CLarification. Domestic Video

[RWels]

But audio video equipment is now cheaper than ever.
In the past most people would have just taped over the previous program anyway.
And you can easily copy a (nonprotected) dvd without any loss of quality.

[Deleted]

You miss the point. The equipment may be cheaper than ever but is it reliable? You can record in high quality to hard drive, for instance, but if you want to keep the recording, what do you transfer it to?!? Hard drives can fail and recordable discs may well not be readable in future. With audio cassette or videotape, you knew they would be playable a few years hence (at the very least). But there is no reliable media in the modern day to replace these as yet.

[RWels]

No, I don't miss the point at all. The video recorder was a complex piece of technology with many moving parts that were liable to break down. Good riddance! VHS was a cumbersome technology, recording or copying would almost always result in quality loss unless you had the most expensive equipment.

Yes, even so, hard drives can fail, dvds may become unreadable. But in case you forgot: video tapes could go bad if not stored properly and sometimes a vcr would eat a tape. You probably have a a semiprofessional model, but how reliable was the average video recorder? The same is true of the equipment you can buy today.

Also, if I look at some of the **** that's on TV today, who wants to keep that forever? And is that what the general public wanted, or wants? To keep everything they record, forever?
But if you wish, you can easily make a few copies on different storage systems to minimize the risk of losing a show.
And if in two years it turns out the show you recorded has not been released, your dvds are unreadable and your hard disc has failed, you can go on the internet and find someone else who recorded it but was more fortunate.

Are you sure your opinion is not influenced by nostalgia?

[Deleted]

My view is based on practical considerations relating to the longevity of the format and not nostalgia. I'd gladly discard my old tapes if I felt there was something trustworthy that could replace them.

Very very few VHS, SVHS, Betamax or U-matic tapes failed on me in 25 years and virtually all still play fine today. Picture quality was lower than with disc but at least there IS a picture on them! The compact cassette format lasted from the mid '60s up till now (I have many from 35 years ago that play fine) and reel to reel tape even longer.

I was initially pleased when DVD came about as here finally was a way of recording in high quality ("good riddance to tape" etc) but since then my views of it as a reliable format have reversed completely. I hear regularly so many experiences of DVDs failing after a short time and I don't think that anybody who takes archiving their important recordings seriously would consider using it as a reliable format long-term. This is the reality to be faced.

[RWels]

No, I didn't say discard the tapes that you have. But my point is, you are not the average user. By the way, part of my objection was that VHS is inferior in quality to betamax or vcc or umatic. I didn't say anything about audio tape.

How about the expensive, archival quality recordable dvds? Do they fail as well?

[Deleted]

Well, that is the question, isn't it! Is recordable disc a suitable format for preserving anything? The evidence up to now seems to suggest that there is no such thing as archival quality DVDs and it's a lottery whatever brand / type you choose.

The point i'm making is that we don't have a choice of formats any more. It's basically place your trust in discs or nothing. Before, we had various tape formats and some were better than others. Mention of audio cassette was deliberate though as it seems tape as a medium (audio or video) is more reliable long-term but we aren't being given a choice of medium to record on any more. There should be a higher quality consumer equivalent of the old formats alongside disc - but there isn't, so expect a lot of people (whether it's collectors like us, camcorder buffs that record weddings etc. or whoever) to have large unplayable disc collections in the future!

[Eric Lawton]

Jul 13, 2009 11:33:20 GMT @laurencepiper said:

Well, that is the question, isn't it! Is recordable disc a suitable format for preserving anything? The evidence up to now seems to suggest that there is no such thing as archival quality DVDs and it's a lottery whatever brand / type you choose.

The point i'm making is that we don't have a choice of formats any more. It's basically place your trust in discs or nothing. Before, we had various tape formats and some were better than others. Mention of audio cassette was deliberate though as it seems tape as a medium (audio or video) is more reliable long-term but we aren't being given a choice of medium to record on any more. There should be a higher quality consumer equivalent of the old formats alongside disc - but there isn't, so expect a lot of people (whether it's collectors like us, camcorder buffs that record weddings etc. or whoever) to have large unplayable disc collections in the future!

With Audio cassettes, I always found the more expensive ones like Scotch, Phillips etc, that were always dearer in the 70s havent aged as well. All my radio stuffs in mp3 now, but whilst transferring material from cassette to mp3, I found the best tapes were the old "COMPACT CASSETTES". Remember those. Even the c120 tapes very rarely caused me any major problems whilst transferring.
Eric.

[Deleted]

Yes, i've still got some of those! The Philips ones seemed to often suffer from phasing sound, if I recall rightly. You quickly got to know which ones were poor and just avoided them though - usually it was the cheapo brands. EMI, TDK, Maxell, Sony, Memorex were all OK for audio, back in the '70s and '80s. I rarely bought Scotch or BASF anyway.

[Jeff Leach]

Jul 13, 2009 16:05:59 GMT Eric Lawton said:

Jul 13, 2009 11:33:20 GMT @laurencepiper said:

Well, that is the question, isn't it! Is recordable disc a suitable format for preserving anything? The evidence up to now seems to suggest that there is no such thing as archival quality DVDs and it's a lottery whatever brand / type you choose.

The point i'm making is that we don't have a choice of formats any more. It's basically place your trust in discs or nothing. Before, we had various tape formats and some were better than others. Mention of audio cassette was deliberate though as it seems tape as a medium (audio or video) is more reliable long-term but we aren't being given a choice of medium to record on any more. There should be a higher quality consumer equivalent of the old formats alongside disc - but there isn't, so expect a lot of people (whether it's collectors like us, camcorder buffs that record weddings etc. or whoever) to have large unplayable disc collections in the future!

With Audio cassettes, I always found the more expensive ones like Scotch, Phillips etc, that were always dearer in the 70s havent aged as well. All my radio stuffs in mp3 now, but whilst transferring material from cassette to mp3, I found the best tapes were the old "COMPACT CASSETTES". Remember those. Even the c120 tapes very rarely caused me any major problems whilst transferring.
Eric.

I generally found that where i used branded Vhs tapes - the best being Maxell and Panasonic they have stayed in good quality playback. Suprisingly one of the best picture qualities even re-playing today is a Granada 3 hour tape from 1980 and it is a very heavy tape ! i don't know if this is a factor in its quality. Regarding audio tapes i always tried to use metal and chromium tapes (Maxell and Ampex) which again still play well today.
As for dvd's after speaking to a few people and trying various brands over approximately 6 years, the best most reliable discs that i've found are Verbatim archive grade and the Taiyo Yuden -R(Verbatim, Maxel and TDK) which seem to have a very low failure rate with a good quality dye, claiming up to 100 year archive life.
I must confess i keep as many of the original tapes as i can and i probably will for at least ten years till i can test the early discs for any sign of degredation.