PAL capture device recommendations?
 

Hi, I want to digitize a lot of VHS tapes, I would love to digitize at the highest quality, for a price between 100 and 300 dollars at most, what is the best option? I have read good things about the ADVC 110, I also read something good about the Blackmagic Intensity but then I read you on the forum saying that it loses frames.
I give top priority to audio, but I would also like it to output really good video. I have a VHS, I have a Panasonic DMR-EX99 VHS-DVD combo, if I connect the combo to the Intensity Shuttle or the Intensity Pro via HDMI, for example, would I lose frames? Would the audio be affected too? The good thing about the Blackmagic is how comfortable it would be for me, and that I can't install an old operating system here due to lack of space. What would be the best way to get super good audio and more than decent video as well?

another thing, the problem with the frames with bm, is it also with pal? or only with ntsc? in that case do you recommend for example the advc 110 or 300? which one?

What software are you going to use with the Shuttle? It’s not compatible with Virtualdub.

I don't even know which capture device would be better for me, I haven't thought about that yet, that's why I haven't asked that yet.

Hi, you really need to use the "search" box at the top of the page as all your questions have been answered MANY times before. Maybe start by researching the hardware that you suggest.

Analog Blackmagic devices typically need a pretty stable signal and good frame TBC to really consider using at all which is likely not in the budget described, whereas the ADVC110 does well without a frame TBC. The EX99 most likely already has line-TBC-like-effects especially through the HDMI output as European models retained that feature as they continued to use a different chipset than the USA ones did. If you aren't seeing vertical wavy lines within the picture or on the edges of the screen, it's probably safe to say that it is acting like a line TBC. If you like how VHS looks playing over HDMI on a modern HDTV, then you could also just capture from that. If you capture from HDMI, it might put HDCP (copy protection) on the output which can be bypassed with certain HDMI splitters.

Another consideration is macrovision. If your tapes are macrovision protected, you'll want an ADVC100 or ADVC55 instead of the 110. The 110 can't bypass macrovision. Only difference between the 110 and the 100 (other than the lack of macrovision bypass mode) is that the 110 can run on power from the firewire port whereas the 100 always needs a separate AC adapter.

If you want something reliable that isn't going to have audio sync issues or be too picky with non time base corrected signals at your quoted budget, the ADVC-100 or 55 are good options, particularly for PAL per Video99.co.uk, he does most of his transfers in that format.

It's hard to say you could go a proper lossless route without a frame TBC or a much higher end VCR, though the HDMI output from the EX99 is probably quite stable, but you'll need to check your settings on the EX99 to see if it can output 576i (for PAL) over HDMI or not and you'd also need an HDMI capture card that can capture it that way as well (which is a much rarer feature on newer capture cards, but most Blackmagic cards probably still can) as well as an HDMI splitter that removes HDCP that the EX99 probably adds to the HDMI output that'll prevent most capture cards from capturing at all. Depending on the capture program, if you're ok with some dropped frames and inserted frames here and there, you could use a modern analog capture card as well. Main issue is audio sync problems, but I hear AmarecTV does a pretty good job of keeping things in sync even if there are frame drops without particularly complicated settings. Virtualdub can probably do it too, but I think it's harder to set up initially and doesn't create a detailed frame drop/insert log like AmarecTV does. I don't think you have to worry about macrovision with the HDMI route, it's HDCP instead.

Downsides of DV/Firewire is potentially macroblocking in low contrast or high motion scenes. Color accuracy may not be exactly perfect either, but color was never really that accurate for VHS to begin with, often containing a lot of chroma noise. Upside is smaller initial capture file sizes around 13GB per hour.

I have used the "search box" and read a lot, that is precisely why I said what I said, but no one clarifies anything for the pal, and everyone always differs.

So you recommend the ADVC instead of the BM Intensity Shuttle? Another question, wouldn't the ADVC 300 be a better option than the 100? Since it has built-in TBC, they say

Macrovision is copy protection that was put on retail tapes. Unless your copying a VHS of Star Wars or something macrovision isn’t something you have to worry about.

Virtualdub tells you when a frame is dropped or inserted on the right hand side of the screen while you are capturing.

When you go from analog to digital you have to think about Timebase errors.
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vid...time-base.html

I used the shuttle before and have used a better card now and the shuttle is just wasted money if you want to capture analog. It’s better to get a good card for this and capture in a losslessly compressed codec like Huffy but that will go
way over your budget because you have to have something to prevent timebase errors.

The Canopus ADVC 300 has some issues like the filters being always on.
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vcr...00-dead-2.html

Really DV isn’t as bad for Pal VHS as it is for NTSC but since there is lossy compression before editing you can have troubles when you edit it because you threw out color information during capture. So it brings up the question are you going to be editing your VHS?
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vid...erter-pal.html

Besides that you really want to use Svideo because it separates your luma and chroma instead of compositing them together. The combo units are really bad and the Svideo connection on them
Isn’t really Svideo because luma and chroma are composited together internally in the machine. An Svideo deck is a better idea and PAL decks are cheaper than NTSC but a 300 dollar price range makes that tough. Anyways here’s the recommended VCRs.
https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vid...ing-guide.html

but wouldn't the panasonic ex99 work as a tbc? and another thing, the advc 100 doesn't have synchronization right? and what tbc would work well for the 100 or 110?

Welcome. :)

Right away, this means that you don't want/need to screw around with inferior gear. What will happen is that (a) you'll save money, but (b) you'll spend excessive time and frustration. So you will pay, one way or another. When you have quality gear, it "just works", and you can focus on the video conversion project. Not a nightmare of wasted time, frustration, and never getting anything done. Or at best, awful quality conversions.

Assuming that number ibcludes the VCR, TBCs, and capture card:
That won't happen. "higher quality" is not achieved with such low numbers. On what basis have you come up with those numbers? It's like asking for a "good working" car, but only having less than 1000 dollars/euros/quid to spend on it. Not happening there, either. You can surely buy "something", but it'll not be quality by any means.

But if 100-300 is a budget for just the capture card, then you're in good shape. Several options. Ideally, certain USB cards from ATI/Pinnacle/clones. Not just any random card, definitely not anything "new" (all old/inferior tech still sold) from Amazon/eBay.

Not sure where you read that. I would suggest you were reading advice from fellow newbies, not any sort of experienced advice. Because old Canopus ADVC boxes are 1990s DV technology, and have been inferior for 20+ years now. (Only in very specific cards do you have to relent, and accept the lower quality as your only option.)

Blaclmagic is HD gear "also does" SD, and quite poorly.

Correct. Dropped/black/etc frames. Messy, not the correct tool.

Are you referring to 2 separate VCRs here? If so, what is the other unit brand/model?
Or just restating that your VCR is that Panasonic model?

Yes, your current without-TBCs setup would be a mess. Dropped frames, audio out of sync, etc.

Comfortable? As in you don't want to learn anything new? (That won't happen. Even I still face new digital conversion learning experiences after 25 years.)

Explain.

Dropped frames is formats agnostic. PAL, NTSC, SECAM, etc -- all are affected.

Neither ADVC are suggested. Both are 1990s tech that literally had Pentium III recommended, and Pentium II was the minimum spec. Or a pre-Intel Mac G3/G4. Yeah, old. In fact, these days, a lot of people I write/speak to weren't even norm yet! Even VHS wasn't a dead format yet, that's how ancient ADVC boxes are. Windows 98 had just come out!

I'm not ready aware of the non-ES series, ie the EX series, having any TBC or TBC-like function. It's just a a boring low-end old combo DVD/VHS unit. I'd check with user Bogelein on this one. He's tested/used, or at least claims to have tested/used, far more PAL DVD units on passthrough that anybody I've come across. I don't recall ever seen EX mentioned.

This is actually part myth. While it can "ignore" the anti-copy signals, it still very often reacts to them with luma/chroma/brightness issues. This is because anti-copy is a fake/artificial video error, and can mimic legit/natural errors. So outcome is often the same, without TBC purification.

He's a nice guy, but he doesn't convert video for quality, but rather just to make money quickly converting. Small conversion shops are rarely the benchmark for quality. I have many samples (and will share those on the new site platform).

... blah blah blah. :)

My point here is how I started this reply: When you use wrong or inferior gear, you get into this screwy "duct tape and chicken wire" situation. You're using gear as it wasn't intended, and it's a long-winded frustrating process. You'll spend all your time "trying to make it all work", rather than just converting the videos. Isn't that what you actually want to do? Because, again, in general, proper quality gear "just works". (Yes, it costs money, like everything else in life.)

Correct.

That doesn't matter. The goal is to not make it worse yet.

In an era when a 22tb HDD is $300, I'd suggest complaining over 13gb DV vs. ~35gb lossless is silly. You can easily further compress to H.264 and MPEG-2 if you really want to gripe about space.

Excellent. You searched, you read, you still had questions, you posted. :)

If I had to choose between an ADVC and BM anything, I'd have to opt for the ADVC. But I consider that choice to be comparing dog food to cat food, but I really want some human food instead.

False positives can happen, so still a worry.

Assuming you didn't follow a bad setup guide, and disable the top two timing settings checkboxes. That just effectively disables reporting. "If I close my eyes, you can't see me?"

There are a few Europe-only cards that are somewhat ATI-clone(ish), though harder to find. If willing to search, wait, you'll find one for maybe $75 range. If the full budget is $300, that'll leave $225. But the problem here is older OS required (and OP says no to it), and ATI is less resilient with lesser TBC usage. You cannot limit yourself in both budget and OS, and expect good options.

Yep, a lot of people do not realize that VHS is not treated well, not respected as a format by the VHS/DVD combo unit, and quality is tossed internally. It was about cheap manufacturing costs, not quality.

I do not believe the EX series acts as line TBC, but you need to check with the specific user mentioned above. I'll defer to him on this exact detail.

No, not correct. This is a video myth that's 25+ years old now. It had actually died out in the 2010s, but during the pandemic low-knowledge users brought it back. The root cause here is Canopus marketing, and a misunderstanding of what "audio lock" meant. The term "audio lock" does not apply to audio sync from ingest, but instead is a linear editing term. DV boxes can lose sync just as easily as any other capture card. DV boxes can drop/insert frames like any other capture card. It's nothing special in that regards.

Above all, I want to give priority to audio quality, that the audio is very good, what do you recommend?

If you go into this without the right card and you run into a bunch of timebase errors then I’m thinking that the timebase errors will be the number one priority. The audio stuff also goes back to your VCR and can go into power line hum. If it’s linear audio some VCRs have dedicated linear audio output but that’s getting way over the 300 dollar mark. It’s hard to have priorities at 300 dollars honestly. I remember LS saying something about the Pinnacles having good audio.

When you correct/purify the video, the audio tends to fall into place without much effort. The main issue with audio is linear vs. HiFi, and how well (or not well) it was recorded to the tape. For example, JVC decks get a bad reputation for linear audio, but it's really not JVC's fault. And then other decks can sound bad or worse. It really goes back to the source tape audio recording quality.

The capture card needs to not be tinny or distorted. A lot of cheap USB cards use junk processing. ADVC boxes actually have pretty crappy audio, because again, 1990s tech. (I had a Pro Audio card in the 1990s, but it cost $$$. Most cards, especially cheap SoundBlaster, were awful.)

Yep, also watch the power line noise.

Yes, certain Pinnacles have quite decent audio -- but not all, certainly not Dazzle junk. Also not "the best", but it's up there.

Just bringing this up as a bit of story on audio quality. Do remember getting a TV recording VHS tape that was recorded EP mode, and linear only (must've been recorded on a rather cheap VCR) that no joke, the audio was so low, so inaudible and just so plan bad that it basically made the whole tape unwatchable (even if the footage itself was fine given the recording speed/VCR). So I took the lost and deleted the captured file, felt like I wasted my time digitizing such a tape. Even EP mode VHS-C tapes, for as muffled as they are, sounded better than that TV recording.

What operating system are you using now? I find Win10 works fine with Pal, and the small amout of NTSC that I get for that matter. I think that this is highly dependent on the PC specs though. I am using a purpose built workstation with 8 cores, and 16 threads which deals with the background tasks problems.

The 300 was the capture card, you say what is ideal for audio, the budget doesn't matter, I'll think about that later, I want to know the best way

That’s a Lordsmurf question.

You must have been very confident that your audio capture of this EP audio was very good. Has it ever occurred to you that others in the world might have more audio transfer skills than you, and might have made a better audio capture of that tape than you?

Probably, but that was the worse tape I came across audio wise. I've done other TV recordings, from SP to EP and they never sounded as bad as that single tape, where the audio was basically unrecoverable. All the other mono only EP mode tapes I've done have audio that is just muffled with noticeable hiss, but still audible enough. The audio on that tape sounded like it was badly processed. But it doesn't matter anymore, tape is gone, I felt like I wasted my time doing it. As I've said, even mono only VHS-C tapes recorded in EP mode, for as muffled the audio can be (plus the quality of the camcorder's microphone) didn't sound so bad it basically made the final result unwatchable.

I don't really want to argue as this would just detract from the original intention of this thread. Just thought about sharing a story but it might be leading to a fight..

I don't know, since it was that one tape it was probably just an outlier, and not my VCR making linear audio tapes sound worse than when I first got it.

Definitely not so with Normal (linear) audio which is a separate recording system from HiFi audio on the same tape. Even HiFi can sometimes play better with a different tracking setting than for the picture.


Of course the quality of the original recording is a basic limitation, but the playback deck itself can set another audio quality limitation, and how well aligned the linear head is to the recording on the tape sets another audio limitation.

Then if as you say different decks extract different quality from the same linear audio recording, it's not just the quality of the original recording that determines the final audio result. The deck's own audio performance, and adjustment matters.

Hi, I'm thinking of buying an aja lhi, which super vhs do you recommend for pal? I give priority to audio, but of course the video must also be good. Another question, if the super vhs has tbc, is it necessary to put dmr es10 in it? Because I think I've read that they are different, and it is necessary even if the super vhs also has tbc, but other comments say the opposite and it confuses me.

No personal experience using that but I looked up specs for the audio. While they didnt give much detail, being a modern upmarket pro audio converter it'll probably be excellent. Excellent digital audio converters were available 20 or more years ago and have further improved since then, and got cheaper and more compact.

For excellent digitisation the audio converter should be the least of problems. IMO it's much more important to focus on the tapes and the playback VCR, and getting the cleanest, best signal from them and into the converter.