Quantcast ATI 600 USB vs. Canopus ADVC capture cards - digitalFAQ Forum
  #1  
09-19-2013, 07:50 PM
tomswift tomswift is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Pembroke, Ontario
Posts: 87
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Admin Note: Split from Questions regarding Panasonic AG-1980 - linear audio, s-video
___________

Quote:
Originally Posted by volksjager View Post
the 600 is a decent device, just dont use the default settings
With the 600 (or any of the other ATI's), I don't get how you think they are decent devices, especially when, for analog inputs, such as composite and S-Video, they are basically acting like an RF modulator, since the connection on the board is a F-9 connector (so it's converting the S-Video to a composite signal, mixed with the audio, even before it digitizes it)? Not to mention, but DeeSeven said he's using the USB version which is for USB 2.0!


This question has been split from another post or thread. This was done in order to address the topic more in depth, make it easier to find via forum searches, as well as prevent the other post/thread from going too far off-topic. Please continue this part of the conversation here. Thanks for understanding our tech Q&A policies.

Reply With Quote
Someday, 12:01 PM
admin's Avatar
Ads / Sponsors
 
Join Date: ∞
Posts: 42
Thanks: ∞
Thanked 42 Times in 42 Posts
  #2  
09-19-2013, 08:10 PM
volksjager volksjager is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,023
Thanked 206 Times in 189 Posts
i use an AIW card
i have a 600PCI too but dont use it for VHS
but have owned a 600usb in the past and it is a decent card - i just didnt like the clumsy USB card hanging out of my PC.
the site staff here highly recommends ATI cards and they are the best in this business.
USB 2.0 has enough bandwidth for capture - not sure what you issue with that is???

your just stuck on sham canopus DV devices, even though a $20 ATI card is better
Reply With Quote
  #3  
09-19-2013, 08:52 PM
tomswift tomswift is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Pembroke, Ontario
Posts: 87
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
You're trying to say that capturing from a device that converts the video into an analog RF composite video/audio signal, and then digitizes it, is better than capturing from a device that takes analog audio and component video directly from an S-Video connection and seperate audio connection and digitizing it? Not only are you losing quality with the MPEG capture, and it doesn't matter whether the VCR's connected by S-Video or composite, but the video's already lost quality before it has been sent to the digitization circuits!

ATI made good video capturing devices back in the mid-90's for dial-up internet and VideoCD, but their capture devices for modern video have fallen far short of acceptable quality, even for Standard Definition. At $20 you get what you pay for. And I use Canopus because I have found that I get the best quality transfers with it than with these other transfer devices---especially ones that convert S-Video and seperate audio to combined RF composite/audio.

USB 2.0 is not good for video transfers. 3.0, maybe, but not 2.0. 2.0's speed just doesn't allow for the necessary transfer of information, and I've found, leads to a lot of out-of-sync video and audio. I know that the specs say that USB 2.0 is about 80Mbps faster than Firewire400, but even computer professionals (like here at PCWorld: http://www.pcworld.com/article/185415/article.html) admit that Firewire is the better of the two connectors, especially when you need the speed.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
09-19-2013, 09:12 PM
volksjager volksjager is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,023
Thanked 206 Times in 189 Posts
this just never ends...
do you work for canopus? or maybe you are a retailer of their garbage??
the staff here has probably forgotten more than you will ever know and they all recommend ATI cards

OP- you should just ignore Tom
Reply With Quote
  #5  
09-20-2013, 07:17 AM
tomswift tomswift is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Pembroke, Ontario
Posts: 87
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
I don't work or have any connection to Canopus. And it's funny how you completely side-stepped the fact that the 600 brings the video in by RF Composite. From my tests, ATI cards offer the worst quality, unless we are talking about video for dial-up internet and VideoCD.

The ATI's were designed to by capturing devices for programs from analog/digital cable-satellite-OTA. They were never meant for video transfers.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
09-20-2013, 08:19 AM
volksjager volksjager is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,023
Thanked 206 Times in 189 Posts
you just make this crap up
a fountain of mis-information you are
this forum is for people looking to do the job right - which obviously isnt you

fact is your $300+ canoPOS is outclassed by old ATI cards
Reply With Quote
  #7  
09-20-2013, 08:45 AM
NJRoadfan NJRoadfan is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,031
Thanked 317 Times in 259 Posts
The ATI 600 USB has S-Video and composite inputs. It is not just an RF input device.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
09-20-2013, 09:09 AM
tomswift tomswift is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Pembroke, Ontario
Posts: 87
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by volksjager View Post
you just make this crap up
a fountain of mis-information you are
this forum is for people looking to do the job right - which obviously isnt you

fact is your $300+ canoPOS is outclassed by old ATI cards
Sorry, but as far as ATI's go, you are the ones with mis-information. The Canopus ADVC-300 provides better quality picture and color than the ATI All In Wonder or the 600 USB. I've done my own tests, and unless I was watching the video through composite, ATI's provided over-cooked and outblown colors over S-Video, Component and HDMI playback. I even changed the settings multiple ways and the ATI's just gave garbage video.

ATI makes great video cards, but their capture cards have been sub-par since 1999. Canopus outclasses ATI in terms of capture quality. Period.

The old saying "You get what you pay for" is true with capturing devices. Pay $20 dollars, you get garbage video. Pay more and you get a lot better video.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
09-20-2013, 09:33 AM
volksjager volksjager is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,023
Thanked 206 Times in 189 Posts
if more money equals better why dont you have a aja Kona or Matrox?
no- it isnt about the money

the recommend ATI cards don't even have component or HDMI - so as usual you have cranial-rectosis

the ATI is superior to anything canocrap has ever put forth.
you are the one with garbage video
i cant believe you run a transfer service.
you should be ashamed to scam your customers of their money for trash DV transfers.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
09-20-2013, 12:38 PM
metaleonid metaleonid is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Fort Lee, New Jersey
Posts: 493
Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomswift View Post
With the 600 (or any of the other ATI's), I don't get how you think they are decent devices, especially when, for analog inputs, such as composite and S-Video, they are basically acting like an RF modulator, since the connection on the board is a F-9 connector (so it's converting the S-Video to a composite signal, mixed with the audio, even before it digitizes it)? Not to mention, but DeeSeven said he's using the USB version which is for USB 2.0!
What makes you think so? If S-Video is converted to Composite, how come I don't see dot crawls and rainbows on Snell & Wilcox test pattern?

I own both ATI USB 600 (thanks to this group) and ADVC-300. I of course is using ATI USB 600 if I need to archive high quality video losslessly. ADVC-300 would be good for low quality VHS cassettes. Image quality is better on ATI USB 600.

By the way, I just got ATI USB HD 750 which I will review later. I like it better than ATI USB 600.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
09-21-2013, 12:42 PM
juhok juhok is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 379
Thanked 99 Times in 84 Posts
I have no experience with ATI but I've tested ADVC-55, ADVC-300 and whatnot against cheap and expensive (lossless) capture devices ($100 to $1500) and Canopus loses horribly.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
09-26-2013, 10:49 PM
msgohan msgohan is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 888
Thanked 201 Times in 175 Posts
FUD-busting anyone?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomswift View Post
From my tests, ATI cards offer the worst quality
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomswift View Post
The Canopus ADVC-300 provides better quality picture and color than the ATI All In Wonder or the 600 USB. I've done my own tests
Sorry to catch you in a lie. If you had tested the ATI 600 USB, you would know that it is packaged with a little spaghetti cable that plugs into a port on its side.




The quotes below are perhaps based on a simple misunderstanding from not seeing full product photos, but to claim that you've compared for yourself?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomswift View Post
for analog inputs, such as composite and S-Video, they are basically acting like an RF modulator, since the connection on the board is a F-9 connector (so it's converting the S-Video to a composite signal, mixed with the audio, even before it digitizes it)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomswift View Post
You're trying to say that capturing from a device that converts the video into an analog RF composite video/audio signal, and then digitizes it, is better than capturing from a device that takes analog audio and component video directly from an S-Video connection and seperate audio connection and digitizing it?
Quote:
I use Canopus because I have found that I get the best quality transfers with it than with these other transfer devices---especially ones that convert S-Video and seperate audio to combined RF composite/audio.
As for USB...

Quote:
USB 2.0 is not good for video transfers. 3.0, maybe, but not 2.0. 2.0's speed just doesn't allow for the necessary transfer of information, and I've found, leads to a lot of out-of-sync video and audio.
The designed rate is 480Mbps and the effective throughput is 280Mbps. 480i30 at 8-bit 4:2:2 is less than 166Mbps (under 21MB/sec). Audio only adds 190KB/sec. I've done sustained USB 2.0 HDD transfers in the 30-35MB/sec range all the time.

Frame drops and loss of sync really aren't a problem for the other people you see on this site using the 600 USB (providing the source is stable).


Attached Images
File Type: jpg ATI 600 USB - items.JPG (23.5 KB, 125 downloads)
File Type: jpg ATI 600 USB - inputs.JPG (18.0 KB, 124 downloads)
Reply With Quote
The following users thank msgohan for this useful post: facp (09-26-2017), juhok (09-26-2013)
  #13  
09-26-2013, 11:40 PM
admin's Avatar
admin admin is offline
Site Staff | Web Development
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,368
Thanked 584 Times in 437 Posts
We do professional work -- working with most consumer tape formats (VHS/S-VHS, Hi8/8mm, DV, MicroMV and others) -- and have a number of ATI products in use here. It's not junk. The Canopus ADVC boxes, unfortunately (and quite sadly, given the price), perform poorly. I'll put an ATI 600 and ATI AIW against a DV box any day. The ATI does lossless, and the hardware is excellent. Done deal, nothing else to say. We only use the best tools, and those are some of the best for this kind of work.

msgohan is 100% correct here. USB2 is fine, etc.

metaleonid, if you have a review of the 750, I'll publish it on the main site if it's thorough and no-BS, like our other reviews. That's a card I'm also curious about.

Matrox cards are mostly good for NLE work.
I forget what the deal with Aja is (search this forum; it's here somewhere). Don't use it, don't need to, don't want to.

Quote:
ATI made good video capturing devices back in the mid-90's for dial-up internet and VideoCD, but their capture devices for modern video have fallen far short of acceptable quality, even for Standard Definition. At $20 you get what you pay for. And I use Canopus because I have found that I get the best quality transfers with it than with these other transfer devices---especially ones that convert S-Video and seperate audio to combined RF composite/audio.
ATI cards were terrible in the 90s. It wasn't until the Radeon series (128 Pro and 7000+ cards) that it was really good. The Theatre chipset was a game changer.

"Modern" video cards are mostly DVR cards, HD NLE cards, and some piddly/fireware USB junk. The days of excellent video cards was 2001-2006, which a few stragglers until 2009 (ATI 600). If you work with tapes -- ANY tapes (pro or consumer!) -- the best cards are at least 5 years old now, if not older. It's a lot like high quality VCRs; new ones are crap.

As stated, the ATI 600 USB doesn't combine as RF. Even a rudimentary glance at the drivers would have showed you that.

Maybe you didn't actually test with an ATI 600, but something else. Because none of that is true.

- Did this site help you? Then upgrade to Premium Member and show your support!
- Also: Like Us on Facebook for special DVD/Blu-ray news and deals!
Reply With Quote
The following users thank admin for this useful post: juhok (09-27-2013), volksjager (09-27-2013)
Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should I use a Canopus ADVC-55 or ATI x800 ? JLegnon Capture, Record, Transfer 3 06-09-2012 09:40 AM
Canopus ADVC as just Y/C separator? metaleonid Restore, Filter, Improve Quality 6 01-03-2012 05:37 PM
Philips SAA7130HL Chip Capture Card vs ATI and Canopus ADVC naripeddi Capture, Record, Transfer 7 12-06-2011 07:42 PM
Canopus ADVC 110 DV video capture card, for sale [SOLD] kaliree Marketplace 2 02-25-2011 08:39 PM

Thread Tools



 
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:38 AM