We've had clients use everything from the el cheapo standard Sony DV tapes right upto the expensive ones that come in the larger box. So far we've had no reports of dropouts from any of them recording HDV. Make what you will of that.

For my money tape is cheap compared to everything else so I'd go for the DVM63DM tape, we're suspecting the more expensive HD variant is the same thing in a bigger box, we've been unable to get any info from Sony on it other than how much it costs.
I wouldn't blame this on John Barry either, low end isn't their thing, and secondly Sony are a bit vague on this issue.

PS, if you want your tapes a bit cheaper, email me, we're not far from JB and a bit cheaper.

Bob.

Spot,
sorry but this is wrong!
Or if it's not we've all been led up the garden path by Sony and others over DV!
If digital data is recorded onto ANY megnetic media then it's just ones and zeroes. Improving any tape parameter will not make any difference to the recovered signal. Extremely bad tape may cause bits to end up the wrong way around but it'd have to be very bad for that to happen. If you've ever tried to bulk erase any DV tape you'll understand how unlikely it is to happen.
Better tape formulations are less likely to wear out or shed the media. That's where these tapes are better, there's less risk of the metalised layer shedding. This probably isn't such a big deal with HDV as no one seems to be using those tapes in the same way as say DB gets used, played over and over again.
Of course if you're recording analogue signals to tape then better tapes give you more headroom which is a good thing.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be using better tape with HDV given how much grief a dropout can cause but I know of no way you'll get a 'better picture' from them!

Bob.

Well...the rationale, and shown by a couple independents, is that the greater error correction, coupled with the greater gain, leads to greater color stability/reproduction. While I personally haven't experienced a dropout, nor significant errors, all devices have errors, and the more faithful the error correction, the more accurate the image.
BASF has an image comparison somewhere, that one of the Shoreview guys showed me last January at the Sundance Film Fest, and strangely enough, even in a digital picture, the image was "better" even though all the colors were the same. Less interpolation in the error fields, results in a cleaner reproduction. They weren't/aren't Sony affiliated, but their images demonstrated pretty clearly that higher correction and embedding of information resulted in a better image. It wasn't lightyears better, but is the difference between 4:1:1 and 4:2:0 lightyears different? No...but we're always looking for that extra "edge"

"At BASF, we dont make products, we make products Better!" Those old commercials have been stuck in my mind forever.

If what BASF is saying is indeed true then that's something of major significance. What they're saying does make some sense, a better signal being presented to the read heads means less subsequent error correction is required and the result is an ultimately superior image.
Now in some things digital this does indeed happen, audio CDs being a good example, if the lower level error correction is unable to correct the error then some smarts smooth out the values so we don't hear anything nasty. Without a professional disk analyser or software we're unlikely to know there's anything wrong or that information has indeed been lost.

However if the same process is indeed happening with DV25 then that's a very unsettling piece of news because every piece of advice I've read here and in many other forums is quite the contrary. The obvious implication is that there is a generational loss with DV25, if we PTT and then capture that tape back, what we get is NOT the same as what we previously had! Now that can be determined pretty easily, there's no room for some vague 'looks better' kind of comparison, either every 1 and 0 is the same or it's not, if even one bit is different then there's a pretty serious issue at stake here.

Now I've only so far mentioned DV25, it's one of the few DV formats that truly doesn't suffer generational loss (so we're lead to believe) as the 1394 data pipe is purely digital, there's no analogue fiddling or transcoding involved.

So perhaps what we've been told so far about DV25 is true but perhaps there's something unique about HDV, maybe it's not a purely digital system, maybe the error correction is less perfect that it is for DV25?

Certainly from what I've seen with DV25 there's no smoothing over of unrecoverable errors. The errors can be rather hard to find as they can be as small as a few pixels and only last for one frame but once you find them they're pretty obvious. We were led to believe that HDV being mpeg-2 was able to employ better error correction, in other words there was less risk of unrecoverable errors. All results to date indicate that with HDV the results of an unrecoverable error are much worse than they are for DV25. But what's being implied here is that there's some grey area, errors that could be recovered but that are being glossed over.
All this warrants some serious investigation, if what BASF are saying is true we all need to seriously rethink our workflow!

Bob.

Thanks for the offer Bob. Are you speaking of John Barry in Melbourne? They're just up the road from me, also, which is very convenient. I'm not being critical but they weren't aware of DVM63HD tapes and could only report that another customer had bought up their small stock of PHDVM63DM tapes as being what he wanted for his Sony HDV cameras. They're getting more of the same down from Sydney. According to various sites the DM tapes are more expensive, but JB has them at the same price Sony sells the HD.
Cost isn't really an issue -- I'm used to the cost of 16mm neg/pos.
Anyway, I think I'll stick with the 63HD tapes even though they seem a bit more difficult to get (ie have to walk further into downtown). But I would like to have a better understanding of the technicalities of the options.

The Sony tape team has a powerpoint that I used at NRB, but it wasn't my computer. I'll see if I can get a copy of it. They also claim superior picture, and JVC is apparently launching a new tape line that claims superior.
It makes a lot of sense to me, but the question is HOW MUCH better is the picture? I could see the difference indeed, in the BASF presentation.
And, as you noted errors on various CD brands affected the audio quality.

FWIW,
i have used the DVM63's since I bought my FX1, and as I had mentioned to Spot at one time, I have two tapes that I have used for "test tapes", I have rerecorded over them multiple times. One tape at least 5 times, for things like timelapse tests etc.
I have had ZERO drop outs on those tapes. (none of the virgin ones I use for everthing else,have had drop outs either).

I dont know of thats a testament to the tapes , but I figure I am sticking with them if not for the Lubrication factor.
Tapes are one place where the saying "you can never have too much lubrication! " doesnt apply. I figure for the cost of the tapes its worth not having to worry about head cloggage etc.. from mixing tapes.

Over 110 DVM63 and 20+ DVM83 on 2- FX1 , 1-Z1 No drops or artifacts.

Sorry no, I was referring to JB in Sydney, we're about 1 KM from them and a bit cheaper. JB are not noted for low prices, I think you might do better even at an official Sony shop if they carry the stock.

I agree it's all a bit confusing, we carry the HD stock and only found out about the DM stock when Sony started putting a free tape in with every Z1! We suspect it's the same tape, just the box is larger and the case itself maybe of better construction.

For what it's worth, at first most clients hiring Z1s were buying the DH stock but lately they've all gone back to the standard DV stock. Given the price difference and that free travle clock no wonder.

Now here's a tip, if you get one of those Sony travel clocks, do NOT set the alarm! The only way to disable it is to take the batteries out of the thing!

If you're after bulk tape stock, Awesome Support up here in Sydney seem to be the cheapest around but I think you have to buy it by the box.

Bob.

Thanks Bob, I'll be wary of that Sony alarm if I should stumble across one!
cheers,
Serena

Having done today a tour of Melbourne's firms that supply the film and video industry I can report that the only tape they keep for the HDV camera is the Sony PHDVM-63DM. The DVM63HD tape was unknown to them, but now they know about it. The differences between the two tapes isn't known and I've had a variety of descriptions about the likely advantage of the DM over the HD. All were logical and reasonable but were all guesses; in fact the one I like best is that the DM is better because the "P" means professional; but then I'm a fan of Monty Python. Also the HD cassette is wrapped only in cellophane, whereas the DM is in a proper box. Also the box says: "for professional use" and "designed for HDV"; well it doesn't actually say that -- you have to read it on the label. Plus, you can read it also in French.
I'm told that Sony likes to remain mysterious about the same tape being offered in different boxes, so perhaps we'll never solve this problem.

Well they sent us a glossy pamphlet to go with the DM stock but it tells us nothing and we're supposed to sell the stuff!
I suspect this is the same smoke and mirrors stuff that Sony pull with their DVCAM professional stock in the larger plastic cases, that blue plastic case helps you look more like a pro and therefore your pictures must be better!

Bob.

Yes, the DVCAM blue box was mentioned. Anyway, I gave in and bought a number of the DM tapes. One retail store I phoned did have the HD tapes and they wanted $48 each; maybe the phone-answerer asked the wrong question of the sales person but I didn't bother to visit them for confirmation.