| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 75525 | 2007-01-01 19:17:00 | How not to buy a DVD Hard Drive Recorder | Strommer (42) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 511932 | 2007-12-27 07:16:00 | Yes I have a tape collection I have recorded of TV going back to the early 80s that I would like to transfer across. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 511933 | 2007-12-27 18:11:00 | Yes I have a tape collection I have recorded of TV going back to the early 80s that I would like to transfer across. :) How interesting. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 511934 | 2007-12-27 20:17:00 | Sorry about the missing f. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 511935 | 2007-12-27 20:28:00 | Sorry about the missing f. :) You are forgiven. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 511936 | 2007-12-27 22:07:00 | We have a Panasonic RDR-HX950 I am presently studying how to transfer some of our tapes to the Hard drive. I see how to do this is outlined on pages 24-25 of the manual. Seems best to connect the VCR to the DVD Recorder and the DVD Recorder to the Line input 1 of the TV and then the VCR direct to the TV using Line input 2. My question is there any value in my buying a s-video connection ? It may seem easier but using the three separate video/audio cord setup hardly seems complex. Indeed, although it may not be relevant for what I want to do, S-video seems to not have as sophisticated a range as using the three cord setup. What do you reckon ? Misty :D |
Misty (368) | ||
| 511937 | 2007-12-28 00:31:00 | I'd probably go for the S-Video, simply less connections to get bumped. :p Bear in mind you'll still have to run seperate cables for the audio, as S-Video is just that - video. | wratterus (105) | ||
| 511938 | 2007-12-28 01:00:00 | I'd probably go for the S-Video, simply less connections to get bumped. :p Bear in mind you'll still have to run seperate cables for the audio, as S-Video is just that - video. Why less connections if audio separate ? Seems like one connection for "ordinary" video each end, or one connection for S-video at each end ! Misty :confused: PS - I had also assumed that audio was included in S-video but seems not the case :( |
Misty (368) | ||
| 511939 | 2007-12-28 01:40:00 | Yeah, normal S-Video doesn't carry audio . I don't know your exact setup, but in my mind, the less pugs between the source and destination = the best option . (For quality and ease of use, that is) . What you said originally will work also, in the end it will come down to how you want to have it set up . Theres plenty of different ways of doing it . Try stuff and see what works for you . :thumbs: |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 511940 | 2007-12-28 10:24:00 | My question is there any value in my buying a s-video connection ? It may seem easier but using the three separate video/audio cord setup hardly seems complex. Indeed, although it may not be relevant for what I want to do, S-video seems to not have as sophisticated a range as using the three cord setup. What do you reckon ? Misty :D[/quote] The main difference between them is the quality of the picture. S-video delivers a better picture than composite video, while component video gives better picture quality still. The variety of outputs also gives you the flexibility of connecting your particular equipment using the best connection type available. S-video carries the picture as separate colour and luminance (brightness) signals. Component video carries the picture as two separate colour signals, plus a luminance (brightness) signal. Hope that helps. :thumbs: |
memphis (2869) | ||
| 511941 | 2007-12-29 07:28:00 | Before buying expensive toys , it pays to join up to Consumers Institute. They test things like DVD Recorders , and you get good advice. They are there to look after the customers interest. I don't buy much without checking with CI. They are on the Internet , really up to date and all that. |
oldguy (7868) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | |||||