Atarikid96 Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 I was wondering which would generally give me better picture: using an RF to coaxial adapter from the unit directly to the CRT tv, or running it through a VCR then to the TV? Anyone know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SignGuy81 Posted April 14, 2017 Share Posted April 14, 2017 (edited) Unless your TV has issues with tuning and your vcr has better tuner I would say hook it directly to your TV. I'm assuming you mean that your TV has composite inputs and you will be hooking your VCR up via composite. Because if your TV has a crappy tuner and your VCR has a better one using the better one on the VCR for the Atari won't help if it is sending the signal out to the crappy tuner of the TV. So really it all depends, just try different ways and see what you think looks best. Edited April 15, 2017 by SignGuy81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Nathan Strum Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 It depends entirely on how good the demodulator is in either device. Generally, the CRT TV would probably give better results for RF simply because it's one less device in the chain. That said, I use a Sony TU-1041U for RF, and really like it (they show up regularly on eBay for around $25-$35). For RF, it's remarkably clean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atarikid96 Posted April 15, 2017 Author Share Posted April 15, 2017 Would you recommend a modern dvd/vcr or older straight up vcr? Because I have both. Granted I'm going to try it and see, and post the results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Nathan Strum Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 Would you recommend a modern dvd/vcr or older straight up vcr? Because I have both. Granted I'm going to try it and see, and post the results. You answered your own question. Whichever works best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atarikid96 Posted April 15, 2017 Author Share Posted April 15, 2017 True lol. I actually found the old VCR had better picture than the vcr/dvd combo. I also just switched my VCS from a 19" Panasonic CRT TV from the late 80s to a 32" JVC CRT TV from the same time period. It looks great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maiki Posted April 15, 2017 Share Posted April 15, 2017 It depends entirely on how good the demodulator is in either device. This must be true. I have TVs that produce RF interference, and TVs that are clean. Running the signal through external antenna box also eliminates the interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+sixersfan105 Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 I use the VCR method b/c my modern LCD tv has an awful Coaxial/Antenna/RF (whatever you want to call it) input, to the point where the picture has static and the audio is all garbled. Running my VCS through a VCR, and then VCR to TV with composite cables, however, completely fixes this issue and works like a charm! Your mileage obviously will completely vary based on your TV's demodulator, as stated previously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted April 17, 2017 Share Posted April 17, 2017 I'd be surprised if manufacturers these days really put much effort into their RF demodulators these days. Very few people actually need them. Usually that input is used for a digital cable connection. In the old days, VCR's ranged from the very low end to the very high end. Higher end VCR's generally had better RF demodulators. So my guess is that often you'd get a better picture using a high-end VCR connected to a modern TV than using the TV's built into demodulator. It would surprise me if modern TV's had demodulators better than low-end VCR's, if even that good. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+sixersfan105 Posted April 18, 2017 Share Posted April 18, 2017 I'd be surprised if manufacturers these days really put much effort into their RF demodulators these days. Very few people actually need them. Usually that input is used for a digital cable connection. In the old days, VCR's ranged from the very low end to the very high end. Higher end VCR's generally had better RF demodulators. So my guess is that often you'd get a better picture using a high-end VCR connected to a modern TV than using the TV's built into demodulator. It would surprise me if modern TV's had demodulators better than low-end VCR's, if even that good. sounds about right to me. The VCR that I use is a Broksonic (not really a quality brand) that I picked up off craigslist for $20 a year or so ago when I realized my modern TV's RF was crap. Best $20 I've spent in a long time and gets the job done! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMaddog Posted April 22, 2017 Share Posted April 22, 2017 I've used a VCR to hook RF only Atari systems to my Commodore video monitor, but that's only as a compatibility thing. Picture quality was decent for gaming but it would never be as good as a pure composite video signal. A $30 RF demodulator from Radio Shack could do the same thing but I already had the VCR plus I also used it for TV viewing with an OTA and also for movie rentals. But on a modern HDTV I would never use the RF port for anything other than a digital OTA... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.