Thank you very much for this video! I've seen lots of B-format reels in the Bulgarian National TV back at the beginning of the 90's, always wanted to work with this huge fascinating video tape machines. :-) Now I have pro-programs at home and am only smiling with nostalgia. Still it is magnificent piece of technology. :-) And you are a great teacher.
Great stuff. I collect my first C format machine, a VPR2 in a few weeks. It's not been used in some years, so will certainly need some work. It's all going to be new and scary for me, it's not a format I'm familiar with.
If you find one - look for the VPR-80, or Sony 2000 series... or if you're really lucky an AMPEX VPR-3 with it's matching TBC. The VPR-1 'could' be an A-format converted to C-format (VPR-1C), not nice.
I remember doing dubbing commercials in on spot reels, I used to do about 15- 20 an hour (in between running the on VTRs recording incoming programs, etc)
After 25 years of watching analog over the air TV stations that were weaker than the boiler on my first shower (which is a weak as American lager beer) and watching VHS tapes these video glitches are hard to notice. Yes there's room for improvement but most of my life I was doing the equivalent of watching TV with the wrong prescription eyeglasses wrapped with Saran wrap.
I used to be able to lace and line up for playout in about 30 secs. Vid level controls were generally done on the boards, not the front panel, and unless there were sub blacks, you should never adjust black level on programme material, likewise unless pek white is over 100% on prog material leave it alone. Line up is there for a purpose, if you start tweaking on prog , material then how on earth do you expect to match it if a retransfer for repair needs to be done. Plus, watching demod out is no good. The TBC will fill in small drop outs. Demod is only useful for line up adjustments, and for diagnosing problems if visible post TBC. Also why did the line up not start with a scratch test, then tracking??? Looks like a bit too much reliance on AST heads.Oh, and please zero the counter at the beginning when the tape is first loaded, and put a pip in to cue back to.
Thanks for sharing. Happy Memories! That's Ray Moore, OOV at 10.00 (1 inch Dropout). 'One inch' was a 'walk in the park' compared to 2 inch Quad. Both formats are now consigned to history.
Quad was awesome. It had a much cleaner tape path. All those guide rollers and heads in constant contact with the tape on helical machines were terrible. No wonder the heads wore out fast. I worked on every model of quad that Ampex ever made.
@@rty1955 if you want to do multi generation dubbing/editing from 1" tabe didn't the video noise increase much faster than dubbing from 2" Quad, resulting in you having to return to an earlier edit and starting again?
@@Robert_Manners the newer TBCs on 1" where much better than the video processors on a quad. But you were still very much conscious of match cuts that was a generation apart. You edit decisions and generations were critical to good edits. Back then we were concerned with burst flips , which were color burst signals that were 180° out of phase, horizontal timing that was slightly out of time with a previous scene and other various details of a complex video signal.
..and OOOH! how easy it become after U-matic.... this is beautifull video what really could go wrong, at the first place of recording a 1 program in 70`s and early 80´s, people dont get it at all... iMOVIE generation dont know where they coming from...
Re: The Capstan Servo Errors (where the tape speed drastically decreases at regular intervals) - I don't believe this is a particular fault of the tapes per se. I think this is due to a lack of oversight regarding what happens to these tapes over time, and should be relatively easy to prevent. Firstly, the edge of the tape containing the control track is clearly not being read properly, and there are two possible causes, which may be occuring singly or doubly. Firstly, the alignment/azimuth of the control track head may be out of spec. It can seem in spec with a line-up tone but that's when the tape tension is at one extreme in terms of the edge torque, because the take-up spool is pulling the tape at its hardest, meaning the angle at which the capstan is pulling each edge has a greater differential than it will as the take-up spool fills up. Secondly, the edge of the tape may be getting slightly stuck to the inside of the feed spool flange, meaning that the edge of the tape curls away from the horizontal plane. In both cases, this means the control track head doesn't read a coherent signal, but reads the wanted signal along with a pre- or post- image of the control signal slightly out-of-phase, meaning where it should be on the positive peak, a bleed-through component from the negative part of the phase is modulating onto it. For parts of the tape whose edge curves away slightly more than the rest, this can overcome the tach servo and TBC, causing the servo to slow down in the belief that's going to correct the phase, and it keeps going because it never corrects. Also there may well be a slight stickiness on the capstan itself. Two things that could be done, is to fit a guide (preferably with brushes) just before the head stack to flatten and clean the tape edge before it goes over, and another is to take the top flange off the feed spool, so that it feeds into the machine as an open pancake. This allows the tape edges to partially, naturally uncrinkle as it unwinds, and also to prevent any crinkling that might happen DURING playback.
Maybe you could edit this video around 10:00 mins, and cause a COMPLETE audio AND video dropout, when Jimmy Saville is about to appear... ✌️"Whoops, lost him!"✌️
Hi There G.A. You don't give a time for the fault. Sounds like it might be tape damage ( a transverse crease) on copied material that was originated on U-matic tape.
@@Saprophitic Transverse tape damage used to seriously dog VHS 📼 recordings, even when a tape was looked after. When I moved to the S-VHS format it was less of an issue however I do recall if you used a standard VHS 📼 tape with the S-VHS ET option it did reoccur much faster than if you had made the recording in standard VHS.
@Matt Quinn, where i was working - Australia and for a couple of years in Malaysia, D1 made a brief show, mainly in graphics intensive post, D2 was everywhere, D3 saw vet little in my time... DigiBeta really got out there in the 90s.
the black setup level would never pass FCC regulations in USA. we use NTSC standards which call for black to be at 7.5 IRE. This allows for any black not to dip into the sync part of the signal which could make some TV receivers to lose sync
That is for NTSC only. It's PAL in the above video, on which a greater degree of separation between black level and blanking level is achieved in the design of the PAL system as the sync level is at -43IRE, as opposed to -40IRE. Peak level is +133IRE as opposed to +120IRE. Burst is 21.5IRE instead of 20IRE.
And in comparison to NTSC and PAL, NTSC-J (the Japanese variant of NTSC) does allow for 0 IRE for black in the video though, compared to the 7.5 for NTSC used in North America/Mexico/South Korea. Most newer receivers/monitors (especially those for the Japanese market) can handle 0 IRE in the video lines and not mistake it for sync (I'd guess by the sync processing circuitry of the monitor/TV paying attention more to sync timings rather then levels). That being said, NTSC-J is compatible with its North American counterpart mostly, usually all that's needed is an adjustment of the brightness control.
I still prefer to watch the old analog picture tube TV. Most TV station signals are still intended for old vacuum tube TV receivers which are still in 4:3 format and a few are in 16:9. When played in a digital wide screen format, the pictures are distorted, stretched sidewise, and pictures of people look short and fat. Moreover, I am bothered by the "mapping" in the faces of persons due to "connecting dot effect" of digital colors. Unlike the old analog signal where the change of shade is smooth, digital pictures shadows are abrupt and in steps. There are channels which show pictures with large black strips on top and bottom, rendering the big screen useless.
What kind of terrible TV stations do you watch? O_o TV stations have moved well Beyond analog TV production, and in most cases have full digital workflow o_O
Most people are "aspect blind". They can not differentiate a normal picture from a stretched picture. Most TV broadcast are stretched like football and basketball players that look short and fat, and newscasters with over-broad shoulders and fat cheeks.and long ears. People who are not bothered by this distortion are known as "aspect blind". It seems that you are one of those not bothered so it's OK.
I suspect that this has more to do with how the images are displayed, rather than how they are broadcast. People generally dislike having portions of their TV picture with black bars on, so they'll alter the controls until the screen is filled with picture - whatever shape it is.
Odouls77 I'm pretty much the opposite, I can't stand poor AR, and get regularly annoyed at the few retrograde broadcasters who fail to set AR flags properly forcing me to adjust display AR manually, but there are next-to-no channels that actually broadcast stretched material. Stations have been broadcasting widescreen content for a very long time, and are pretty darn good at it, same goes with wider ARs. In most cases, if you're seeing it wrong, it's because you've not set your TV properly.
Phil S That's possible, though black bars wern't any different on CRT TVs. If people refuse to set their system up properlly they can hardly complain. TV tech has never been better than it is today.
I learned it at BBC Training Department at Wood Norton, and at Television Centre. These places don't exist anymore But now everything is recorded as digital files there is no need for line up. Back in the day I we could all put on a tape and have it lined up and ready to go in 30 seconds or less.
@@trxbloke Hard to believe...but there is still a small presence at the BBC training centre at Wood Norton. No more 1" machines though :) The 1" machines used to be be my responsibility for maintenance when I was there (1985-2016).
@@chrissavage5966 I think I remember you from when I was there. I was in ITO 20, one of two bikers on the course, I rode my Honda 400/4 in the film opener of our prog exercise. have a look at ua-cam.com/video/OqHeAV1r7p0/v-deo.html
Ampex VPR-2Bs had their quirks - I used a number of them in the 1980's. I liked the Ampex VPR-3 better and it became my "go-to" VTR in the 1990's. The VPR-3 was a very solid and reliable VTR plus it worked well with CMX 3600 editors.
Good heavens man, you are indeed literal! Actually, it's the VTR operator that I want to meet. If I wanted to meet an Ampex VTR all I have to do is go into my machine room. I have three (3) Ampex VPR-3s that are still up and running splendidly.
+8068 You are lucky then. Even if not as beautiful as the one you fancy, women can be seen everyday while an Ampex VTR is a sight for the privileged eyes these days. :P
Yes there wher problems with anologe signals and storage bit at least it kept working. Now a days you have the freeze frames and the squares or cannot read this format. Sorry to say but i hate the digital formats. Nothing above analog
In India otha even unfit to Argument lawyers & advocates but keeping full of leagal books even nt able to read but clerk weekend use to clean da dust 😄😃😀😍
И ниодного умника нету который говорит что аналоговый сигнал лучше цыфрового бо с этим явным хреновым качеством никак не поспориш, а вот звук, это всё он лучше при всём том что видео несёт в себе намного больше информации чем звук, короче говоря цыфра рулит везде
@@stickytapenrust6869 I have work in every machine Ampex ever made. And I still prefer quad. Straight tape path, no tape tension issues, you can splice quad, way less complicated. The AVR-1 I feel was the best quad ever made. You can even playback a tape with no control track. There servos were superb In addition she makes a adjustments to program material (video level, black level, chroma, audio etc) a BIG no-no here in the US. FCC would fine you if you deviated from the test signal. The last person who recorded the video is responsible for any deviation from the test signal, not a playback operator
This girl is a credit to her organisation..from the era when operators actually understood what the were doing - and why.
That picture quality is amazing!!!
Thank you very much for this video! I've seen lots of B-format reels in the Bulgarian National TV back at the beginning of the 90's, always wanted to work with this huge fascinating video tape machines. :-) Now I have pro-programs at home and am only smiling with nostalgia. Still it is magnificent piece of technology. :-) And you are a great teacher.
Great stuff. I collect my first C format machine, a VPR2 in a few weeks. It's not been used in some years, so will certainly need some work. It's all going to be new and scary for me, it's not a format I'm familiar with.
What will you be doing with it please?
Wow Great Video. I want one now. I have no application for this. I just love analog video, and audio tape. Nicely done, thanks for posting.
If you find one - look for the VPR-80, or Sony 2000 series... or if you're really lucky an AMPEX VPR-3 with it's matching TBC. The VPR-1 'could' be an A-format converted to C-format (VPR-1C), not nice.
I remember doing dubbing commercials in on spot reels, I used to do about 15- 20 an hour (in between running the on VTRs recording incoming programs, etc)
After 25 years of watching analog over the air TV stations that were weaker than the boiler on my first shower (which is a weak as American lager beer) and watching VHS tapes these video glitches are hard to notice. Yes there's room for improvement but most of my life I was doing the equivalent of watching TV with the wrong prescription eyeglasses wrapped with Saran wrap.
I used to be able to lace and line up for playout in about 30 secs. Vid level controls were generally done on the boards, not the front panel, and unless there were sub blacks, you should never adjust black level on programme material, likewise unless pek white is over 100% on prog material leave it alone. Line up is there for a purpose, if you start tweaking on prog , material then how on earth do you expect to match it if a retransfer for repair needs to be done. Plus, watching demod out is no good. The TBC will fill in small drop outs. Demod is only useful for line up adjustments, and for diagnosing problems if visible post TBC. Also why did the line up not start with a scratch test, then tracking??? Looks like a bit too much reliance on AST heads.Oh, and please zero the counter at the beginning when the tape is first loaded, and put a pip in to cue back to.
Thanks for sharing. Happy Memories!
That's Ray Moore, OOV at 10.00 (1 inch Dropout).
'One inch' was a 'walk in the park' compared to 2 inch Quad. Both formats are now consigned to history.
Quad was awesome. It had a much cleaner tape path. All those guide rollers and heads in constant contact with the tape on helical machines were terrible. No wonder the heads wore out fast. I worked on every model of quad that Ampex ever made.
@@rty1955 if you want to do multi generation dubbing/editing from 1" tabe didn't the video noise increase much faster than dubbing from 2" Quad, resulting in you having to return to an earlier edit and starting again?
@@Robert_Manners the newer TBCs on 1" where much better than the video processors on a quad. But you were still very much conscious of match cuts that was a generation apart. You edit decisions and generations were critical to good edits. Back then we were concerned with burst flips , which were color burst signals that were 180° out of phase, horizontal timing that was slightly out of time with a previous scene and other various details of a complex video signal.
This quality is much more friendly to eyes than HD
Time to get your eyes checked.
..and OOOH! how easy it become after U-matic....
this is beautifull video what really could go wrong, at the first place of recording a 1 program in 70`s and early 80´s, people dont get it at all... iMOVIE generation dont know where they coming from...
i still edit in beta sp...and umatic vo hiband
i have one sony lowband umatic recorder, picture quality is still awesome! unused casets are hard to find... but i still love it 8)
Re: The Capstan Servo Errors (where the tape speed drastically decreases at regular intervals) - I don't believe this is a particular fault of the tapes per se. I think this is due to a lack of oversight regarding what happens to these tapes over time, and should be relatively easy to prevent. Firstly, the edge of the tape containing the control track is clearly not being read properly, and there are two possible causes, which may be occuring singly or doubly. Firstly, the alignment/azimuth of the control track head may be out of spec. It can seem in spec with a line-up tone but that's when the tape tension is at one extreme in terms of the edge torque, because the take-up spool is pulling the tape at its hardest, meaning the angle at which the capstan is pulling each edge has a greater differential than it will as the take-up spool fills up. Secondly, the edge of the tape may be getting slightly stuck to the inside of the feed spool flange, meaning that the edge of the tape curls away from the horizontal plane. In both cases, this means the control track head doesn't read a coherent signal, but reads the wanted signal along with a pre- or post- image of the control signal slightly out-of-phase, meaning where it should be on the positive peak, a bleed-through component from the negative part of the phase is modulating onto it. For parts of the tape whose edge curves away slightly more than the rest, this can overcome the tach servo and TBC, causing the servo to slow down in the belief that's going to correct the phase, and it keeps going because it never corrects. Also there may well be a slight stickiness on the capstan itself. Two things that could be done, is to fit a guide (preferably with brushes) just before the head stack to flatten and clean the tape edge before it goes over, and another is to take the top flange off the feed spool, so that it feeds into the machine as an open pancake. This allows the tape edges to partially, naturally uncrinkle as it unwinds, and also to prevent any crinkling that might happen DURING playback.
Very interesting video!
Maybe you could edit this video around 10:00 mins, and cause a COMPLETE audio AND video dropout, when Jimmy Saville is about to appear... ✌️"Whoops, lost him!"✌️
Fascinating
The vpr 6 was the best.
Unless you had a VPR-3 loaded !
and now the "digital vtr tape" is being transferred to a .AVI file on some hard drive at the BBC! LOL
It's a never ending story, Quad 1958 - 1983 ish. New format gone by end of the decade 📼
As a format, I must admit it looks very good.
But damn I bet there's a hell of a lot of boring stuff that gets transferred.
What was that fuzzy line from bottom to top every 3 secs or so
Hi There G.A. You don't give a time for the fault. Sounds like it might be tape damage ( a transverse crease) on copied material that was originated on U-matic tape.
@@Saprophitic Transverse tape damage used to seriously dog VHS 📼 recordings, even when a tape was looked after. When I moved to the S-VHS format it was less of an issue however I do recall if you used a standard VHS 📼 tape with the S-VHS ET option it did reoccur much faster than if you had made the recording in standard VHS.
You have a really good deinterlacer. This goes to show you that PAL stands for Paradise At Last while NTSC is Never The Same Color
Videotape broadcasting have come a long way, after the reel-to reel vtr's came professional 3?4 inch vide casstte recorder/players
@Matt Quinn To add a bit more, the Digital 3/4 formats (D1, D2, D3) were in fact 19mm tapes.
@Matt Quinn, where
i was working - Australia and for a couple of years in Malaysia, D1 made a brief show, mainly in graphics intensive post, D2 was everywhere, D3 saw vet little in my time... DigiBeta really got out there in the 90s.
the black setup level would never pass FCC regulations in USA. we use NTSC standards which call for black to be at 7.5 IRE. This allows for any black not to dip into the sync part of the signal which could make some TV receivers to lose sync
That is for NTSC only. It's PAL in the above video, on which a greater degree of separation between black level and blanking level is achieved in the design of the PAL system as the sync level is at -43IRE, as opposed to -40IRE. Peak level is +133IRE as opposed to +120IRE. Burst is 21.5IRE instead of 20IRE.
And in comparison to NTSC and PAL, NTSC-J (the Japanese variant of NTSC) does allow for 0 IRE for black in the video though, compared to the 7.5 for NTSC used in North America/Mexico/South Korea. Most newer receivers/monitors (especially those for the Japanese market) can handle 0 IRE in the video lines and not mistake it for sync (I'd guess by the sync processing circuitry of the monitor/TV paying attention more to sync timings rather then levels). That being said, NTSC-J is compatible with its North American counterpart mostly, usually all that's needed is an adjustment of the brightness control.
At minute 7 is not a 1 inch vtr control panel but is the betacam cp
Paolo Alberti Sorry...the comment is inappropriate
+Paolo Alberti why
It is the digital betacam control panel of the machine she is recording onto.
I still prefer to watch the old analog picture tube TV. Most TV station signals are still intended for old vacuum tube TV receivers which are still in 4:3 format and a few are in 16:9. When played in a digital wide screen format, the pictures are distorted, stretched sidewise, and pictures of people look short and fat. Moreover, I am bothered by the "mapping" in the faces of persons due to "connecting dot effect" of digital colors. Unlike the old analog signal where the change of shade is smooth, digital pictures shadows are abrupt and in steps. There are channels which show pictures with large black strips on top and bottom, rendering the big screen useless.
What kind of terrible TV stations do you watch? O_o TV stations have moved well Beyond analog TV production, and in most cases have full digital workflow o_O
Most people are "aspect blind". They can not differentiate a normal picture from a stretched picture. Most TV broadcast are stretched like football and basketball players that look short and fat, and newscasters with over-broad shoulders and fat cheeks.and long ears. People who are not bothered by this distortion are known as "aspect blind". It seems that you are one of those not bothered so it's OK.
I suspect that this has more to do with how the images are displayed, rather than how they are broadcast.
People generally dislike having portions of their TV picture with black bars on, so they'll alter the controls until the screen is filled with picture - whatever shape it is.
Odouls77 I'm pretty much the opposite, I can't stand poor AR, and get regularly annoyed at the few retrograde broadcasters who fail to set AR flags properly forcing me to adjust display AR manually, but there are next-to-no channels that actually broadcast stretched material.
Stations have been broadcasting widescreen content for a very long time, and are pretty darn good at it, same goes with wider ARs.
In most cases, if you're seeing it wrong, it's because you've not set your TV properly.
Phil S That's possible, though black bars wern't any different on CRT TVs.
If people refuse to set their system up properlly they can hardly complain.
TV tech has never been better than it is today.
Where did people go to learn this type of work? And now I see why it cost so much to copy from tape to digital
+adelgado75 I learned the theory at Sunderland University on the Broadcast Engineering degree back in the mid 90s.
+Paul Mabley Thank you. I was considering, when I was younger, to attend Brooklyn College but
I learned it at BBC Training Department at Wood Norton, and at Television Centre. These places don't exist anymore But now everything is recorded as digital files there is no need for line up. Back in the day I we could all put on a tape and have it lined up and ready to go in 30 seconds or less.
@@trxbloke Hard to believe...but there is still a small presence at the BBC training centre at Wood Norton. No more 1" machines though :) The 1" machines used to be be my responsibility for maintenance when I was there (1985-2016).
@@chrissavage5966 I think I remember you from when I was there. I was in ITO 20, one of two bikers on the course, I rode my Honda 400/4 in the film opener of our prog exercise. have a look at ua-cam.com/video/OqHeAV1r7p0/v-deo.html
They didn't record in stereo?
didn't BBC2 start recording record in stereo sound before BBC1 did?
@@Super_Mario128 1988 I believe.
The programme material shown at 13:50, anyone know what it is?
+zaprodk Looks like a programme called "Tomorrows World"
Very likely, it's definitely Maggie Philbin in that segment.
Why did they not use header tape on VT?
19:54 what is the title of the music?
Shazam says... Adamski - The Space Jungle.
Seems Right.
The portion of SONG LYRICS that he is heard singing is from "All Shook Up." (Originally made famous by Elvis Presley.)
Worked with these extensively in the 1980s... the ultimate in mediocrity! We certainly have come a long way!!
Ampex VPR-2Bs had their quirks - I used a number of them in the 1980's. I liked the Ampex VPR-3 better and it became my "go-to" VTR in the 1990's. The VPR-3 was a very solid and reliable VTR plus it worked well with CMX 3600 editors.
@@8068 Hitachi HR211's baby... mechanical music.
Any chance of meeting this lovely?
8068 you want to meet a taperecorder? This was mine!!
Good heavens man, you are indeed literal! Actually, it's the VTR operator that I want to meet. If I wanted to meet an Ampex VTR all I have to do is go into my machine room. I have three (3) Ampex VPR-3s that are still up and running splendidly.
+8068 You are lucky then. Even if not as beautiful as the one you fancy,
women can be seen everyday while an Ampex VTR is a sight for the
privileged eyes these days. :P
Right you are, mate.
Yes there wher problems with anologe signals and storage bit at least it kept working. Now a days you have the freeze frames and the squares or cannot read this format. Sorry to say but i hate the digital formats. Nothing above analog
Amen to that!
In India otha even unfit to Argument lawyers & advocates but keeping full of leagal books even nt able to read but clerk weekend use to clean da dust 😄😃😀😍
2:15 "clean those heads there" yea baby you clean those heads
Nothing hotter than a tech woman... :)
those fults are nothing . analoge is better
You are a nutbar... Digital is perfect. Analogue is horrid to work with.
@@tcpnetworks Not so fast! Digital tape machines had their issues too!
@@bob4analog Like the early D1 & D2 decks accelerating so fast - they'd run the tape off the cassette hubs!
@@tcpnetworks Digital is perfect... until it's not.
@@bob4analog yes when digital went wrong it really went wrong 🌿
she's hot!!!!!
И ниодного умника нету который говорит что аналоговый сигнал лучше цыфрового бо с этим явным хреновым качеством никак не поспориш, а вот звук, это всё он лучше при всём том что видео несёт в себе намного больше информации чем звук, короче говоря цыфра рулит везде
compared to this VHS sucks
Helical sucks!
VHS can look pretty decent under the right circumstances, but the sharpness just isn't there, since it doesn't record as much picture detail.
@@rty1955 You try saying that with segmented video head recording, then you might realise helical scanning ain't all that bad!
And I don't know why the woman called it "segmented helical scan" - there's no such thing! It's either segmented scanning or helical scanning!
@@stickytapenrust6869 I have work in every machine Ampex ever made. And I still prefer quad. Straight tape path, no tape tension issues, you can splice quad, way less complicated. The AVR-1 I feel was the best quad ever made. You can even playback a tape with no control track. There servos were superb
In addition she makes a adjustments to program material (video level, black level, chroma, audio etc) a BIG no-no here in the US. FCC would fine you if you deviated from the test signal. The last person who recorded the video is responsible for any deviation from the test signal, not a playback operator