When I was in elementary school, during the '80s, we had older Sony U-Matic machines connected to 23" tube-type commercial-grade RCA color TVs in a metal cabinet, all on a tall roll-around cart. The only solid-state TV I remember being at that school was a 25" Zenith in the library and it was connected to a Panasonic U-Matic machine. We didn't get VHS until about '87 and after elementary school, I never saw another U-Matic machine in use.
@@jasonthejawman5442 yes i know. I have a Panasonic NV9800 and Sony VO4800 portable and a Sony VP1000 and VP2000 player. I should dump a few as they get very little use these days. Used to do a fair number of u-matic conversions but they have fallen off sharply in recent years.
Thanks for a great memory. In 1985 my TV station had upgraded to Sony 800/850 decks with the Sony TBC, so for the first time we had slo-mo available for news stories of the day. Pretty slick! But we still had 3 of the old 200s to record satellite news feeds. Those decks were already about 5 years old and were pretty long in the tooth, needing lots of repair/tweaks on a weekly if not daily basis. The engineering staff was very happy to see them go away when they added several more Sony800 decks. We were all broadcast Betacam by 1989 and the quality difference was dramatic over the crappy under color carrier of U Matic.
I'm sorry that I'm not used to English yet. There may be mistakes, so please understand.When I was in high school, I ordered the idler tires, each rubber belt, and a complete set of consumable parts from the Panasonic company to replace my Panasonic U matic loading idler tires. It was a little difficult to disassemble due to the tape mechanism above. Repair was successful.Although it has been over 35 years, it is still usable. SONY's screws have a minus center groove, so I used a homemade minus. SONY original screws were often used in VTRs such as BVH-1000~3100.
Dave, I envy your mechanical proneness! When I was in the business long time ago I admire how my colleagues repaired these machines. I only could repair and install transmitters!
Wow, never knew there was a BVU model that early on. I’m glad there was a remote control for automatic editing. Crash editing. Yikes. I learned to edit on the 9800 series Umatic when I was in high school. Later, I interned at a studio and they had the 5800 series. A/B roll. I have a 5600 of my own. I’m only 42 so I’m probably on the very tail end of editing analog. Digital was terrible at the time. Thanks for all the great videos! I wish you were closer to me. 😀
It probably is identical, the BVU series basically just took the industrial VO series and added SMPTE timecode for editing, and professional connectors such as XLR for audio.
We had a Shibaden VCR in grade school, did black and white only and used reels of tape that came off this "portable" Sony recorder Sadly I had one and when I moved here, I threw it out, too big and heavy.
Interesting to see that the NTSC version of the BVU200 is Lo-Band. The PAL version of this model is one of the first Hi-Band recorders (U-MaticH). The only other models I've seen using the U-MaticH logo are the BVU110P portable and the BVU800P recorder. The BVU150P portable and the BVU850P were the later U-MaticSP format, so Hi-Band was a short lived variant of U-Matic, although compatibility existed on later SP machines. I've still got a VO-9800P and it will playback all 3 PAL variants but can only record in Hi-Band or SP depending on the tape stock. The machine gives no indication to tell you when it's playing (or recording) Hi verses SP, but if I remember correctly the DolbyNR will only work in SP mode, there's a Hi/SP indicator that goes out when playing Lo-Band.
Only the PAL models had hi-band, the NTSC versions aren't. The only difference between the industrial VO series and the BVU series was the BVU series had professional I/O (XLR and BNV connectors)
I knew that NTSC didn't have the Hi-Band variant it was just odd to see a BVU unit that was Lo-Band. All PAL BVU decks I've seen are either Hi-Band or SP, as Lo-Band PAL was never considered to be a broadcast format. My VO-9800P has both XLR audio and BNC video connectors, so it's not just the BVU series that has those, in fact I think most PAL U-Matics have BNC video connectors, I've seen them on VO-2000, 5000 and 7000 series. RCA/phono connectors are much more commonly used as audio connectors rather than video, at least up to the end of the 1980's.
@@KylesDigitalLab correct. This has direct rf output as well for external video processing so technically it could play an so tape with external demodulator, as it would look like playing an svhs tape with the built in electronics. SP was relatively short lived as. BETACAM SP had already been released and with the large tapes BETACAM could record much longer than the 60m of u-matic.
@@12voltvids If I'm correct the direct RF output jack was for connecting the VTR to an external TBC. And there was a subcarrier input jack that would also come from the TBC. I'm also wondering if you could use that RF output jack to do tape path alignment.
@@KylesDigitalLab the rf out was for an outboard video processor / time base corrector and it also provided subcarrier. That eliminated most of the ringing. It was also for direct editing as when dubbing using rf there was less generation losses.
I saw a VTR that used 3/4 inch wide tape. That was probably 1987 or 1988 at a college. I have no recollection of brand. I didn't know 3/4 inch video cassettes existed. Interesting .
@@12voltvids Yeah. Sony had also originally intended U-Matic for home use, but it proved too expensive for that purpose. But, as you know, it was more practical than 16mm film for news gathering in the field, thus pioneering ENG. In between U-Matic and Betamax, there was the Philips VCR format in Europe while the USA had Cartrivision ... which was crap.
@@Watcher3223 actually u-matic was never intended for home use. It was targeted for industrial use, business and schools ECT. Was not considered good enough for broadcaat. Sony already had a portable 1" that met FCC requirements. With the development of better time base correctors u-matic became good enough for eng use. Betamax was devoloped soon after u-matic. U-matic went into production. In 1971 followed by betamax in 1975. VHS followed the next year in 1976. Video 2000 was 1979, late to the party. Cartrivision was 1972. The difference between u-matic and betamax was the drum size and tape width. The smaller drum resulted in lower relative tape speed which resulted in 240 lines horizontal resolution vs u-matic 330 lines. That is the major difference in quality. Since both used 688khz color under frequency the color resolution was the same. The original beta 1 speed had pretty good audio. BETACAM followed in 1982 and that sealed u-matic's fate. Beta became the most successful analog video format of all time. Not home beta, but professionally it quickly became the world standard. Sony made a killing with those machines. Home beta may have been a failure but the professional format was a home run.
@@12voltvids Well, at least in Japan, U-matic was advertised for home use. There's even a commercial from Sony for that purpose. ua-cam.com/video/VwtewuB29os/v-deo.html
That's what these were used in. Before betacam u-matic was used in ENG. I still have my old VO4800 / DXC1800 portapak but have lost the cable that went between the camera and recorder.
When I was in elementary school, during the '80s, we had older Sony U-Matic machines connected to 23" tube-type commercial-grade RCA color TVs in a metal cabinet, all on a tall roll-around cart. The only solid-state TV I remember being at that school was a 25" Zenith in the library and it was connected to a Panasonic U-Matic machine. We didn't get VHS until about '87 and after elementary school, I never saw another U-Matic machine in use.
We had them too. They were playback only machines.
History a peace of equipment U-Matic
@@jasonthejawman5442 yes i know. I have a Panasonic NV9800 and Sony VO4800 portable and a Sony VP1000 and VP2000 player. I should dump a few as they get very little use these days. Used to do a fair number of u-matic conversions but they have fallen off sharply in recent years.
Thanks for a great memory. In 1985 my TV station had upgraded to Sony 800/850 decks with the Sony TBC, so for the first time we had slo-mo available for news stories of the day. Pretty slick! But we still had 3 of the old 200s to record satellite news feeds. Those decks were already about 5 years old and were pretty long in the tooth, needing lots of repair/tweaks on a weekly if not daily basis. The engineering staff was very happy to see them go away when they added several more Sony800 decks. We were all broadcast Betacam by 1989 and the quality difference was dramatic over the crappy under color carrier of U Matic.
I'm sorry that I'm not used to English yet. There may be mistakes, so please understand.When I was in high school, I ordered the idler tires, each rubber belt, and a complete set of consumable parts from the Panasonic company to replace my Panasonic U matic loading idler tires. It was a little difficult to disassemble due to the tape mechanism above. Repair was successful.Although it has been over 35 years, it is still usable.
SONY's screws have a minus center groove, so I used a homemade minus. SONY original screws were often used in VTRs such as BVH-1000~3100.
Dave, I envy your mechanical proneness! When I was in the business long time ago I admire how my colleagues repaired these machines. I only could repair and install transmitters!
I've worked on a lot of Umatic machines but never one of these early top loaders.
Wow, never knew there was a BVU model that early on. I’m glad there was a remote control for automatic editing. Crash editing. Yikes.
I learned to edit on the 9800 series Umatic when I was in high school. Later, I interned at a studio and they had the 5800 series. A/B roll. I have a 5600 of my own. I’m only 42 so I’m probably on the very tail end of editing analog. Digital was terrible at the time.
Thanks for all the great videos! I wish you were closer to me. 😀
What an impressive looking machine, i can't imagine the original price.
Yes robertson screws would have been very reliable.
That machine was probably 20,000 new. Perhaps higher.
The lawn mower man is back in town. Yay!😊
This looks almost identical to the Sony VO-2850 from the mid 70s.
It probably is identical, the BVU series basically just took the industrial VO series and added SMPTE timecode for editing, and professional connectors such as XLR for audio.
We had a Shibaden VCR in grade school, did black and white only and used reels of tape that came off this "portable" Sony recorder Sadly I had one and when I moved here, I threw it out, too big and heavy.
Interesting to see that the NTSC version of the BVU200 is Lo-Band. The PAL version of this model is one of the first Hi-Band recorders (U-MaticH). The only other models I've seen using the U-MaticH logo are the BVU110P portable and the BVU800P recorder. The BVU150P portable and the BVU850P were the later U-MaticSP format, so Hi-Band was a short lived variant of U-Matic, although compatibility existed on later SP machines. I've still got a VO-9800P and it will playback all 3 PAL variants but can only record in Hi-Band or SP depending on the tape stock. The machine gives no indication to tell you when it's playing (or recording) Hi verses SP, but if I remember correctly the DolbyNR will only work in SP mode, there's a Hi/SP indicator that goes out when playing Lo-Band.
Only the PAL models had hi-band, the NTSC versions aren't. The only difference between the industrial VO series and the BVU series was the BVU series had professional I/O (XLR and BNV connectors)
I knew that NTSC didn't have the Hi-Band variant it was just odd to see a BVU unit that was Lo-Band. All PAL BVU decks I've seen are either Hi-Band or SP, as Lo-Band PAL was never considered to be a broadcast format. My VO-9800P has both XLR audio and BNC video connectors, so it's not just the BVU series that has those, in fact I think most PAL U-Matics have BNC video connectors, I've seen them on VO-2000, 5000 and 7000 series. RCA/phono connectors are much more commonly used as audio connectors rather than video, at least up to the end of the 1980's.
@@KylesDigitalLab correct.
This has direct rf output as well for external video processing so technically it could play an so tape with external demodulator, as it would look like playing an svhs tape with the built in electronics. SP was relatively short lived as. BETACAM SP had already been released and with the large tapes BETACAM could record much longer than the 60m of u-matic.
@@12voltvids If I'm correct the direct RF output jack was for connecting the VTR to an external TBC. And there was a subcarrier input jack that would also come from the TBC. I'm also wondering if you could use that RF output jack to do tape path alignment.
@@KylesDigitalLab the rf out was for an outboard video processor / time base corrector and it also provided subcarrier. That eliminated most of the ringing. It was also for direct editing as when dubbing using rf there was less generation losses.
I saw a VTR that used 3/4 inch wide tape. That was probably 1987 or 1988 at a college. I have no recollection of brand.
I didn't know 3/4 inch video cassettes existed. Interesting .
These were the first video cassettes. Then betamax and then VHS
@@12voltvids Yeah.
Sony had also originally intended U-Matic for home use, but it proved too expensive for that purpose.
But, as you know, it was more practical than 16mm film for news gathering in the field, thus pioneering ENG.
In between U-Matic and Betamax, there was the Philips VCR format in Europe while the USA had Cartrivision ... which was crap.
@@Watcher3223 actually u-matic was never intended for home use. It was targeted for industrial use, business and schools ECT. Was not considered good enough for broadcaat. Sony already had a portable 1" that met FCC requirements. With the development of better time base correctors u-matic became good enough for eng use. Betamax was devoloped soon after u-matic. U-matic went into production. In 1971 followed by betamax in 1975. VHS followed the next year in 1976.
Video 2000 was 1979, late to the party. Cartrivision was 1972.
The difference between u-matic and betamax was the drum size and tape width. The smaller drum resulted in lower relative tape speed which resulted in 240 lines horizontal resolution vs u-matic 330 lines. That is the major difference in quality. Since both used 688khz color under frequency the color resolution was the same. The original beta 1 speed had pretty good audio.
BETACAM followed in 1982 and that sealed u-matic's fate.
Beta became the most successful analog video format of all time. Not home beta, but professionally it quickly became the world standard. Sony made a killing with those machines. Home beta may have been a failure but the professional format was a home run.
@@12voltvids Well, at least in Japan, U-matic was advertised for home use. There's even a commercial from Sony for that purpose.
ua-cam.com/video/VwtewuB29os/v-deo.html
What is the exact model of that small Sony camera you mentioned?
DSC-TX100
I am Still recording onto 3/4” in 2023 😂
U-Matic $30,000 New, Reminded of a TV Station
That's what these were used in. Before betacam u-matic was used in ENG. I still have my old VO4800 / DXC1800 portapak but have lost the cable that went between the camera and recorder.
@@12voltvids I have a VO-8800 and a DXC-M3A.
Sony Cybershot DSC-TX100V ?
Yep
Do you have one that works I may Buy it from you!