[howardmg]

Just as I was ruling out the Sony HX900 and choosing between the Toshiba 32 / Panasonic E95, out come the latest magazines. "Home Cinema" makes the Sony the clear winner in its test this month (but boththe Tosh 32 and E95 come out well) due to PQ, audio, build quality.

No review in "What Video and TV" until next month, versus the new Pioneer (which looks good) but a columnist (Barry Fox) writes about HQ+ and how it will improve quality of not only Camcorder footage, but also VHS recordings, when dubbed to DVD. Rascek has helpfully explained this on this forum ie it involves the 2pass re-encoding process.

Would be interested to know this forum's view of the these two magazines in particular and the home cinema/dvd/video publications in general.

And this means that I now have some questions on the Sony's drawbacks:-

Lack of Flexible Recording / 2 hour max resolution - which seems to be the most important. If you have a recording of more than 2 hours, is it a big issue in dividing the recording, save to 2 or more discs, to keep within the the high resolution limit? Does it really matter when discs are 30p each? But I'm probably missing something here.

Lack of HDD Playlist
If like me you plan to continue to edit DV camcorder footage on the PC (and then save edited footage back to tape), and do simple edits on TV footage, isn't the A-B cut offered by the Sony sufficient? I'd probably like to do more sophisticated editing but realistically will probably never have the time…

No DVD-RAM
Is there any advantage in archiving in RAM rather than -R?

Fan Noise
I've seen some feedback that the Sony is pretty noisy, but no mention in any of the magazine reviews so far.

The other shortcomings are probably minor (although taken together they count for a fair amount):-
No picture in picture
No zoom
Max 8 timer recordings
No time-shift (I think)
No library facility for DVD recordings

I suppose it comes down to whether the extra PQ of the Sony is more important to the extra functions of the Toshiba / Panasonic…

As usual any help would be much appreciated, and sorry for the long post,

Mark

[EN]

Lack of Flexible Recording / 2 hour max resolution -
The next mode 3H is not so bad, it depends a lot from the source and your pretends. It is very watchable. The choice of two discs is always a option.

Lack of HDD Playlist
I porformed such A-B editind on SONY 900 and it is enough for regulat TV edits. No need for playlist.

No DVD-RAM
In my case I can't see any need for RAM. Am I missing something?

Fan Noise
I think this is the big problem, very anoying..

The other shortcomings are realy minor.

[CLH]

The WhatHiFi "review" was nothing of the sort.

It commented on DVD playback and HDD recording at HQ+ mode.

It did no further investigation whatsoever.

The lack of flexible recording is not JUST about 2 hour mode. It means that at 2 hrs 1 mins the resolution and bit rate drop (i.e. you have to use 3 hour mode).

It also means that 92 minute movies have to use 120m mode.

I keep on harping about this but it really IS a serious omission.

[Rasczak]

HCC and WVWE are both excellent magazines (albeit with LOTS of adverts this days!) and generally speaking you can trust and rely on their reviews. I haven't read either magazine yet (will do so on Saturday) but I'm sure they accurately reflect the quality of the Sony models. The only thing to note is they may not reflect the 'end user limitations' that are all-important. Frequently this is because you need to use the model in a day to day environment before you can say what is good or bad.

You have clearly looked at the posts already made by some HX900/1000 owners and have highligted the issues. To give you my 'take' on the subject:

Lack Of Flexible Record
Having trialled the HX1000 myself I agree with CLH that the lack of Flexible Record is the biggest problem in otherwise excellent recorders. A 2hr 1min film will be recorded in half the resolution of one just a minute shorter. And on most setups that looks quite poor against a full resolution recording.

Lack Of Playlists
The lack of Playlists on the HDD is a subjective problem. If you want to record and re-arrange music then I would suggest this may well be a show-stopper - otherwise it isn't really an issue.

Lack Of DVD-RAM/Fan Noise
The lack of DVD-RAM is irrelevant and Fan noise is always subjective.

So the bottom line is the Sony's are good DVD recorders but aren't really quite designed for general analogue recording - more with an eye to the future. I think when a DVB makes it way into them where the 2pass encoding can work on the digital feed from the broadcast then they will be excellent choices.

Barry Fox (who, these days, is waste of two pages in What Video IMHO!) is correct in saying that recording in VHS in HQ+ is going to give better quality. Infact recording ANYTHING in HQ+ is going to result in better quality. However you still have to re-encode it to put it on a DVD-R and thus the quality of the final DVD will not be upto a first generation copy made using the Flexible Record.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by Rasczak

HCC and WVWE are both excellent magazines (albeit with LOTS of adverts this days!) and generally speaking you can trust and rely on their reviews. I haven't read either magazine yet (will do so on Saturday) but I'm sure they accurately reflect the quality of the Sony models. The only thing to note is they may not reflect the 'end user limitations' that are all-important. Frequently this is because you need to use the model in a day to day environment before you can say what is good or bad

I think that's the main problem. I'd kill for the Sony if it just had flexible record. Even playlists don't really bother me.

I don't know how these companies conduct their reviews. It should be plainly obvious to them where an omission is made. That said I'll wait to read the review.

I just hope it's a little more in depth than WhatHiFi managed.

[CLH]

Just to add to that:

As I see it there are two forms of DVD recorder. The ones we buy on here and the one Joe Public buys.

Joe wants one to record Eastenders. The Sony would be superb for that but it costs a bomb. Joe can buy the cheaper Sony so he doesn't really care.

Then you have us. We want it all. Ideally to write to every form of disc including vinyl and a HDD bigger anything NASA have. We can't afford the Sony either but we are prepared to pay for it.

What WE want is the dogs. Toshiba try hardest. Build isn't the best and they do look a bit old fashioned to some eyes. Panasonic consolidate and improve, look well built, omit some discs. Sony go mass market, write to most discs and have superb perceived build and great PQ. But they pitch high, price high and end up useless for our purposes. (though I speak for myself).

I thought my GX7 was brilliant save for two things:

a) it cost more than most HDD recorders.
b) it was inflexible.

You can of course get round the quality issue by using two discs for a 140 minute movie.

However, even then you're stuck with an effective drop in quality because you have to put the 70 minute halves on 90 minute mode.

For me the real show stopper is the lack of a HDD title divide capability. A play list function would be able achieve the same result (sadly also absent).

What if you record an eight hour chunk - there would be no way to archive this. Hell, a simple "title duplicate" function in addition to the "a-b erase" function could solve this dilemma.

Also, the North American version of the HX900 has a maximum of 30 timer recordings. It boggles my mind that they would limit the european version to 8 timer recordings. Actually, since these recorders have HDDs there is no reason why there has to be an upper limit on the number of timer programs - its not like they have to store the timer data in memory.

[CLH]

Are you serious? I had no idea about that.

So if I record say Black Hawk Down then I either have to:

a) record it at a suitable resolution (180mins)

b) record it at a higher one and let the disc stop when full (then restart at that point etc)

c) do b then a-b divide out and be sure that what's left will fit on a disc.

[nialli]

Can't believe the Sonys only have 8 event timers - that's pathetic!

I set my Panny e85 every Saturday morning for the entire week's programming; only takes a few minutes and ensures everything's set in case I'm late back from work or anything. Most weeks I set around a dozen events, including stuff I may want to Timeslip.

This oversight makes the Sony a non-starter in my book, as does the lack of Flexible Recording. Sorry Sony ... I'll stick with Panasonic.

[OARDVD]

I knew about the lack of Flexible Recording & no playlists. But only 8 timer recordings? That’s absolutely pitiful. Earlier this year I went on holiday for 2 weeks and loaded up the timer of my Panasonic with about 30 entries (OK my wife & I watch too much television I know ). But also no split utility? - that’s another thing which is essential for an HDD DVD recorder IMO. Think again Sony.

[howardmg]

Just so I understand the big drawback with the Sony:-

- I record a 3 hour film in HQ+ mode on the HDD
- I then want to archive it to DVD at best possible resolution ie HQ = 1 hour per disc
- I then divide the original recording into 3 one hour sections and dub to 3 discs

Is the issue that I can't divide the original recording? At least not easily. In which case you're left with low resolution on DVD?

And very annoying about the new HX90 model in Japan - with HDMI / HDD Playlists and EPG, all for the same cost!
I suppose importing and using a Japanese model in the UK would be out of the question?

And making the European model have a timer limit of 8 when the North American one has 32 - thanks a lot Sony!

[CLH]

Originally Posted by howardmg

And making the European model have a timer limit of 8 when the North American one has 32 - thanks a lot Sony!

VHS has more event timers!!!

As I said, the North American version has 30 event timers.

Also, the Japanese counter parts (HX100, hx90, hx70 and hx50 - see my other thread) have HDD playlists.

I have no idea why sony would introduce such arbitrary limitations into a product that could be potentially excellent.

[Maximumbaz]

Originally Posted by howardmg

Just so I understand the big drawback with the Sony:-

- I record a 3 hour film in HQ+ mode on the HDD
- I then want to archive it to DVD at best possible resolution ie HQ = 1 hour per disc
- I then divide the original recording into 3 one hour sections and dub to 3 discs

Is the issue that I can't divide the original recording? At least not easily. In which case you're left with low resolution on DVD?

And very annoying about the new HX90 model in Japan - with HDMI / HDD Playlists and EPG, all for the same cost!
I suppose importing and using a Japanese model in the UK would be out of the question?

And making the European model have a timer limit of 8 when the North American one has 32 - thanks a lot Sony!

That's about it, the Sony will not devide a recording. I taped The lord of the rings and copied it to dvd-r but the quality was poor in 3hr mode. I then spent the next hour trying to find a way of putting it on two discs but the only way would be to record until the first disc was full then a-b delete the first half of the film from the HDD and copy the second part. I'm afraid the machine had to go back.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by Maximumbaz

That's about it, the Sony will not devide a recording. I taped The lord of the rings and copied it to dvd-r but the quality was poor in 3hr mode. I then spent the next hour trying to find a way of putting it on two discs but the only way would be to record until the first disc was full then a-b delete the first half of the film from the HDD and copy the second part. I'm afraid the machine had to go back.

Awful. Just awful.

Why on earth are the mags not considering these issues.

[howardmg]

Exactly. If I hadn't stumbled on this forum then I would have relied on the magazine reviews and bought the Sony, been unhappy with it but probably just assumed all were as limited.

Would the japanese HX90 model be workable in the UK? Presumably the instructions would be in japanese only...

[Maximumbaz]

Originally Posted by CLH

Awful. Just awful.

Why on earth are the mags not considering these issues.

It gets worse, I forgot to mention that when I tried to record the film on two discs, I couldn't, the machine said there was not enough memory on the disc so you can't even record half the film then a-b delete on the HDD to do the second disc. You would have to record the film twice.

Weird. I was going to ask the exact same question. Guess I bought the same magazines......

Anyway one quick question. It seems to me (for what I want to use the recorder for) that the major drawback of the Sony is this lack of flexible recording problem, and having to record a 2hr 1min film as a 3hr film so losing the high picture quality.

Does this mean that the Panasonic 95 not do this? Does it adjust the record quality to fill the disc?

Any help appreciated before I spend my hard earned pennies.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by PhilJW

Weird. I was going to ask the exact same question. Guess I bought the same magazines......

Anyway one quick question. It seems to me (for what I want to use the recorder for) that the major drawback of the Sony is this lack of flexible recording problem, and having to record a 2hr 1min film as a 3hr film so losing the high picture quality.

Does this mean that the Panasonic 95 not do this? Does it adjust the record quality to fill the disc?

Any help appreciated before I spend my hard earned pennies.

IIRC the Panasonic does do it as do the Pioneer and Tosh (my preffered.)

It's not always 2 hrs 1 min with the Sony. It can sometimes squeeze a few extra minutes on but you can't predict what it will do and as such can end up with coasters.

[ACoolDude]

Well the review fooled me (doesnt take much!) and i must say the hard disk editing facilities are pathetic

[JohnG]

Why on earth are the mags not considering these issues

It makes me wonder if we have to be aware of how much advertising money the magazine gets from Sony, as I'm sure the reviewer can't be that incompetent

[CLH]

Originally Posted by JohnG

It makes me wonder if we have to be aware of how much advertising money the magazine gets from Sony, as I'm sure the reviewer can't be that incompetent

it is shameful.

Are one of the mods able to put this to HCC for example??

The Sony gets great reviews for picture quality when used as the main DVD player (for watching purchased DVDs) and sound quality if used as the main CD player.

Lets assume that 70% of the use is going to be simply as a DVD player so picture/sound quality is important, 20% to archive old VHS (so not great quality to start with) tapes to DVD and 10% to archive fresh recordings (digital camera, from Sky+ or the HDD etc).

Does this mean that what you lose in recording flexibilty on the Sony you more than make up for on the playback quality compared to the Panasonic or is that just the mags overselling the Sony?

[CLH]

Originally Posted by PhilJW

Does this mean that what you lose in recording flexibilty on the Sony you more than make up for on the playback quality compared to the Panasonic or is that just the mags overselling the Sony?

The way I see it is that Tesco man is already catered for at the bottom end of the market leaving the top spec Sony to us "videophiles."

That's where the mags are going wrong. They're failing to address issues that concern us and are leaving people to buy the wrong product.

Does anyone really think an HX900 is £300 better than an XS32??

And if so why not buy an XS32 and a £300 DVD player?

[howardmg]

But the price difference between the XS32 and the HX900 is nearer £150, and for that you get a better built and better looking machine, with great playback sound and audio. And the recorded picture at HQ+ on the HDD or HQ on DVD is, according to the mags and some users on this forum, superb.

Trouble is though that the machine has serious limitations that have stopped me and others buying it.

[EN]

I own SONY 900 and it has superb picture, not only in recording but in a playback mode. I think this is the important thing about recorder.
I don't need to record more than 2-3 programs by timer - simply I got other thing to do.
Build like a serious machine and nice organazed, I love it.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by howardmg

But the price difference between the XS32 and the HX900 is nearer £150, and for that you get a better built and better looking machine, with great playback sound and audio. And the recorded picture at HQ+ on the HDD or HQ on DVD is, according to the mags and some users on this forum, superb.

Trouble is though that the machine has serious limitations that have stopped me and others buying it.

AFAIK the Tosh is now about £349 and the Sony still around £650.

A £300 difference. Where can you get the HX900 for £500?

I would admit the sony is better looking and better built.

But I don't care about the HQ+. What's the point in great quality stuff on the HDD if I can't edit it to DVD properly.

Might as well stick to Sky+!

EDIT: seen the HX at RGB direct for £529 so still £180 difference.

[Lord Lucan]

Bought HX900 on Saturday from RGB Ilford for £539! The PQ on HDD HQ+,recorded off Sky+, is stunning.

Can't work out what all the fuss about the noisy fan is, possibly I'm going a bit mutton jeff.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by Lord Lucan

Bought HX900 on Saturday from RGB Ilford for £539! The PQ on HDD HQ+,recorded off Sky+, is stunning.

Can you help me with this point.

Why ARE you dumping Sky+ stuff to the HDD. Is it just to watch later and so that you don't run out of space??

EDIT: also at 15MBps you get 23 hours of space. Just about what you get on Sky+ in the first place.

Wouldn't you be better off putting a larger HDD in your Sky+???

[Lord Lucan]

Good point. Well the simple answer is that over the years I have archieved a lot of music videos to VHS. Now I want to build up a collection on DVD. I want to edit out any unwanted tracks and ads, find the A-b edit works fine. Plus I wanted a half decent DVD player. Forgot to mention in my last posting that the sound quality from the CD is on a par with my Cyrus DAD3 Q24.

Personally I feel that the picture and sound quality is far better than ths Sky. Is it me? Note I am using Cyrus amp, Monitor Audio speakers, and Philips 32" CRT with Pixel Plus.

Last night the fan cut in when dubbing, yes it is slighly noisy, but hey I can live with it.

Lastly, I am on my third Sky + in 12 months. Now out of warranty.Is this a record?

Cheers!