Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!rhea!akov68!boyajian From: boyajian@akov68.DEC Newsgroups: net.video Subject: re: Beta HiFi Problem/Question Message-ID: <6323@decwrl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 26-Mar-84 00:35:37 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.6323 Posted: Mon Mar 26 00:35:37 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 21-Mar-84 01:17:42 EST Organization: DEC Engineering Network Lines: 42 watcgl!dmmartindale: > Sounds like you got an ordinary Beta tape rather than a Beta HiFi tape. They > definitely exist - I watched Blade Runner on a friends Beta HiFi VCR and the > tape was definitely not HiFi. Since it wasn't labelled as such by the rental > place, ther was nothing to complain about. (Beta HiFi tapes have the ordinary > audio tracks recorded, too, for compatibility.) Waitaminute -- if the BHF tapes have the regular mono soundtrack in addition to the stereo track to make them compatible with non-HiFi decks (and I know this to be true), why would anyone find it necessary to issue two separate "editions" of a movie, one with just a mono track, and one with both mono and stereo tracks? It's one thing if the movie had already been released in mono and was then re- released in stereo (like APOCALYPSE NOW, STAR WARS, and DRAGONSLAYER), but BLADE RUNNER was one of the first stereo Beta tapes issued, and was marked as a stereo tape when it first appeared. Of course, you've pointed me in a possible direction for a solution. That I can recall, the copies of BLADE RUNNER that I've seen are all marked "Stereo", but not "Hi-Fi". But no, now that I think about it for a minute, this isn't a rea- sonable answer. The rental copy at my dealer's also says only "Stereo", but it behaved in my BHF unit the same as the other two tapes that *are* marked Hi-Fi (including having the "Beta Hi-Fi" light come on). It's possible that when the boxes for the tape were printed up, it wasn't clear that "Beta Hi-Fi" was going to be the neologism rather than "Beta Stereo" or somesuch. At any rate, my pur- chased copy wasn't even in stereo, let alone high fidelity. On the other hand, if your friend's rented copy wasn't in stereo, that could point toward the first alternative that I postulated: that when dupes were being made, one (or maybe more?) of the machines might not have been set up for stereo input, resulting in some lot of the tapes being non-stereo. I don't know the likelihood of this as an explanation (for one, I'm not sure of the probabilities of one tape from this lot finding its way to the Boston area, while another is sent to the Waterloo area (I assume from your net address that you're in that area)). This explanation does fit the available facts, though. --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC Maynard) UUCP: (decvax!decwrl!rhea!akov68!boyajian) ARPA: (decwrl!rhea!akov68!boyajian@Shasta)