[kaycee]

Can anyone recommend a really simple to use DVD recorder? An elderly relative has used a video recorder until now but it's wearing out (it's only about 30 years old!!!).

My relative hasn't got good eyesight and basically wants something he can just put disc in & press record & hey presto.....

He doesn't want something with Freeview and all that....

[Deacon1972]

Even though they don't require Freeview, I think a freeview + box would be easier to use than a DVD recorder. Everything gets recorded to a hard drive, no discs to mess about with, setting up recordings are done from the EPG, no manual setting required. Worth thinking about I reckon.

[Chasing Shadows]

Originally Posted by kaycee

He doesn't want something with Freeview and all that....

Haven't made them without Freeview for years - seeing as Freeview is the only form of terrestrial television available in 90% of the UK now.

Very few DVD recorders are manufactured anyway - LG still make them, Panasonic still make them, but Sony, Pioneer, Toshiba and Philips pulled out of the market over a year ago.

As Deacon suggests, if he only wants to be able to record things shown on telly, watch them then delete them, he'd be far better using a Freeview+ box than messing about with DVD discs. DVD recorders are good for archiving things to keep long term - but you won't find one without "Freeview and all that".

[chrisjr]

One is tempted to ask what this relative has been recording on the VCR? Unless he lives in an area still awaiting DSO it won't have been very much probably. The only way he could have been recording TV in a post DSO location is if the VCR had a Freeview box attached. Or he was just recording whatever programme the TV was set to by using a reverse feed down the SCART lead.

Can't see how either of those options can possibly be "easier" than a Freeview PVR frankly.

[bobcar]

Yes echoing those who have said a PVR. This is by far the simplest and most user friendly solution, DVD recorders are most definitely not for those who are not good with new technology. It may well be that some PVRs have larger text than others that would make them easier to use for your relative.

If they really can't do anything other than put the cassette in and press record then a second hand VCR from eBay or the like would be the solution, definitely stay away from a DVD recorder.

[blueisthecolour]

I don't think a DVD recorder is a great option.

How about something like this:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/t...tially-sighted

[grahamlthompson]

[quote=blueisthecolour;59631520]I don't think a DVD recorder is a great option.

How about something like this:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/t...tially-sighted[/QUOTE

Sadly TVonics has gone bust, so dont expect too much support even if you can get one.

http://www.companies-uk.co.uk/tvonics-limited-05087575

[kaycee]

Originally Posted by Deacon1972

Even though they don't require Freeview, I think a freeview + box would be easier to use than a DVD recorder. Everything gets recorded to a hard drive, no discs to mess about with, setting up recordings are done from the EPG, no manual setting required. Worth thinking about I reckon.

I understand what you're saying, but he has Sky so doesn't need freeview, and though you can save to a Sky+ box you can only store so much, and you can't copy anything from a camera or camcorder.

[kaycee]

Originally Posted by chrisjr

One is tempted to ask what this relative has been recording on the VCR? Unless he lives in an area still awaiting DSO it won't have been very much probably. The only way he could have been recording TV in a post DSO location is if the VCR had a Freeview box attached. Or he was just recording whatever programme the TV was set to by using a reverse feed down the SCART lead.

Can't see how either of those options can possibly be "easier" than a Freeview PVR frankly.

It is possible to save things in Sky+ and then copy them to a video - I know cos I've done it. Also as said above, film/pics from camcorder and camera.

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by kaycee

I understand what you're saying, but he has Sky so doesn't need freeview, and though you can save to a Sky+ box you can only store so much, and you can't copy anything from a camera or camcorder.

It might have helped to have explained this in the OP.

The impression you gave was that he was using the VCR to record off air programmes rather than copy stuff off a Sky box. Hence all the posts about PVRs and such like that are totally useless in this scenario.

[kaycee]

Originally Posted by chrisjr

It might have helped to have explained this in the OP.

The impression you gave was that he was using the VCR to record off air programmes rather than copy stuff off a Sky box. Hence all the posts about PVRs and such like that are totally useless in this scenario.

Sorry - I must think more clearly before I type.

I have Sky+ and can copy saved items to dvd & video.

Relative has Sky (not Sky+ though) and copies directly to VCR, which needs replacing as it is wearing out.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by kaycee

Sorry - I must think more clearly before I type.

I have Sky+ and can copy saved items to dvd & video.

Relative has Sky (not Sky+ though) and copies directly to VCR, which needs replacing as it is wearing out.

If he subscribes to Sky, then he wants a Sky+, if he doesn't he wants a Freesat PVR - not to mess about with DVD recorders.

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

If he subscribes to Sky, then he wants a Sky+, if he doesn't he wants a Freesat PVR - not to mess about with DVD recorders.

Seconded.

At the moment all he can do is record whatever channel he is watching and unattended recordings must be an unnecessary faff.

Surely it has to be easier to call up a programme guide and just select the programme(s) you want to record and let the box just get on with it.

About the only reason these days for hanging a stand alone recorder off the back of a TV receiving device is to archive recordings to a different format (ignoring the legal niceties of this of course )

[kaycee]

Originally Posted by chrisjr

Seconded.

At the moment all he can do is record whatever channel he is watching and unattended recordings must be an unnecessary faff.

Surely it has to be easier to call up a programme guide and just select the programme(s) you want to record and let the box just get on with it.

About the only reason these days for hanging a stand alone recorder off the back of a TV receiving device is to archive recordings to a different format (ignoring the legal niceties of this of course )

Admittedly recording to a Sky+ (or similar) box is simple, but it has it's limitations. Space wise you can't keep recordings indefinitely, nor can you use a recording on another tv.

Also, you can't record something you have taken on a camcorder. [Not everyone has a computer!]

[chrisjr]

If you adhere to the letter of the law you can only use a TV recorder to timeshift, ie record for watching at a later time. You cannot keep that recording for repeated viewing or to form part of a collection. Then again who keeps strictly to the law?

Why not upgrade to Sky + (or a Freesat PVR if he doesn't subscribe to Sky) and see how it goes? You might find that in reality he doesn't really keep that much stuff. How many tapes does he have now and how many has he actually watched back more than once? It could turn out that actually being able to archive stuff is a lesser priority than timeshifting.

And once he gets used to being able to recording a different programme to the one he is watching and being able to select a load of programmes in advance and series link etc etc that are so easy on a PVR he may never want to return to a VCR type existence.