Panasonic ES10 vs. video mixers?

[packsnap85]

I am using a Panasonic ES10 for its TBCish capability in capturing VHS tapes. Would adding a video mixer with a TBC (videonics) be an improvement to my setup or would it just be redundant to the ES10?

[themaster1]

video mixers get rid off macrovision (generate clean sync pulses i believe) , so if you have Mv tapes to digitize that's ok otherwise useless imo, depending on the price indeed

[hodgey]

Not all mixers contain frame stores either, though the fancier ones generally did as it was used to add digital effects and sync inputs etc. How much they are able to stabilize horizontal instability (aka line-tbc) also varies, though ont aware of any on the level of an ES10. They also won't always be as transparent on the video quality due to the age and less sofisticated digitizing circuitry. On the plus side they can help skip macrovision as noted and are more adjustable than a dvd-recorder. Adding a mixer after the ES10 won't be of any help and just slightly degrade quality.

[dpalomaki]

Videonics MX-1 or MXPro or MXPro DV?

The MXPro series has higher bandwidth corresponding to DV signals. The Pro DV offered IEE1394 I/O but was not widely sold because it came late to the game wand was pricey. By that time NLEs were becoming more popular with the event videography market. The MX series mixers also served in low budget CATV, church and school video operations (e.g., live multi-camera switching of church services for streaming.) Some MX-1 users encountered heat issues in certain applications, possibly due to poor airflow around the device in their studio.

While not built and sold as a TBC but as a video mixer/switcher with frame sync it does provide some TBC-
like functions because it buffers the incoming frame and then spits it out with precise timing. The issue is how well it can cope with funky input signals. (Its intended uses were with live camera and original tape inputs in the tape-to-tape linear editing era.)

The manual warns that "Video processing circuits such as enhancers, sharpness controls, and the playback circuitry used in some VCRs can over-process the video causing the visible signal to interfere with the invisible sync portion of the signal making the signal non-standard. This may cause video lines to shift to the right, black lines to enter the picture area from the left edge the screen, white flashes,video 'tearing,' or a shredded picture." Thus the "EDIT" or similar setting on many VCRs. (TV sets were generally much more forgiving of these signal issues.)

MX-1 Specification: "...13.5 MHz, 4:2;2 8-bit quantization, 4x sub carrier oversampling, Dual-field infinite window time base corrector. Time base meets RS-170A standard. Gain Unity, S/N ratio 56 dB, Resolution 5.0 MHz."

The MXPro used 10-bit Quantization and 60 dB S/N for s-video (Y/C) inputs, 480 TV lne resolution (~6 MHz) and was CCIR-601 compliant.

Looking beyond the Macrovision issue, a MX-series mixer might help with some tapes and not with other tapes, and its performance will be impacted by what the components earlier in the signal chain do including playback VCR settings as well as the aging of the MX components. A MX in good condition should pass a NTSC (or PAL if a PAL model) standards compliant VHS signal without noticeable degradation when viewed on SD monitors from its era. It can be a useful tool for an SD analog video enthusiast but serves little purpose for those working in digital and HD.

[lordsmurf]

The issue with "also does" TBCs is that these frame/line function do not exist for you or your tapes. Those TBCs are always weaker, and were only there to assist with the main function of the unit. Mixing, keying, etc. The TBCs are not to accept dirty sources (VHS), problem sources, copy protected, etc. Nor do they work that well, or at all, for that function.

This gets even more complicated when it comes to versioning (production changes). There are some mixers that have frame, line+frame, line, and nothing at all. With the last entry (nothing) being most common. But even the non-nothing is weak, or has drawbacks.

These vary wildly from line TBCs in S-VHS VCRs, or frame DataVideo/Cypress type TBCs specifically created for consumer sources. And primarily for digitization, not some other mixing/keying/etc function.

These units can be interesting, useful at times. But these add to a workflow, not really a replacement for anything in a standard workflow (quality VCR with line TBC, quality frame TBC, quality capture card).

At best, you can say "better than nothing" (aka "not that ugly", "doesn't suck", aka a non-compliment).

[packsnap85]

Thanks. So these wouldn’t serve as replacements for the DVK’s in the “99%” ES10->DVK TBC chain referenced in other threads?

I can’t say I’ve really noticed issues with only having the ES10. Could my capture card be helping me out here in some manner (more forgiving?), or are the tapes I’m working with just not problematic enough?

[hodgey]

If you hit issues with the output from the ES10 not being stable or something yeah, though I've never seen any example of that happening. At least if you look at the output of the ES10 on a scope or similar it's a 100% stable video stream. So unless you're noticing problems it should be fine.

The only I know the panasonic dvd-recorders can do is turn off the analog outputs if there is nothing going into the selected input (besides not being connected the one thing I know that can trigger it is when playing back a tape that was erased by recording with nothing connected to the inputs. unrecorded portions won't trigger it).

They will also put a fresh macrovision/copy protection signal on the output if it's detected on the inputs which could maybe upset certain capture cards in which case a dvk or similar would also help strip that. A lot of capture cards don't care about macrovision. On my PAL lion king tape the copy protection also ends up messing with the brightness/agc of my ES10 (and other panasonic and pioneer dvrs) causing it to fluctuate so it doesn't work well for at least some macrovision tapes anyhow. Idk if that would happen with all MV tapes or just some though, as that tapes gives the TBC in my JVC SVHS trouble as well. Using a mixer or something else alone may or may not be a better option in those cases.

(caveat, I'm in PAL land with PAL gear so can't say for certain that NTSC ES10 will act 100% exactly the same though the PAL and NTSC variants do use the same exact same digital board other than firmware.)

[thestarswitcher]

I've dealt with a switcher in the past (SE-500), and attempted to use it as a TBC. It couldn't handle sudden bursts of light; I've attached an example here.