CED VideoDisc and Player Discussion

7jlong · Joined: 01 Jun 2004 Posts: 187

It has long been observed that when RCA gave up on Selectavision, they erased it right out of their history and never dared speak of it again.

This might have been up for a little while, but I know it wasn't always there - RCA gives the most imperceptible nod to Selectavision on their "The RCA Story" web page:

"[RCA] dabbled in various video disc formats before the introduction of the DVD..."

Previously there had been absolutely nothing coming close to pairing the words "video" and "disc" in the same sentence, so I guess that's some small improvement.

Rixrex · Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 1222

That's a pretty lousy way of putting it - dabbled. It's obvious that whoever wrote this has little knowledge about the CED technology and simply was looking at things from a wholly business and profit margin perspective. The incredible technology and effort required to bring Thomas Edison's phonograph into the modern age of picture and sound deserves more than "dabbled" as it's footnote in history, especially from RCA itself.

RCA operatives should take a look at Chrysler to see the right way to handle a techological breakthrough that was not a commercial success. Here I'm talking about the Chrysler and DeSoto Airflow, a technological success and commercial failure. However, Chrysler does not hide this in any of their historical references, but instead touts the airflow as a good example of how Chrysler innovation was the most important aspect of its production.

Although the Airflow has a small contingent of interested collectors, much like the CED systems now, the company never turned its back on the fact they made it and it didn't succeed. They instead are proud of being in the forefront of the automotive technology of the time.

In my opinion, and my Dad's, who was working in the CED production division at the time of CED marketing, had RCA execs given more effort toward having the CED ready for market 5 yrs sooner, we'd be looking at a different landscape right now. In other words, we'd never be able to collect every one of the disc titles produced.

Rixrex · Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 1222

Jesse Skeen · Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 539 Location: Sacramento, CA

There was a DVD put out in 1998 that was given away with some RCA DVD players about that year's Super Bowl, called "The Best One Ever". It starts out with an unskippable "history" thing where their first VCRs are referred to as "SelectVision". Of course it doesn't mention CED at all. I'll try to put that on YouTube soon.
_________________
Videodisc and stereo sound- there's no better value around!

jbrockhyde80 · Joined: 21 Mar 2006 Posts: 30 Location: Monroe, LA

Beetlescott · Joined: 03 Oct 2010 Posts: 2099

Well I have to say, for a format that was full of problems, isn't it amazing that you can pick up a CED that has been sitting in a box for 30 years, and pop it in your RCA Selectavision Video Disc Player and get clarity and sound that was unparralled for that time? I just bought 200 + CEDs from a lady who was liquidating an estate, I brought them home, popped in one of the movies I had never seen before, and I was watching The Boston Strangler! Are there flaws? you bet. But think about it, after all these years, Our format still stands up quite nicely!!
_________________
1000 titles
SGT-250
SJT-400
Montgomery Ward
SGT-100

krbsforty · Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:07 pm Post subject:

Rixrex · Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 1222

I agree that they've lasted better than any of the tape formats, but I think LDs have done as well as CEDs but for the occasional laser glue issue. Perhaps LDs will have more problems in the future due to being two sides glued together, and CEDs will not have any. And the tape format, whew, what a lot of maneuvering and mechanisms to get a tape rolling in a machine, rolling out, pulling, stretching, etc. No wonder they can't last. (Still a pretty amazing technology as well)

It's well known among enthusiasts and those who started with CEDs that the price was right, less than half of a same time VCR and the discs were mush cheaper to make via the pressing process. So better and cheaper thanks in part to RCAs wealth of experience with record manufacturing, but not the favorite it could have been.

It really should have been introduced 5 years sooner. Of course it can't record, but neither could DVDs initially. And imagine CEDs with the advanced digital memory technology that allowed LDs to use still-frame, frame advance and all. The 400 series just started taking advantage of such technology. And there definitely would have been other technical advancements that would have improved picture and sound quality as well.

Oh well, can't spend too much time thinking about what might have been.