GV-USB2, AmaRecTV dropping frames, no VirtualDub audio?

[MrEightThreeOne]

Hello all!

Been doing some video captures and unfortunately I've run into another issue after getting one resolved. There was something that concerned me in the back of my mind, and that was AmaRecTV, which I've been using to do captures, having an unusual amount of inserted frames. I thought maybe it was just that the tapes had worn that badly (I do not have an external TBC -- I'm priced out of having one, though I think I may know someone who has one I could borrow so I'll have to ask about it), but I wanted to be sure it wasn't the tape so I exercised a capture of nothing but the VCR OSD with nothing playing -- as you know, that should 100% be producing a stable image with absolutely no dropouts. And...it's *still* inserting frames even just capturing that. Yikes. Not even a TBC is going to fix that.

I tried VirtualDub as an alternative, and it doesn't appear to exhibit the same issue -- it still occasionally inserts a frame, but WAY more rarely on a pretty stable tape that has little wear. And leaving the OSD on for several minutes while testing a capture, it isn't inserting anything at all. Great! So, just use it instead of AmaRec, right?

...except it won't capture audio. It just stalwartly refuses. I have absolutely no idea why this would be the case. In preview mode, I hear audio just fine, and AmaRec captures it no issue, but the minute I go into capture mode on VDub, it just won't capture audio. It'll get video but audio is absolutely no go. And even weirder, it will only work if I have the specific audio source for the GV-USB2 selected; if I pick any other audio source, it stops seeing video, so rerouting it to Line In just makes things worse.

Do any of you have any ideas what might be the issue here? I'm at a total loss as to why this would at all either of these programs would be throwing such a fit. It doesn't matter the codec I use on AmaRec, whether it's HuffYUV or Lagarith, the behavior still persists, and I'm using second hard drives too. Help would be appreciated!

[aramkolt]

"Inserted frames only" is an interesting issue. To me, it would say that you either capturing at a frame rate higher than what the source is being played back - like trying to capture PAL at 29.97 fps (which is the NTSC frame rate, hence it would have to insert something like 5 frames per second), or that the VCR isn't moving the tape quickly enough past the heads because it thinks it is going the correct field rate, but is actually just outputting frames (and moving the tape) a bit too slowly.

I can't say why AmaRec would behave differently than virtualdub though with an otherwise identical setup, unless they have their frame rate of capture set differently. Conceptually, where I think a full frame TBC helps the most is if you're seeing dropped frames and inserted frames occur together in tandem as that suggests that a frame arrives too early, gets dropped, and then the capture program ends up then inserting a frame to compensate.

As for audio, try each of the different input devices in virtualdub and also check your sound card settings for input levels. You could also try capturing with an external sound card instead of the audio inputs from the GV-USB2 and using that as the source in virtualdub.

[lordsmurf]

I've written about this before, at length.

AmaRecTV was made to stream video game captures, from analog capture cards that worked best with video game consoles. Any "video" (games) is not any other "video" (tapes). It has consequences (lost data), especially because streaming/broadcast is not the same as archival capturing. This is the same reason that OBS is not suggested for videotape capture, as it does not internally work the same to arrive at the final output files.

GV-USB2 is not an ideal capture card, for multipe reasons. A few (literally 2-3?) overtly loud people online proclaim it to be "the best card ever", and yet far more disagree. I've had numerous PM/emails about this card, because they're afraid to get lambasted by the loud ones. Quite a few "what card should I use?" posts (at this site and others) are current GV-USB2 owners looking for something better. Those few loud ones are having a capture experience to satisfy them, great, but I'm not able to recreate that at all, nor are others. (I'm actually friendly with several of those loud ones, but we just have to agree to disagree on this topic, in the interest of staying friendly, especially in other areas like Avisynth, where we do agree.)

[MasterOfCapture]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

I've written about this before, at length.

AmaRecTV was made to stream video game captures, from analog capture cards that worked best with video game consoles. Any "video" (games) is not any other "video" (tapes). It has consequences (lost data), especially because streaming/broadcast is not the same as archival capturing. This is the same reason that OBS is not suggested for videotape capture, as it does not internally work the same to arrive at the final output files.

AmarecTV is the best analog capture software, solidly proven by many use cases, in videohelp forum and also here. Search for them, study them and experiment with the software if you are not familiar with it. Eventually come back with some real case and example of dysfunction if you will find a problem, so that everybody can understandand what you are talking about, because is it not clear.

On the other hand, OBS has been proven to be faulty on some experiments in videohelp forums (for instance by members Sharc and lollo https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/...tal-file/page2)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

GV-USB2 is not an ideal capture card, for multipe reasons. A few (literally 2-3?) overtly loud people online proclaim it to be "the best card ever", and yet far more disagree. I've had numerous PM/emails about this card, because they're afraid to get lambasted by the loud ones. Quite a few "what card should I use?" posts (at this site and others) are current GV-USB2 owners looking for something better. Those few loud ones are having a capture experience to satisfy them, great, but I'm not able to recreate that at all, nor are others. (I'm actually friendly with several of those loud ones, but we just have to agree to disagree on this topic, in the interest of staying friendly, especially in other areas like Avisynth, where we do agree.)

IOData GV-USB2 is an excellent card, able to provide an optimal analog capture. Again many use cases in videohelp forum, and also some nice results in youtube (for instance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flc8pOWm6YQ&t=294s). If you have any tests showing different results, you can show them here so that everybody can understandand what you are talking about, because is it not clear.

I have no intention to be rude or harsh, so forgive me if my language is strong, english is not my best (i use google translator for support).

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrEightThreeOne

but I wanted to be sure it wasn't the tape so I exercised a capture of nothing but the VCR OSD with nothing playing -- as you know, that should 100% be producing a stable image with absolutely no dropouts

False.

You problems (inserted frames) are probably related to the specific tape and not to the capture software.

[lordsmurf]

Just to clarify the above post, a banned member had registered a new account, and the above foaming-at-mouth tirade was his first post. Those accounts were merged, and thus re-banned as a result.

Do you see now what I mean about "loud" people, and how confrontational they seem to get over their precious GV-USB2/AmarecTV combo?

It's supposed to be a capture card, not a cult.

FYI, he was not banned for suggesting/defending those tools, but rather comments and attitude, in some previous post. In 20+ years of this site existing, we've not even had to ban 20 people (excluding blatant spammers).

[gunzel]

I wasn’t able to get a GV-USB2 working on Windows 10 with the latest version of the driver and had to revert to version 1.10.93. I can’t remember what the exact issue was, and unfortunately my notes don’t say, but it may have been audio related.

[Hushpower]

LS, I have been on VH and your site for over two years. There is literally only one person who regularly bags the GV-USB2: you, but have never once produced any comparative evidence that shows it is worse than any other digitiser.

As for foaming at the mouth, if that comment is based on post 4 above, I think one needs to toughen up. The poster even said:

Quote:

I have no intention to be rude or harsh, so forgive me if my language is strong, english is not my best (i use google translator for support).

Cut them some slack; after all, you're not exactly a shrinking violet in the diplomacy stakes.

[MrEightThreeOne]

...well then. This certainly became quite a thread.

So...I guess I'll give an update. First off, I still can't get Vdub to work on my main computer, but out of desperation I pulled out an old laptop and decided to try it there -- and it worked! No dropped frames or anything, audio and all! Woohoo! So I have something at the least!

To address a few of the things people have been suggesting:

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

"Inserted frames only" is an interesting issue. To me, it would say that you either capturing at a frame rate higher than what the source is being played back - like trying to capture PAL at 29.97 fps (which is the NTSC frame rate, hence it would have to insert something like 5 frames per second), or that the VCR isn't moving the tape quickly enough past the heads because it thinks it is going the correct field rate, but is actually just outputting frames (and moving the tape) a bit too slowly.

See, here's the thing -- Amarec doesn't allow you to capture higher than the source frame rate, so I highly doubt it's that. And again, the VCR not moving the tape fast enough is nullified entirely by the fact that this still happens when I'm capturing with the tape stopped and nothing but the VCR OSD showing. That, to my knowledge, should be a 100% clean signal with zero dropout, unless it's just the worst VCR ever made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

As for audio, try each of the different input devices in virtualdub and also check your sound card settings for input levels. You could also try capturing with an external sound card instead of the audio inputs from the GV-USB2 and using that as the source in virtualdub.

Input levels and the like are fine -- it just, for whatever reason, gives up capturing audio when I try to actually capture. Like, the audio file size doesn't even increase. It literally just doesn't try. And trying the other sound settings was something I addressed -- for whatever reason Vdub didn't like that either. But I have the solution with the other computer now so I guess that's not a big deal anymore.

What was said about Amarec being more for games makes sense, and I've used it for games in the past too and it works fine for those needs. Though for all I know it could have had this frame insertion issue the whole time and I just never realized, who knows.

So, ignoring all the other things being said about the GV-USB2, I do have two other options, by which I really mean only one because one of those said two options is my old Dazzle DVC-100 which I know is total junk and shouldn't be used.

I'm sure I'm going to get some eye rolls saying this for not mentioning it earlier, but...one of them happens to be an ATI All-in-Wonder 2006 PCI-e card. I know people on this forum absolutely swear by this line (not so much PCI-e, which I've seen on other posts is the weakest of the lineup), and if they give you good captures, great! I must admit I've got some issues to contend with though.

Firstly, I find the image is rather soft for my tastes. The GV-USB2 has a nice sharpness setting I can play with, which has proven quite helpful. But the other thing is that the ATI software for whatever reason really likes to mess with my files. It has a nasty tendency to unnecessarily double the vertical resolution, and when capturing AVI, it unnecessarily deinterlaces the video too.

Though, even using VDub with it, I've got a bigger problem to contend with -- the HDD latency on this computer is *abysmal.* The SATA port on this computer went out years ago, which means it's stuck with the far lower write speeds of IDE hard drives, which is a massive problem on its own, and makes doing lossless captures almost impossible. I could find a second hard drive, as presumably it would be able to access it faster since OS functions aren't being performed on it, but I dunno, that's a bit to gamble. It's an AMD Athlon 64 X2 2GHz, for those who wanted to know. The card does admittedly have good mid-2000s PC gaming performance though, so I'm at least getting some mileage out of it.

Do you think my capture issues with ATI MMC could just be that I'm using too new a version? It's 9.16. Are these known issues?

I'll continue to make my own assessments based on what all has been said about cards elsewhere too. Thanks for all the help.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hushpower

never once produced any comparative evidence that shows it is worse than any other digitiser.

The internet can be amusing place at times, where people demand "proof" of things far too often. And I often don't consider those demands valid, as those are veiled "prove me wrong" requests that tend to ignore the facts already given. And that's partially the case here.

AmarecTV is documented as being created for analog-source live-streaming/broadcasting of Japanese video game consoles. Live-streaming/broadcasting software is well-known (well, not as much as it should be, apparently) for capturing in a way that gives priority to sustained throughput, rather than give priority to the data integrity (aka drops/inserts). As such, the mechanisms "under the hood" don't work the same. Wrong tool for the task. Same for OBS, which was created for digital-source livestream.

And we're not even talking about wild claims here, but video capture software. This stuff is boring, dry, and nobody (aside from myself, and maybe a few others) really gives a crap about "how" or "why" it works, but rather that it does (ie, no drops/inserts, and with quality). If video capture software was in the grocery store, it'd be next to the rice cakes and bread crumbs. So I don't waste my time "proving" things to the 2-3 other people that may care. It's a waste of my time. I've already explained, using quick words, why it functions as it does, when the topic comes up.

Unfortunately, AmarecTV has lots of flaws and failings, and on average more than VirtualDub (which is far from perfect either). And it makes sense, given the software's intended use (ie, not videotape conversion). And that's that. It should not be the "first line of defense" (ie, VirtualDub is), nor the "second line" (tweak VirtualDub settings, then attempt other versions like VirtualDub2). But if you've exhausted all software, and even other hardware, sure, go for it, use AmarecTV if you have to, if it works, you tried your best to achieve better.

GV-USB2 is a mediocre card, the end. Not worst, not best. There's really nothing more to be said about it. (BTW, I've not had time to confirm it, but there may be two versions of this card, and I think I have both now.)

Remember: I often lament the fact that software and hardware fails us. I don't take any joy in it. I don't love VirtualDub or ATI, and both of them abandoned us. Phaeron and ATI are just ghosts from 20 years ago. The same is true of many others products, individuals, and companies. All that the capture community has left is us in the capture community.

In the past 25 years, I've spent a lot of time on R&D, sharing my summary findings, helping others with capture success. I just do not have the time to respond to all requests, especially not the "I need more proof" demanding types. Given how this is all unpaid time, I do enough, arguably too much, already.

BTW, this single reply has likely burned much of daily typing allowance. Right now, my pain is cumulative. So I hope you take that into consideration. I gave you some of my time, my most precious commodity. I think of you fondly, and didn't want to ignore you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrEightThreeOne

the GV-USB2,
an ATI All-in-Wonder 2006 PCI-e card.

Between those exact options, it'd be a tough decision, and I can see myself chosing the GV-USB2 here, more often than not.

Quote:

But the other thing is that the ATI software for whatever reason really likes to mess with my files.
It has a nasty tendency to unnecessarily double the vertical resolution, and when capturing AVI, it unnecessarily deinterlaces the video too.

PCIe drivers are to blame here.

Quote:

it's stuck with the far lower write speeds of IDE hard drives, which is a massive problem on its own, and makes doing lossless captures almost impossible.
I could find a second hard drive, as presumably it would be able to access it faster since OS functions aren't being performed on it, but I dunno, that's a bit to gamble.

It's not that slow. I captured lossless in 2002, using a "big" 100gb WD IDE HDD, no drops. Yeo, 1 tape filled most of the HDD. And that's why we all capture MPEG back then! The problem here is trying to capture to the OS drive, that never works.

Quote:

It's an AMD Athlon 64 X2 2GHz, for those who wanted to know. The card does admittedly have good mid-2000s PC gaming performance though, so I'm at least getting some mileage out of it.

I had two of those configs, using ATI AIW AGP cards. Very hot systems, like a space heater. But those all worked flawlessly -- literally until the day the CPUs melted to the motherboards.

Quote:

Do you think my capture issues with ATI MMC could just be that I'm using too new a version? It's 9.16. Are these known issues?

ATI MMC 9.1x was made for PCIe, and is awful. The card/drivers are already somewhat screwy, but ATI MMC is usuable on these cards. Use VirtualDub.

Quote:

I'll continue to make my own assessments based on what all has been said about cards elsewhere too. Thanks for all the help.

I think you're doing well so far, you'll get it figured out here.

[MrEightThreeOne]

Sorry I'm a bit late to respond to this! Got caught up in other things last night, haha.

Anyway, that's a bummer about the PCI-e card. Though again at least I'm getting good mileage out of it for mid-2000s PC gaming (yeah, I'm a retro gamer, can you tell?), so it's not like it was all in vain. That certainly explains why I was so unimpressed!

What's really frustrating is I have a massive retro computer arsenal, and not a single one of them has AGP. Ugh! Though honestly, even if they did, the closest I'd get to that would be a Pentium III (it's the fastest one they ever made, a 1.4GHz Tualatin CPU) which is absolutely not good enough for video capture.

So as far as being on a budget goes, I don't feel too at odds with using the GV-USB2 if it comes down to it. I'll keep my eye out for better options -- I know any sub-$100 capture card is probably not gonna give the greatest results, but it's still an option none the less. At the very least, I've got a great VCR for the job, and it fixes the worst of our family home videos' issues; it doesn't magically make all of them go away, but the left-and-right wiggling that it fixes more than satisfies me. Of course you still have to contend with whenever the picture bounces or rolls, and I know a TBC would fix that but it honestly just doesn't happen enough in our old home videos for me to consider it worth spending that much money on one (and yes, I'm aware they are considered mandatory to you, but I personally feel like it would be hitting huge diminishing returns -- just my feelings on it). I am considering some alternative options like a passthrough device of some sort (I'd rather I still had a picture even if it rolled for a bit than have the video just randomly freeze a while), but I guess I'll ask others about that.

Thanks for all your help! You really know your stuff and I do appreciate it!

[Feedbucket]

Anecdotally, I found the 2006 to be the better of the non-AGP AIW options I tried, based mostly on usability (the 600 USB clips blacks, the PCI VE's 2D rasterization is too slow for Windows XP 32 bit color - possibly bad hardware?). I recommend not giving up on it.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feedbucket

Anecdotally, I found the 2006 to be the better of the non-AGP AIW options I tried, based mostly on usability (the 600 USB clips blacks, the PCI VE's 2D rasterization is too slow for Windows XP 32 bit color - possibly bad hardware?). I recommend not giving up on it.

I don't see harm in trying, as you suggest. The x1800 and x1900 were definite crap, never disagreement there. The 2006 gets reported both ways --- which often means it had multiple versions, including multiple driver discs. That happens, including with ATI in the 2000s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrEightThreeOne

Though honestly, even if they did, the closest I'd get to that would be a Pentium III (it's the fastest one they ever made, a 1.4GHz Tualatin CPU) which is absolutely not good enough for video capture.

Did you get that to upgrade an XBOX?

Quote:

So as far as being on a budget goes, I don't feel too at odds with using the GV-USB2 if it comes down to it. I'll keep my eye out for better options -- I know any sub-$100 capture card is probably not gonna give the greatest results, but it's still an option none the less.

Sounds like a plan.

Quote:

At the very least, I've got a great VCR for the job,

Brand, model?

Quote:

I know a TBC would fix that but it honestly just doesn't happen enough in our old home videos for me to consider it worth spending that much money on one (and yes, I'm aware they are considered mandatory to you, but I personally feel like it would be hitting huge diminishing returns -- just my feelings on it).

Buy it, use it, resell it. That's always my suggestion here. Frame TBC is for cleaning the signal, not cleaning the image. What you need is line TBC, and budget TBC(ish) paired with low-end VCR would accomplish it -- though noting it has side effects, it's not transparent. And still frame needs to be addressed, but there are budget cheats in TBC(ish) realm.

Quote:

I am considering some alternative options like a passthrough device of some sort (I'd rather I still had a picture even if it rolled for a bit than have the video just randomly freeze a while), but I guess I'll ask others about that.
Thanks for all your help! You really know your stuff and I do appreciate it!

You're sort of getting there. This is just a typical "wrong gear / not enough gear" conversation.

[MrEightThreeOne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

I don't see harm in trying, as you suggest. The x1800 and x1900 were definite crap, never disagreement there. The 2006 gets reported both ways --- which often means it had multiple versions, including multiple driver discs. That happens, including with ATI in the 2000s.

To my eyes at least it looks no better than GV-USB2. If it is better, it's too inconsequential a difference to me to go through the hassle of installing a second hard drive to it (I guess SD2IDE or even an IDE to CompactFlash adapter is always an option, but even still).

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Did you get that to upgrade an XBOX?

Haha oh my goodness. I actually use it for late Windows 98-era games; anything that came out before Windows XP hit the scene is near guaranteed to run on this!

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Brand, model?

JVC SR-V101US. I bought it back in college, got a great deal on it. It's been a fantastic one; my only complaint with it is that its linear audio output is really bad, it has this constant buzz that gets worse with each lowering tape speed (I've had a second one and another user on this forum with this model who had the same issue too, so I know it's a problem with the model, not my specific one). Overall it's served me very well and I'm blown away by how good the picture quality looks. It's a great machine!

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

Buy it, use it, resell it. That's always my suggestion here. Frame TBC is for cleaning the signal, not cleaning the image. What you need is line TBC, and budget TBC(ish) paired with low-end VCR would accomplish it -- though noting it has side effects, it's not transparent. And still frame needs to be addressed, but there are budget cheats in TBC(ish) realm.
You're sort of getting there. This is just a typical "wrong gear / not enough gear" conversation.

What budget cheats are we referring to, just out of curiosity? Buying and reselling is definitely an option, albeit still not ideal. The budget options might honestly suffice for me; the funny thing is, the video I'm talking about where that happens isn't even a high priority one either, it's more a "oh that's a neat time capsule" rather than a major family memory, haha. But if I run into any more errors like that it'd be good to have methods to handle them!