Datavideo TBC alternatives?
 

Datavideo TBC are very expensive. Is there any cheaper alternative for about 300$ and easy to find?

In addition to DataVideo, there's also Cypress, but at the same price point. Few other more obscure models, slightly less cost, but still not $300.

TBCs were always somewhat costly, but there are some TBC(ish) alternatives, some of which need modifications (mods), novice presetting (manual useless, confusing device for newbies). The DataVideo DVK units are on such item, but should be paired with the ES10/15 for true TBC(ish) performance. Depending on source, and other workflow hardware, some may suffice on their own, but it's very task specific.

ES10/15 does (mostly) line-ish work (not true line, MV holes), and DVK does weak frame. In combo, performs decently, though with quality drawbacks of the ES10/15 processing, posterizatin, and harsher filterining. But it's a budget option, when archival/best quality can be sacrificed for "good/decent" quality.

Least-worst option, far better than using nothing at all! Nothing is unacceptable.

And I PM'd you about something as well. ;)

For anybody reading this thread, also see http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...time-base.html if not already.

I found something about MP6000. It seems it has a TBC.
Here the instruction manual:
http://www.qed-productions.com/downl...000_manual.pdf

Page 6 describes the presence of"Built in TBC".
I also found a message on videohelp:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/...-Dedicated-TBC

But nothing about the nature of this tbc.

Remember, "TBC" is a loose term, and can mean almost anything.

Given DataVideo lineage, that TBC, if it exists, is probably weak, along the lines of the DVK units.

The DVK can, of course, be fortified by the ES10/15. ES signal output isn't cleanest, even if visual is nice. The DVK does not like untimed input, so the line work of the ES pre-filters it for the DVK. Decent TBC(ish), on a budget, though with add side effects of the ES (posterization, NR even when off, etc). It's not a true TBC replacement, but it can serve as TBC(ish) for analog conversions.

This MP-6000 is a DVD recorder. Does the TBC passthrough? Probably not. Uncommon feature. Only functions to create DVDs.

I wouldn't get anywhere near this unit.

I found also Datavideo SE-500. It seems it has a sort of TBC.
Here the manual:
http://www.sonotechnique.ca/media/wy...deo_SE-500.pdf

On page 18:
"The frozen image is a function of how the time base corrector (TBC, a.k.a. frame synchronizer) works. The SE-500 has a TBC at the Main Video Source and the Sub Video Source input on each channel. Their purpose is to stabilize the video signals as they come into the switcher, and to synchronize their timing so that they can be switched and otherwise combined with no disruption to the video signal. For more information on TBCs, see What is a frame synchronizer."

On Page 7:
"A frame synchronizer is a digital device that stores a frame of video in its memory and releases it at a very precise moment. These little devices are essential if you want to make a seamless switch from one video source to another. If the sources you are switching between are not synchronized with each other, the video image falls apart at the transition moment, and the result is not pretty.The SE-500 has a full frame synchronizer (also known as a time base corrector or TBC) at its Main and Sub Source inputs in each channel (4 Total) to insure switches without distortion and smooth, well-regulated video at its output. In addition to its digital memory, a TBC also has controls that affect the look of the video that passes through it. These controls are known as processing amplifiers, or proc amps; they control brightness, contrast, color, and tint, though these may have different names in different applications.For more information on some of these technical aspects, see the Appendix Tech Notes."

And on page 38:
"Quad Channel Time Base Correction - Full Frame Synchronization, 4:2:2, 13.5MHz"

-- merged --

SE-800 has dual channel TBC (page.6):
"A Dual channel TBC with YUV 4:2:2 Frame synchronizer for Composite, S (Y/C) and Component Y.U.V. inputs and outputs assures stable and high quality video from virtually any source. The SE-800 can serve as a sync reference for analog cameras, video projectors, scan converters, etc. "

https://resource.holdan.co.uk/Datavi...deo_SE-800.pdf

The same description is on the DVK-100 manual (page.29):
"Two Channel Full Frame TBC"

https://verleih.fhstp.ac.at/upload/M...1304930483.pdf

Here is a demonstration of a similar console that known to work well as a TBC:
https://youtu.be/HEXLlqJQ7Oc

All of these devices have been discussed on the forum. For VHS conversion, each has weaknesses.

The SE-500, for example, was designed specifically for live-camera input. Maybe broadcoast source BetacamSP type tapes. Even DV over analog. But not lowly consumer formats like VHS. That was what the DataVideo TBC-100 lineage gear was created for in the late 90s. What you're looking at are post-analog-world device intended for video houses still operating in analog or mixed analog/digital.

The Videotronics MX-1 is equally limited, many posts here have discussed it over the years. I believe it was NJRoadfan that gave us some in-depth on why it is weak, not suggested.

You're not asking anything new, and you will not receive different answers.

The only "DataVideo TBC alternatives", and with specific reference to usage with consumer analog sources (VHS, Video8/Hi8) are Cypress TBCs. And even then, Cypress from the 2000s, not 2010s, due to chip flaws of those latter generation devices.

What you're seemingly not understand is that not all TBCs are created equal, and that TBC is a wide term.

What sort of sources are you wanting to convert? VHS tapes? So far, you've mentioned nothing about your project. You cannot talk about a TBC in generic terms, conversations must be precise on the use case.

Wonder if the black AVTool box can be converted to a green Cypress one by flashing the chip, Has anyone with coding skills tried to come up with a mod? Are the chips completely different so the contents of one cannot be dumped and loaded to the other?

Chips are completely different.

I don't want to invent hot water. I searched a lot on these products but I didn't find a definitive judgment. I have not read about real tests obtained by using them. In particular on SE-500 or MP6000 (yes, it has tbc passthrough), I never thought they could be comparable to a TB-1000/100, but it could be to a dvk, for example.
Yesterday my "mxo2 mini max" arrived. I was surprised at the quality and stability of the capture. I tested an old original vhs movie and a mounted svhs home video (not the original svhs-c tape). I connected my jvc s5800 in Y/C directly to mxo2. No frame drop, no lost sync, acceptable image quality. I wanna try to improve it, but above all, experimenting, I am a very curious person who likes to learn.

How do you capture to computer with MXO2? Are you using the ExpressCard adapter?

Pci-e card, I have expresscard too but I don’t use on a laptop. It’s installed in an hp z400.

I don't think it would be impossible to alter the new one by reprogramming or replacing the ROM chip with a flash programmer. Granted deconstructing the machine code may be difficult. Whether it could fix the issue I don't know, I highly suspect it's a config error rather than chips being bad given how the error presents itself, but it's hard to say for sure. The A/D and D/A chips are the same from what I remember, not sure about the FPGA chip in the middle (it is for sure different in the TVOne 1-TBC). The memory chips differ but I don't know if it's relevant. It's all off-the-shelf chips hardware, though the SAA7114 chips are discontinued as far as I know.

It's possible there are some debug pins that would allow one to communicate with one or more of the chips on the board as well.

Here is an interesting thread about alternative TBC's:
http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/vi...hp?f=3&t=20487

Not really.

The MX02 is not a TBC, does not contain a TBC. So the OP in that thread is claiming nonsense. Some details are missing, and he jumped to conclusions. As such, he has created logical fallacy. ("John likes blue. John likes bananas. Therefore bananas must be blue.")

The 1T-TBC referenced in the thread is obviously a known-flawed 2010s Cypress.

The thread is claiming what we already know: TBC is required, and no Blackmagic cards will capture with out one. (Note that even when capturing WITH one, dropped frames have been reported by many people. The card is not designed for SD consumer analog sources, and does some weird stuff with SD footage.)

It goes on to discuss a Teranex appliance, and how it really needs pro sources, or at minimum higher/quality consumer sources. Again, nothing new to me.

Another poster claimed that Canopus ADVC-100 and 300 boxes contain TBC. That is malarkey. The ADVC-100 contains nothing at all. The 300 has an extremely weak line TBC that effectively does almost nothing.

You have to remember that I've been seeking TBC alternatives for 5+ years now, doing a lot of TBC research. None of the above is new to me. TBCs are often misunderstood, even by those working the video field. So a lot of what you read is wrong, and I've wasted many hours chasing down phantoms. Outside 90s / early 2000s DataVideo, or 2000s Cypress, it really is a dead zone for TBCs. Maybe a specific For.A here, a certain Kramer there. But that's really it, in terms of an effective TBC for VHS conversion.

TBCs are starting to remind me of classic cars. You want certain models, not just any random model.

What I don't understand is why capture devices manufacturers don't include TBC's in their capture devices, How hard to clone a cypress box and build it inside a capture device so the video get digitized in one single step, I'm not talking about the easy craps, I'm talking about brand names like Black Magic, Ensemble Design, Aja and the likes, People are paying over $300 for their devices anyway, so the market is there.

I love classic cars :D
Tell me more about some For.A or Kramer worth testing.
I found se-500 for about 180 euro here in italy, but it's a little too much for a test.

Probably because they make products for proadcast sources and there is low request on vhs/betamax tbc devices nowdays.

Preaching to the choir. :salute:

Me too ... now only if I could afford one. :laugh:

NTSC only.

I'd do it for no more than $50 total shipped/taxed. But never seen one that low.

Probably. But it still doesn't excuse the 2000s.

First test. Jvc S5800>mxo2mini. Blow-up on an old tape given with an old newspaper :laugh:
Virtualdub, no filter at all.

I'm not sure what that's supposed to show. TBC test needs clips. And specific tests need an hour or more of capturing (and those do not need to be attached to forum posts).

I actually have an MX02 in my possession, and plan to re-evaluate it in early Feb.

Nothing, only a test. That movie capture is stable and without problems. I was lucky, I'm trying another another vhs, a low quality bladerunner. It needs a tbc :depressed:
The good thing is that mxo2 eat everything without frame drop or audio desync.

1 - Adds cost which hurts drive for lowest possible price point while making a profit. Especially in the products aimed at the consumer market.

2.- A TBC can defeat commonly used analog copy protection, which may make the product in violation of the USA copy right acts. Combining an effective TBC in a capture device that respects copy protection can present this problem unless significant additional cost is incurred to prevent it.

The trick to an effective TBC is recognizing/interpreting what the sync timing should be in the(often poor quality) input signal, and using that understanding to store and reform the signal with correct line timing and solid stable sync.

Frame synchronizers such as found in video mixers like the MX1 will generally expect reasonably good sync on the input signal, and as such have limited ability to cleanup sloppy sync. (After all their purpose is to synchronize independent video signals for mixing purposes.) In the process they do rebuild the sync and as such provide some degree of TBC functionality.

Anyone tried one of these?
http://www.burstelectronics.com/pixie.htm

It could be interesting, but it's rare to find.

I've come across that link before numerous times, there is little to no information on how it performs. I have just ordered one, it was less than $100 on Amazon, I will test and report back, I have one home video tape with rolling frames problem I will try it with.

dpalomaki tested one: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...html#post38714

I believe that I tested one about 10-15 years ago, and it was poo. But that long pre-dates my current TBC research. So I've gotten another myself, I can do $109 for TBC research. My biggest concern isn't if the TBC works or not, it's noise, lack of signal transparency. The Big Voodoo TBCs, for example, were unacceptable, lots of interference noise that was created inside the unit itself.

But what sort of BNC to Y/C (s-video) cabling is needed?
Does this work, or are the BNC headers wrong? http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53...m/273869612104

More of like this they have to be females, you would need two.

The 25cm is too short, I need more than 6 inches of cable. The 1.5M may have worked.

I'm not ordering anything outside USA for this, it takes too long. Especially not from China, it's middle of CNY (Chinese New Year), shipping is horrid in Jan/Feb every year. There's always a chance I'll need to use the return policy, and cables from overseas/China may take 30+ days to arrive.

What else, where else?

I really wish I could use my existing s-video cables, meaning female s-video to male BNC, with a short 6 inches length. But where? (But also not a stupid price, bad design, Google has shown me a few of those already.)

https://amzn.to/3Ac487O

https://amzn.to/3MRNxO5

I've also used BNC-to-RCA with RCA-to-S-video (in a pinch though it adds otherwise unnecessary adapters to the chain) since I had them in my bag of connectors and adapters.

My test was not a detailed or comprehensive one, more a look at it and its internals. I did not have a good selection of sloppy signals in need of TBC available to use to test effectiveness.

Not covered in the manual is factory reset (e.g., to unity gain). I believe you turn the mode dial to "0" and hold both "INC" and "DEC" buttons when you apply power.

I just bought a Big Voodoo BVTBC10 off eBay and I'm very happy with it. I know others have had issues with them but I made an offer (gamble:praying:) of $150 and it was accepted (I think I could've offered less).

Externally it's in mint condition and the innards are immaculate - solid build, no bad caps and soldering is perfect. Came with the dedicated 5V power supply.

I've run it for 8 hours and the output remained clean and stable. I've put some very old tapes through it and a ES15 and I can't fault it. Very small foot print compared to the FOR.A FA-330P I was using.

Interesting. :hmm:

I have never seen a Big Voodoo TBC that hasn't had noise issues. Nor ever read anybody else that has not had the same experience. It would be interesting to see it perform with a JVC menu screen as the blue test pattern.

It's also weak, and chokes on quite a few errors.

I have not found tests on the BVTBC10, only previous. Could it be better?

The color bar output signal is uniform and clean. The JVC blue menu screen straight into the BVTBC has some slight wavy lines through it only noticeable if you really look for them. I had the same issue with the FA-330P though. I don't notice any interference or artifacts in the video recordings...using my eyes.

I've put old creased and stretched tapes through it paired with a Panna ES15 and all locked up fine.

I think considering all the TBCs recommended on this forum have their quirks, this particular unit I have is doing an OK job.

[Workflow(PAL): JVC HR-S6970->S-Video ->ES15->S-Video->BVTBC10->S-Video->BMD Intensity Shuttle->USB 3->PC->Virtual Dub->Vegas Pro 14..]

What about es15 posterizzation? Is it evident?

The ES15 already fully digitizes and recreates a stable signal, if there is anything it fails to deal with well it will be baked into the output. The only thing it can do that could possibly upset the capture card (which the BVTBC can remove presumably) is to put in a macrovision signal if it detects it on the input.

To test the capability of the external TBC you have to keep the ES15 out of the workflow, otherwise you wouldn't know which one is improving the signal and which one is degrading it.

I made 3 x 15 minute VHS sourced recordings with the BVTBC on its own, ES15 on its own and then both chained.

BVTBC on its own locked up well with no evident flagging and very slight wiggly lines within the video, not on the edges. The FA-330P suffered badly with the wiggly lines on the edges of the fame. There was posterization using the factory preset procamp settings but a later tweak of the setup and luma values fixed that.

ES15 on its own was very good. Very slight posterization on highlights but no wiggly lines and video was clean and locked with no frames dropped.

The BVTBC and ES15 together was best of course. The ES15 cleaned up the inherent video noise slightly. The procamp tweaking reduced posterization markedly. No video ringing or herringbone artifacts.

Vegas screen caps from captured .avi using MagivYUV

Attachment 11258
Attachment 11252
Attachment 11257
Attachment 11256
Attachment 11255
Attachment 11254
Attachment 11253

Some of the above images and statements don't make sense.

- a "no TBC" clip is required
- all comparison images need to be the exact same frame

The Big Voodoo is not a line TBC. So no amount of wiggling should be corrected.

The FA-330P is, not surprisingly, probably just choking on VHS source. Rackmount broadcast TBCs do not expect consumer sources like VHS, but instead something like BetacamSP. The "wiggling" is probably therefore being added, rather than any other item correcting the video.

The ES15 is not a TBC. It has some basic frame sync (NOT frame sync TBC) and some line(ish) TBC-like functionality. It's both weak and aggressive at the same time. Good line timing correction, but it can fail at any time due to anti-copy/Macrovision (artificial video errors) and MV-like natural video errors. A true TBC would not crumple to the floor and play dead when the video sneezes.

That BVTMC10 is really screwing with luma. That's unacceptable.

This can't be entirely true. No more so than the JVC S-VHS TBC fully digitizes on output. The output is still analog, and some part of the source signal can still mess with capturing. Even with ES10/15, frame TBC is still required almost always.

That capture is not fair to the FA-330P. You are correct Lord, the owner of that TBC told me it has a BetacamSP modification with a switch that was switched on. Once I switched it off BetacamSP those "wiggly" lines completely disappeared.

I tried to record a "no TBC" clip but unfortunately the BMD Intensity Shuttle does not like un-synced video signals and the recording is riddled with black frames and dropouts.

What about ctb-530? It seems something like tbc-5000/dvk

That's a problem. If wiggly lines disappear, you have a line/field TBC, not a frame TBC. And lack of frame TBC is what causes dropped frames. I'm not aware of any device that provides line+frame output in a single unit.

Unknown. You must be very careful with "conversion" TBCs. In order for the TBC to activate, the signal must be PAL>NTSC or NTSC>PAL (or SECAM>PAL, etc). PAL>PAL or NTSC>NTSC enters a bypass mode, and the TBC is not active on the signal.