VHS Hi-Fi: The Mediocre, the Bad and the Crappy

[ReDFoX]

Hi ASR! This is a comparison between 4 Hi-Fi VHS recorders.
One of the reasons I decided to dive into VHS Hi-Fi is its recent boom here, in Russia. For some weird reason, in the span of 2 years, a huge VHS Hi-Fi community has grown up. Those people really believe that Hi-Fi on VHS is equal (or even better) than real R2R...
VHS is served as high-end analog on a budget. There’s only one problem: technical ignorance, which leads to people buying top of the line SVHS decks with TBC (why would they need that for audio?). They think that more money spent -> the better the sound and it already resulted in 2X bump in price for almost all VCRs (Panasonic’s classic AG-4700 doubled in price from 150-200 to 300$+). I hope that this comparison can shed some light into this highly subjective and full of misleading claims territory.

We’ll be comparing four VCRs across different price brackets:​

• Panasonic NV-HD750AM
• Panasonic NV-HD620EU
• Philips VR888/35 (with JVC mecha)
• JVC HR-S7700EU
  
  
  

My current setup consists of E-MU1616, which I’ll be using at consumer levels (-10dBV), which results in ~2 Vrms at 0 dBFS. I recorded the same section with each of them and then played back. Blank TDK HD-X PRO tape was used.

Test 1: Basic Passthrough​

You’d think all these decks would at least handle passthrough transparently, right? Wrong.
I ran two versions of this test — one with 1 kHz and another with 10 kHz — just to see how they handle different frequencies. Turns out, it does make a difference (lol).

I would say that only HD620 and HD750 somewhat passed in this test, however, look at the much higher noise level of VR888! In terms of pure noise performance HD750 is on top again, followed by S7700.

At 10 kHz HD620 is the only VCR which hadn’t clipped... Btw, just look at that awful performance from JVC (THD level is the highest among all 4), especially for that price. Honestly, I would say that both HD620 and HD750 have passed this test, since that nasty clipping from HD750 wouldn’t be noticeable with real world music which has huge HF drop.
This “discovery” makes further testing even more challenging, since I have to lower maximum level… I settled on ~ -6dBFS peak for all my tests just to avoid possible clipping.

Test 2: 1 kHz Single Tone​

Even with a basic 1 kHz tone, we can see huge differences in performance.
The Panasonics are quite reasonable, but the VR888 shows much more harmonic distortion, including high-order components.
Ranking:
HD620 >> HD750 >> S7700 >> VR888

Test 3: CCIF IMD​

Moving to CCIF IMD test: all of them are pretty much suck in this regard, however, HD750 and S7700 are especially awful due to their early clipping on HF. For some reason JVC’s levels were considerably lower after playing back recorded test signal (note that).
Honestly, I wouldn’t even rank them, however, HD620 may pass (VR888 has elevated noise).

Test 4: SMPTE IMD​

SMPTE IMD performance is okay-ish, however VR888 has the most amount of distortion and JVC lowers HF level again.
Ranking:
HD750 >> HD620 >> VR888 (JVC fails to record the signal properly)

Test 5: Multitone​

Multitone shows huge shelf-like drop on JVC’s frequency response. Out of the remaining three, only Panasonics have somewhat low noise floor, but that’s like ~10 bit of resolution. Not something I would be proud of…
Ranking:
HD750 >> HD620 >> VR888 (JVC fails again)

Test 6: White noise​

But what about “real world performance” in terms of frequency response? White noise recording shows that all VCRs have somewhat decent frequency response extension, although JVC has the lowest level (input stayed the same for all 4) and a strange bump between 40Hz and 1kHz…
Ranking:
HD620 >> HD750 >> VR888 >> S7700

Test 7: Frequency sweep (REW)

REW’s default measurement sweep confirms some of our previous findings.
Frequency response charts aren’t really representative here because of non-linearities we’ve seen before. However, even with this relatively high input level HD620 manages to hold up impressively well.

 

[ReDFoX]

Well, singletone THD measurements pretty much sum up this testing.

After all that’s been said:​

• Panasonic NV-HD750AM: Low noise, linear FR, low THD overall, but has frequency-dependent distortion;
• Panasonic NV-HD620EU: Low-ish noise, linear FR, low distortion regardless of content’s spectrum;
• JVC HR-S7700EU: Mediocre noise performance, huge frequency response nonlinearities, moderately high distortion;
• Philips VR888/35: High noise floor, moderately linear FR, but worst distortion overall.

This concludes our testing.

Final thoughts​

If I’m being honest, I wasn’t happy with these results at all...
Whether it comes down to some internal processing or physical limitations of the format (generator is needed to fill gaps while heads are switching), I don’t know.
But as a listener and consumer, I care more about the result than the method — and the result here isn’t all that impressive, at least for today's standards...

 

[kyuu]

Thank you for the extremely thorough examination of VHS players as hi-fi devices.

Honestly, I'm still kind of boggling at the entire concept of using VHS tapes as a medium for listening to music at all. Though honestly, after some examination, it's not that much weirder than the obsession with vinyl as a playback medium.

 

[Curvature]

Honestly, I'm still kind of boggling at the entire concept of using VHS tapes as a medium for listening to music at all. Though honestly, after some examination, it's not that much weirder than the obsession with vinyl as a playback medium.

@ReDFoX Is there some kind of nostalgia in Russia that pulls people more towards VHS than vinyl?

 

[DVDdoug]

At the time it was better than vinyl, cassettes, or 8-track! It was the best thing most of us had at home but the only way you could get music was if you could find a concert video (I had several) or music videos (I may have only had one). I had a reel-to-reel machine, but I only had tapes that I made myself, mostly recorded from vinyl.

The high frequencies in vinyl are also limited (at least partly) by the RIAA EQ, and cassettes and reel-to-reel (at least partly) by NAB EQ. There may be other reasons it's limited but you can't really get-around the EQ which boosts the highs when recording. As you say, with normal program material, you don't need strong signals with high frequencies.

 

[JSmith]

VHS Hi-Fi is its recent boom here, in Russia.

Really? Huh... that's gold.

Thanks for posting the measurements though, still interesting.


JSmith

 

[Multicore]

I did not even know that VHS audio recorders were a thing. Now I know that and that there's a fashion for them in Russia and we have the objective evidence that neither should be. Amazing! Thank you.

 

[amirm]

Promoted to home page.

 

[JeffS7444]

One of my greatest annoyances with higher-end VHS features including Super VHS and VHS HiFi is that few rental movies offered the latter, and I never encountered a single SVHS rental.

 

[amirm]

In its time, VHS Hi-Fi was a revelation. It was far, far better than linear tracks they had used before.

 

[Ifrit]

@ReDFoX Is there some kind of nostalgia in Russia that pulls people more towards VHS than vinyl?

Obsession with first days the western entertainment wasn’t outlawed, was still way too expensive for majority, was a tell-tale sign of “wealth and prosperity” etc.
The trend for using VHS Hi-Fi came back right on the heels of vinyl resurrection and continues on through today.
Plus, it’s a niche for “old guard” part of population that rather fix old equipment than buy a new one, and some younger folk who try to be “hip”. And it’s a cheap way to get “true analog recording medium” compared to reel-to-reels. Abundance of NOS and used tapes for next to nothing (or literally nothing) makes it more attractive as well.

Majority of hifi enthusiasts are pretty much like everywhere else. With much the same setups, arguments and holy wars.

 

[Power Pop 23]

When I couldn't be at home to use a cassette deck, I would sometimes use the 6-hour recording time of a VHS Hi-Fi VCR to record a concert broadcast via FM radio.

 

[dlaloum]

View attachment 463893View attachment 463894View attachment 463895View attachment 463896
Well, singletone THD measurements pretty much sum up this testing.

After all that’s been said:​

• Panasonic NV-HD750AM: Low noise, linear FR, low THD overall, but has frequency-dependent distortion;
• Panasonic NV-HD620EU: Low-ish noise, linear FR, low distortion regardless of content’s spectrum;
• JVC HR-S7700EU: Mediocre noise performance, huge frequency response nonlinearities, moderately high distortion;
• Philips VR888/35: High noise floor, moderately linear FR, but worst distortion overall.

This concludes our testing.

Final thoughts​

If I’m being honest, I wasn’t happy with these results at all...
Whether it comes down to some internal processing or physical limitations of the format (generator is needed to fill gaps while heads are switching), I don’t know.
But as a listener and consumer, I care more about the result than the method — and the result here isn’t all that impressive, at least for today's standards...

Back in the 1980's there was a lot of discussion about using VHS HiFi (the helical recorded tracks, not the standard stereo linear tracks) - as a high quality recording medium.

At the time JVC was considered the high end of VHS... and their machines were highly respected.

I don't know whether the current crop of machines are just far far lower quality (possible), or whether VHS HiFi was always a middling medium, and the hype was all snake oil marketing...

I vaguely recall that there were tests done that rated VHS HiFi highly - at least on a par or superior to the high end of cassette recording capabilities (which on Nakamichi, Revox, Tandberg, etc... was a pretty decent medium).

 

[JakeK]

At the time it was better than vinyl, cassettes, or 8-track! It was the best thing most of us had at home but the only way you could get music was if you could find a concert video (I had several) or music videos (I may have only had one). I had a reel-to-reel machine, but I only had tapes that I made myself, mostly recorded from vinyl.

The high frequencies in vinyl are also limited (at least partly) by the RIAA EQ, and cassettes and reel-to-reel (at least partly) by NAB EQ. There may be other reasons it's limited but you can't really get-around the EQ which boosts the highs when recording. As you say, with normal program material, you don't need strong signals with high frequencies.

It was a thing in the 90s. With NICAM stereo TV broadcasts and a HiFi VHS recorder you could get fairly decent sounding (for the time) recordings of concerts from the BBC. They sounded better than cassette tape recordings. I also used the HiFi VHS to send the NICAM audio from live TV as well as films (movies) to my hi-fi which was a massive improvement. I didn't actually use the VHS much for audio only as it wasn't very convenient and most of my listening was CDs.

 

[Hart]

I have a 4k LG 77" OLED. I watched some old 4:3 480 on it, it is almost unwatchable. It was probably okay in 1980 on a small screen when you had nothing else to compare it to. I am sure an old VCR with a well worn tape would be even worse. I do remember getting my first Hi-Fi VCR and renting tapes thinking...how could it possibly get any better than this? In twenty years from now when you jack directly into your brain so you can step right into the movie you will wonder how the hell you put up with a 77" OLED in 4k. Especially since it didn't even have touch, smell or taste.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

Nice
PS Audio can compete

 

[johnnyx]

For a few years in the 1980's, I compiled party tapes of music on a HiFi Fergusson VCR. They could play for over 3 hours, and avoided changing discs when drunk. The result was good enough for a party, possibly better than the cassette tapes I recorded previously.

 

[AdrianusG]

Hi ASR! This is a comparison between 4 Hi-Fi VHS recorders.
One of the reasons I decided to dive into VHS Hi-Fi is its recent boom here, in Russia. For some weird reason, in the span of 2 years, a huge VHS Hi-Fi community has grown up. Those people really believe that Hi-Fi on VHS is equal (or even better) than real R2R...
VHS is served as high-end analog on a budget. There’s only one problem: technical ignorance, which leads to people buying top of the line SVHS decks with TBC (why would they need that for audio?). They think that more money spent -> the better the sound and it already resulted in 2X bump in price for almost all VCRs (Panasonic’s classic AG-4700 doubled in price from 150-200 to 300$+). I hope that this comparison can shed some light into this highly subjective and full of misleading claims territory.

We’ll be comparing four VCRs across different price brackets:​

• Panasonic NV-HD750AM
• Panasonic NV-HD620EU
• Philips VR888/35 (with JVC mecha)
• JVC HR-S7700EU
  
  View attachment 463861

My current setup consists of E-MU1616, which I’ll be using at consumer levels (-10dBV), which results in ~2 Vrms at 0 dBFS. I recorded the same section with each of them and then played back. Blank TDK HD-X PRO tape was used.

Test 1: Basic Passthrough​

You’d think all these decks would at least handle passthrough transparently, right? Wrong.
I ran two versions of this test — one with 1 kHz and another with 10 kHz — just to see how they handle different frequencies. Turns out, it does make a difference (lol).
View attachment 463857
View attachment 463859
View attachment 463858View attachment 463860
I would say that only HD620 and HD750 somewhat passed in this test, however, look at the much higher noise level of VR888! In terms of pure noise performance HD750 is on top again, followed by S7700.
View attachment 463862
View attachment 463863View attachment 463864View attachment 463865
At 10 kHz HD620 is the only VCR which hadn’t clipped... Btw, just look at that awful performance from JVC (THD level is the highest among all 4), especially for that price. Honestly, I would say that both HD620 and HD750 have passed this test, since that nasty clipping from HD750 wouldn’t be noticeable with real world music which has huge HF drop.
This “discovery” makes further testing even more challenging, since I have to lower maximum level… I settled on ~ -6dBFS peak for all my tests just to avoid possible clipping.

Test 2: 1 kHz Single Tone​

View attachment 463866View attachment 463867View attachment 463868View attachment 463869
Even with a basic 1 kHz tone, we can see huge differences in performance.
The Panasonics are quite reasonable, but the VR888 shows much more harmonic distortion, including high-order components.
Ranking:
HD620 >> HD750 >> S7700 >> VR888

Test 3: CCIF IMD​

View attachment 463870View attachment 463871View attachment 463872View attachment 463873
Moving to CCIF IMD test: all of them are pretty much suck in this regard, however, HD750 and S7700 are especially awful due to their early clipping on HF. For some reason JVC’s levels were considerably lower after playing back recorded test signal (note that).
Honestly, I wouldn’t even rank them, however, HD620 may pass (VR888 has elevated noise).

Test 4: SMPTE IMD​

View attachment 463874View attachment 463875View attachment 463876View attachment 463877
SMPTE IMD performance is okay-ish, however VR888 has the most amount of distortion and JVC lowers HF level again.
Ranking:
HD750 >> HD620 >> VR888 (JVC fails to record the signal properly)

Test 5: Multitone​

View attachment 463878View attachment 463879View attachment 463880View attachment 463881
Multitone shows huge shelf-like drop on JVC’s frequency response. Out of the remaining three, only Panasonics have somewhat low noise floor, but that’s like ~10 bit of resolution. Not something I would be proud of…
Ranking:
HD750 >> HD620 >> VR888 (JVC fails again)

Test 6: White noise​

View attachment 463882View attachment 463883View attachment 463884View attachment 463885
But what about “real world performance” in terms of frequency response? White noise recording shows that all VCRs have somewhat decent frequency response extension, although JVC has the lowest level (input stayed the same for all 4) and a strange bump between 40Hz and 1kHz…
Ranking:
HD620 >> HD750 >> VR888 >> S7700

Test 7: Frequency sweep (REW)​

View attachment 463886View attachment 463887View attachment 463888View attachment 463889​

REW’s default measurement sweep confirms some of our previous findings.
Frequency response charts aren’t really representative here because of non-linearities we’ve seen before. However, even with this relatively high input level HD620 manages to hold up impressively well.

Hi,

Thanks for this great review

Very interesting test, long time ago >35 years I used a Philips VHS recorder for just that, record Vinyl (and sometimes CD) > VHS tape, (well it did double duty actually) you know, just to try if it was any better than my then cassette deck.
at the time I thought the recordings didn't sound too bad at all

 

[AdrianusG]

When I couldn't be at home to use a cassette deck, I would sometimes use the 6-hour recording time of a VHS Hi-Fi VCR to record a concert broadcast via FM radio.

That's how i used it too sometimes, lots of recording time

 

[ReDFoX]

@ReDFoX Is there some kind of nostalgia in Russia that pulls people more towards VHS than vinyl?

Well, I won't say that vinyl is less popular at all! You need to understand, that we didn't have a lot of options back in the day: 95%(?) of people were able to buy a VHS VCR only in mid 1990-s so we have quite a lot of low and mid tier Hi-Fi options on the second hand market atm
Vinyl is popular here, especially with Japan this close...