Well... you know... facts are facts and I object to falsehoods, especially when presented with an unwarranted sense of superiority!
In the 60s the Beeb was using the Ampex Quadruplex format video recorders which ran 2-inch tape costing around £120 an hour (equivalent to about £2,500 a reel in todays money!)... So not surprisingly, the beeb wiped and reused those tapes routinely. That policy was still in place when I joined the Beeb in the 80s, and we were re-using each reel of 1-inch C-format video tape on average 5 times before it was scrapped. A programme had to be deemed extremely important to have the tape archived long-term.
It is a matter of record that the tapes from those BBC Dusty Springfield shows in 1966 and 67 (and I think 1969, too) were wiped — along with countless other shows and series along the way. Lost Dr Who and Dad's Army episodes were high profile examples. At the time, none of those shows were considered valuable enough to warrant long-term archiving of the tapes. Today, with a different perspective, those decisions may appear foolish but that's just the reality and practicality of way it was back then.
So... the '
Dusty at the BBC' DVD's referred to were actually produced and released by Universal — not the BBC — and created from recovered material obtained from private archives of home recordings. I've no idea what quality material Universal started with, but I'd be very surprised if they made it any worse, and in all likelihood they worked hard to make it as good as they could in the circumstances.
I'd say the sound on the YT presentation is seriously lacking bass rather than just having a mid-range hump — possibly to reduce recorded hum? — but we all listen with different ears.
A quick scan of some comments on Amazon reveals that many people have complained about the sound quality, although one I read suggested that "Those clips broadcast by the BBC were far more rounded and wholesome than these..." Presumably that commentator has a very good memory!

Anyway, the point is that Tim's unnecessary put down was well wide of the mark... And not for the first time.
Still, it's the Internet, innit? Purpose-designed to make it easy to criticise people you don't know, over things they had nothing to do with, from a position of zero knowledge and less respect.
