then audio silence.
This is a severe test of the linear audio playback which is what is needed for signal to noise comparisons. For if the VCR performs well on such a severe test tape, it will pass with flying colors on anything less severe.

We've occasionally discussed these issues but there doesnt seem a lot of interest in dealing with it especially on decks which are lauded for their picture qualities, as if that's all that matters. So I for one support a more rigorous objective testing of such machine performance factors which dont change regardless of the tape played.

Last edited by timtape; 07-12-2024 at 10:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
07-13-2024, 03:45 PM
aramkolt aramkolt is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 691
Thanked 111 Times in 103 Posts
Agree with Timtape that audio is also important to test.

Sooo what audio patterns would identify common audio issues and other issues the best? I assume maybe a specific tone that is increased by a specified number of decibels every couple of seconds? Or perhaps a solid tone that increases in amplitude - this could be done by generating a tone of that frequency and then using a "Fade in" filter in audacity. There's also the THX logo audio that people like to use as well haha.

I also have been considering how to address/assess frame drops/inserts on capture chains that don't support frame drop statistics on either the same or a different test DVD. having a time code burnt in before a frame TBC will also tell you if the TBC itself is duplicating or dropping frames which is otherwise not something you can determine at the time of capture with statistics.

You could use an analog timecode generator device like the Horta TG-50 which can either burn in a visual timecode into each frame and/or output timecode audio that you could record as one of your audio channels during capture. The beauty of having timecode audio AND a visual/burnt-in timecode is that you could see cumulative dropped frames or audio sync issues in a different way because the audio time code should match what you see as the visual time code. I'm just unsure if programs like a nonlinear editor can decode the timecode audio like a standalone box can. Worst case scenario is I suppose you use the same TG-50 box (it can both generate and read timecode audio) to listen to the captured timecode audio and display what it translates that audio to be and you can verify that it matches the burnt in timecode on the capture image and is not drifting significantly when you go to play back your captured file.

-- merged --

Guess I'll answer my own question haha:
Davinci can take timecode audio and change it into metadata:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRBwmZf3fk0

So theoretically I could make that test DVD with the burnt in visual timecode and timecode audio already there. The idea is that you then record that to VHS and then see if after capturing the VHS where the frame drops and inserts occur which will be indicated if you see frames or a cumulative timecode metadata not matching the visually burnt in timecode of each frame.

The one thing I haven't seen is if you can take Davinci's time code metadata and create a new timecode audio track from it. You definitely can do it the other way around though as shown in that above video.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
07-13-2024, 07:24 PM
timtape timtape is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 700
Thanked 134 Times in 121 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aramkolt View Post
Agree with Timtape that audio is also important to test.

Sooo what audio patterns would identify common audio issues and other issues the best?
As I mentioned, perhaps the most common machine problem with linear audio playback on say VHS players is noise added by the machine itself. Often it's tones generated by the VCR's own power supply or maybe by the video head drum motor. Later models can be worse in this respect.

As mentioned my test is to play a tape with no audio recorded. The ideal playback adds no such noise or tones. All we hear is the tape's own gentle hiss.

Some people may need to be shown that those added tones are not on their tapes but have been added by their playback deck.

Last edited by timtape; 07-13-2024 at 08:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
07-13-2024, 10:28 PM
lordsmurf's Avatar
lordsmurf lordsmurf is online now
Site Staff | Video
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 14,465
Thanked 2,624 Times in 2,233 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aramkolt View Post
..
Too much emphasis on test patterns. Those are almost entirely for resolution, and that relly just does not matter as much here. VHS resolution is low by modern standards anyway. The focus is on everything else, but resolution.

4:4:4 does nothing for consumer analog formats.
4:2:0 and 4:1:1 bake in loss.

Those SDI converters are "black boxes" that do not allow for granularity in testing gear. Closed-loop systems. Fairly worthless in a testing environment.

Tapping a head doesn't introduce useful timing errors. Yes, it can add 1 sort of error, but then you're just testing for 1 error that's not even natural, and has no real natural counterpart. It's like those stupid car commercials that show the car driving off-road in mountains, something that 99%+ of people will never do. Worthless, not representative of reality, nor what really matters.

Yes, a library of bad tapes, for a newbie, is not easy to acquire. That takes time and funds.

Crowdsourcing is asking random people for feedback, but you must understand it's just random feedback (aka noise). Most of the responses will be crap, though you get a good comment or two, perhaps even connect with somebody that actually knows what they're talking about. (I've been doing this for so long that it's difficult for me to find peers anymore. Most have retired, so few of us are seemingly left now. I miss the 90s and even 00s at times, when I had numerous contacts "above my pay grade" to solicit advice/knowledge. Sometimes it gets lonely now.)

Again, voting "best" is just so stupid and useless. Blinding is itself usually a bias, promoting ignorance. "I don't know what I'm looking at, I'll just pick A over B." The testing must be spelled out very well, and thus enters the bias. It can be a circle-jerk of pseudo science if done wrong, and it is usually done extremely poorly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by timtape View Post
...
Yes, audio is difficult. The irony here is the best image VCRs often have lackluster audio. But the better audio VCRs have horrid picture quality.

Yep, "it can all be fixed in software/post" is such a naive newbie understanding. In reality, most cannot be fixed, as it's burned into the audio or video.

I've never made an audio test tape, but I do have several tapes in my library. Audio performance can also be odd, no real consistency in muffle or hiss from tape to tape.

Audio being generated by a VCR is not something I come across often. More typical is audio noise recorded onto the tape from the cheap consumer camcorder. And all of it can vary unit to unit, and is not necessarily a model-wide issue.

- Did my advice help you? Then become a Premium Member and support this site.
- For sale in the marketplace: TBCs, workflows, capture cards, VCRs
Reply With Quote
  #11  
07-14-2024, 10:02 AM
aramkolt aramkolt is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2023
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 691
Thanked 111 Times in 103 Posts
You wouldn't need very many test patterns to show the different flaws that a transfer can have and I don't see a scenario where actual video content would be superior to a pattern to illustrate that.

Now if you're talking about an alignment, timebase, or just degraded tape error handling, then yes, you need tapes with those errors already there, but assuming there's no visual abnormalities in the playback other than tearing at the top (which most line TBCs should be able to correct) and you've verified there are no dropped frames or audio sync issues, my opinion is that the next priority should be reproducing the stored data as faithfully as possible.

But, the fact that it is so hard to find tapes that play that poorly or have those errors means that it doesn't apply to 95% of tapes out there and should not be the focus of this sort of testing in comparing VCRs against each other. For those last 5%, which VCR plays them the best is going to vary, so the result isn't going to be reproducible from tape to tape, so that's not really a reason to recommend one specific VCR, just to have multiple brands to attempt with in those cases.

The Snell and Wilcox zone plate pattern does almost all testing you'd want in one pattern: http://www.cinedrome.ch/hometheater/...zoneplate.html The pattern you'd want to use there has that center circle moving as a video and that creates some interesting rainbow interference that is much worse in composite vs S-Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObtBIBuqiWU

In addition to that, I'd also throw in at a minimum a pattern that has one image on even and another on odd fields so you can see if one of the field is being thrown away at a glance. AGC can be tested with specific patterns that are recorded at a near black IRE and some areas that are brighter than 100IRE that toggle on and off to see what the AGC circuitry does with that and it will also show if your chain clips or not. A sweep pattern (full dark to full bright) will show if the bit depth of the capture chain is "rounding" similar luma values to the same one in a way that is visible. On video, this is more commonly seen with low contrast scenes such as sky or sunsets. You'd also want a regular video clip that could be 10 seconds long that has a lot of detailed motion in it.

Silent audio is easy enough to do and most test patterns won't have associated audio, so that could be dually used for that purpose. a short audio frequency sweep would be easy easy enough to visualize in audacity after capture to see how different VCRs act throughout their dynamic range which I think is something like 20Hz to 20kHz. If some ones aren't reproduced correctly, that would be very good to know. Probably isn't a dealbreaker if there's something slightly off with the audio, but if choosing between one or another when the video output appears identical, then you might go with the one with better objective audio.

Doing the timecode audio+drop/insert sync test (audio LTC and frame-burned timecode) on a full length VHS capture that I proposed above conceptually is by far the easiest way to see if audio is syncing to video or if frames are being dropped or inserted after a capture since each field will have its own timecode on it. In my opinion, that is far superior to frame drop statistics because you can actually see if the frame TBC itself dropped or duplicated frames whereas frame drop statistics after the TBC will not show that at all. You wouldn't necessarily need a test DVD to make a test tape to do that, just a timecode decoder/burner like the Horita TG-50 and then dropping the captured file into Resolve to have it interpret the audio LTC and see if the frame burned matches throughout the video. For those saying that the Horta doesn't do S-Video - I think you could pass just the Luma wire through it (since that's basically black and white composite) and get the same functionality out of it. Beauty of the Horta is that you can do it with any existing tape you have since that information will get overlayed and you'd just replace one of the audio tracks with the LTC audio. Any test done with the Horita is just a test, wouldn't be looking at it for the actual capture quality or using it for actual captures as you won't want the timecode and timecode audio there for actual viewing purposes most likely.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
07-15-2024, 04:48 AM
timtape timtape is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 700
Thanked 134 Times in 121 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordsmurf View Post
Yes, audio is difficult. The irony here is the best image VCRs often have lackluster audio. But the better audio VCRs have horrid picture quality.
I wasnt aware of that but if true I suspect that before making purchase decisions, many seeking comparisons between machine performances would want to know about such a picture/audio quality tradeoff. It seems like the sort of detail essential in an official VCR comparison guide such as npbrown is hoping to produce. Would you agree?

Last edited by timtape; 07-15-2024 at 05:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this what a bad head looks like? starbond Capture, Record, Transfer 5 04-30-2024 03:58 PM
VCR Head cleaner qwertz73 Restore, Filter, Improve Quality 0 07-08-2023 06:03 PM
Is this head damage? Xhumeka Capture, Record, Transfer 2 04-11-2023 08:26 AM
2-head VCR vs. 4-head/6-head VCR? Dead Christmas Videography: Cameras, TVs and Players 4 05-18-2016 02:38 PM
6 Head VCR... mhadley Capture, Record, Transfer 1 04-30-2006 05:49 PM

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:53 AM