Need advice on equipment for video capture, TBCs
 

I am going to save up for the equipment I need to transfer my tapes to digital storage.

I know I am going to buy a TBC first since that seems to be the part that would clean up most of the hard ones and make things easier on the little difficult ones.

I do however have to figure out what else I should be looking into especially since there is always a chance to strike lucky on eBay or goodwill.

I am not sure I understand why a person would buy a vcr or a dvd recorder with a built in TBC when they are going to have an external one as well, is there any worth while benefit?

I also figured I should ask if there are any advantages I might not be aware of regarding my current equipment.

I have a Sharp VC A410 VCR
A SV2000 from an unknown manufacturer
A Sharp Viewcam 8, from a test I did last night it would appear it can clean up some of the more difficult tapes thru its imput.
A Sony Handycam DCR TRV130, have no idea if it helps I haven't tested it yet.
A Diamond VC500 usb capture device

Any advice?

Some of the VCR's like the Panasonic AG-1980 (or its cousin 5710) have line based TBC's which help with some of the image cleanup, but doesn't clean everything. For that reason, an external full-frame TBC is needed to not only correct the time base errors, but it also helps to keep the signal stable to where it will minimize capturing problems. A TBC also eliminates the Macrovision protection.

The Sharp is a consumer level VCR, and probably does not have an S-Video jack. It would serve you better to seek out a model that has that, and line based TBC. There are many recommendations here on what model VCR's to look for, like the JVC 9911 and the Panasonic AG-1980 or the 5710 (the 1980 is easier to probably find compared to the 5710).

Also, an Windows XP system for capturing would be the best system to use along with the AIW hardware. Some good searches here will help you on what you will need.

For your Sony camcorder, the TRV-300 series (Digital 8 cameras) would be better as I believe they have built-in TBC and can play both Hi8 and 8mm tapes. I have the TRV-350 which does pretty good.

Why would the windows version matter, it seems to be doing fine on 10.

As for my equipment, I have noticed that with the sharp camcorder seems to clean tapes up very well, I do wonder though if there is a way to pass thru it as it has a small jack by the RCA jacks that is marked RF DC Out and I don't think its electric.

Truth be told I am thinking of using the sharp camcorder in some form since I don't know if it can be made any clearer.
As a test I took one of my more difficult tapes, which plays terrible even on tv and copied it to the sharp camcorder, not only did it fix 98% of the tracking, save for a blurp.

I don't don't know why but the recorder in the sharp cam seems to correct the input.

Windows XP can be useful for many of the older capture devices, like the ATI all-in-wonder that people here use and recommend. (Also it won't be doing 10 million things like never windows versions in the background that can interrupt the video capture.)

The VC500 is decent and works fine on windows 10 though.

It's possible that the sharp camera has some filters built in, many Hi8 (and some Video8) cameras had line TBCs and noise reduction for video playback. Don't know which model it is you have though as "Sharp Viewcam 8" seems to match many different models. I believe the RFU out jackonly provides power to an optional RF adapter (which would also connect to the video outputs) allowing playback on a TV without any composite inputs , so I don't think that would be usable for video output, but I could be wrong. Separate video in/out is generally only present on professional cameras as far as i know.

The Sony DCR TRV130 only plays digital8 tapes, so it's probably not going to be very helpful.

W10 has many limitations when it comes to video work, not the least of which is the fact that the classic analog capture gear of legacy fame (still in use by the best professionals) won't work with W10. Compared to the tonnage of video software, filters, consistency, and reliability available for XP and slightly less extensively for Windows 7, Windows 10 by comparison is a broken toy purposely designed for intrusive control by Microsoft and purposely limiting for power users.

a) The suggested legacy DVD recorders are not intended for recording. They are used for their line-level and frame-sync tbc's via pass-thru. Very few DVD devices can be used for pass-thru, and most of those that can be used have weak tbc's that are almost useless with most tapes.

b) Pass-thru units will not defeat copy protection, even for pass-thru.

c) The frame-sync circuitry in the recommended pass-thru units are not as powerful as the circuitry in external tbc's.

d) Pass-thru units will not correct fake copy protection errors generated by many tapes and players.

e) If you own a VCR with line-level tbc and an external frame tbc, what will you do if your prized primary VCR refuses to properly track one of your bad tapes? Depending entirely on a single VCR and tbc is asking for trouble, which will certainly arrive, sooner or later, whether you ask or not.

Okay I was looking up some hardware and found something I wanted to find more information about.

a TVONE-TASK 1T-TBC-GL and a Panasonic Aj-d250.

Are either of these any good?

That TBC was not designed for analog tape played with a consumer VCR. You need studio tape machines and ancillary equipment and calibration to use that type of genlock tbc.

You want to encode your analog tapes to lossy DV format by recording from analog tape to DV tape? From one obsolete tape format to another obsolete tape format at lower quality than the original tape and playing the source tyape with a low quality VCR? Are you serious, or just curious? What will you do with the downgraded DV tapes?

Not sure if you are referring to the Panasonic I found or my sharp camcorder?

If it's the former, I am just asking because when you see a machine that resembles a cinder block and has all those dials you have to ask if it's useful, I didn't see anything about tape format all I saw was professional and Video cassette recorder.

if your talking the sharp camcorder, that would be as a last resort if I can't get a clear picture from the VCR straight to capture, my sharp camcorder seems to have some clean up power but no pass thru.

Your post asked about a Panasonic Aj-d250. It is a digital cassette recorder from the 1990's.

Yes I was simply asking because I knew nothing other then it existed, you said something about the formats, I wasn't sure what you had meant since I never mentioned anything about formats, was just trying to learn more info.

Sorry for any confusion.

On the subject of external TBCs, I am given to understand that the AV Toolbox ones with a black case are all defective and that I should look for one that is blue, I ave seen some with a green case and some with a grey case with blue panel, are those good quality?

Long thread. Let's see if I can give any added input... :)

Wise move.

Eh, maybe. For VHS, a S-VHS VCR with TBC is most important for cleaning up image quality. There are some workarounds to sort-of escape needing a TBC, with at least that in place, but results vary. TBoth are really needed.

For Hi8/Video8 sources, just a good camera and TBC will do you.

External framesync TBC is most for signal integrity, avoiding dropped frames. But lack of TBC can still result in some nasty quality issues. I finally have a good example of what visible difference an external TBC makes, and I'll try to get that captured and uploaded into a new guide soon.

Pfft. Rarely. Almost never. I read about things like this from time to time, but it's where you're in a huge city like LA or NY. When I was in Dallas and Nashville, both large cities, it never happened. Still not large enough.

Different functions. "TBC" is a loose term. I've never come across a DVD recorder with a true TBC. The external TBC and internal S-VHS VCR TBC have different functions. It's sort of like saying "car". Big difference between used Volvo and a new ____ (insert your dream car brand here).

This is an EOL Sharp, not as good as ones made a few years earlier. The transport and tracking is too loose. Not as bad as most other VCRs, especially for the early 2000s era it's from, but not overly great.

Correct, no s-video.
S-VHS buyer guide list: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vide...ing-guide.html

It's about hardware. Windows 10 is a POS for video, and is a OS for tablets. The era of video hardware and conversation was XP. Sometimes Vista and 7 work, on some thing. 8 and 10 are essentially crap, lots of issues even when something "works. The OS doesn't have legacy support for video/audio workflows. It is what it is.

I don't don't know why but the recorder in the sharp cam seems to correct the input.[/quote]

Quoted because good advice like this need careful re-read by newbies. :wink2:

Nope.
- That TBC is a Cypress, flawed chips. Ghosting and frame sticking. Avoid it.
- The Panasonic is portable DVCPro deck. Do you have DVC Pro tapes? Unlikely. Those were broadcast industry only, and even then it was a non-starter format that shriveled before it began.

And that.

Wrong question.
Better = "Man, how abused is that thing?!" (Because it's almost always ridden hard, put away wet ... and broken.)

Nothing to be sorry about. You're just learning. Learning is good. It's why help teach. :)

AVToolbox/Cypress black = bad.
That silver case with muted blues also = bad. (CTB-100, same as AVT-8710)
Green hasn't been made in 10 years, you're seeing old stock photos. Nobody has those new anymore, and used is a rare find.

BTW: If you want TBC, good VCR, etc, I have some workflows for sale in the marketplace. PM me. ;)

Okay so I went looking through the list of VCRs that are recommended and found the JVC HR-S7800 VCR for sale by someone starting at 200 would that be any good or should I just save to buy a Panasonic model later?

It really depends on where the VCR is from. If eBay, all bets are off. Probably 2/3rds off all VCRs there are listed as broken (aka "untested", etc). But even among the "tested" and "working" VCRs, at least half don't actually work correctly. $200 could be a bargain, depending on condition. It's very much buyer beware, and you need to remember that eBay is an online flea market.

The ONLY place you should buy a Panasonic is TGrant Photo. Or somebody that had a deck refurb'd by TGrant or deter. And at least one member here is selling his deter-refurb'd AG-1970 in the marketplace.

Speaking of Panasonic, I know that a Panasonic Ag-7650 is considered a recommended one, but is a Panasonic Ag-7650p any good? I sort of doubt it since looking at it shows no RCA jacks, it does seem to have a TBC but since it's refereed to as a Broadcast VCR and I see no indication that it takes anything other then normal vhs and svhs.

I figure I should ask since at least it might be useful for anyone else who has the same question.

AG-7650P is a "Big Bertha" editing VTR, not recommended.

You wrote 7650 twice.

Good to Know.

Okay here's a good question, given the choice would a JCV VCR be better then a Panasonic, specifically a JVC HR-S7800 vs Panasonic AG-1970, from what I see the Panasonic at least has the controls on the unit, but what what I read Panasonics don't give as clear a picture.

Where did you read that? Let us know the website name and we'll warn our users not to go to that site or to any other source that publishes such clueless b.s.

You'll have to make up your own mind about high-end VCR's, which vary by model, by brand, video head design, type and level of noise reduction, tbc operation, color accuracy, and a host of other issues. One can easily make a few generalizations that can be demonstrated via thousands of video posts in this forum and in others over the years. For example, no tape will play exactly the same way twice in every respect, even if played in the same VCR. JVC's DigiPure color system has a different "look" to it than the color typically produced by Panasonic's Dynamorphous head units, and one isn't any "better" or more "accurate" than the other. Tapes recorded at slow 4-hour or 6-hour speed tend to look like crap on a JVC, but can look oversharpened and require some post-process tweaks with many Panasonics (the player most often recommended for extended-play recordings is the Panasonic AG-1980).

Here are three VHS capture results that were discussed several times in recent threads and were referenced again as specific examples a few days ago. You might want to browse some of the other forum categories to get an idea of what users are encountering, what they use for capture and processing, and how they solve many typical problems.

The following examples are all previously posted results from captures using various Panasonic players and two different capture cards. They've been through very light to extensive restoration work. Let us know if you think they don't look very clear.

Example 1, home-made VHS recorded at 6-hour slow speed: Panasonic PV-S4670 SVHS VCR, Panasonic ES10 tbc pass-thru, AVT-8710 external frame tbc, ATI All In Wonder 7500 AGP Radeon capture card. Liv5A_ivtc_cut_EP_playback sample.mp4

Example 2: 4 short, edited scenes from a poorly mastered retail VHS tape: rebuilt Panasonic PV-8662 from 1998, composite output, Panasonic ES10 tbc pass-thru s-video output, AVT-8710 frame tbc for Macrovision, and ATI All in Wonder 9600XT AGP Radeon card. D_defect_samples_after.mpg

Example 3: originally underexposed with a home VHS camera: played and captured with a Panasonic AG-1980 with active line tbc, an AVT-8710 frame tbc, ATI All In Wonder 9600XT AGP Radeon capture card. home_tape_rework.mpg

In my own personal experience, JVC players tended to over filter, but a Panasonic recording required more cleanup. It depends on what you like, how you want to work, and what you discover by looking at and studying the work of others. The players on the recommended list are there because they represent above-average equipment suitable for proper analog capture work. The end product depends on what you do with the captures. It's also my own personal experience that two JVC players permanently damaged 3 of my favorite tapes, with the result that I never used JVC again and will not recommend them. On the other had, people have their reasons for not liking anything from Panasonic, Mitsubishi, or any other name. Not everyone had such experiences. Your mileage may vary.

This is why I double check, I read it here actually, in the recomended VCR Post, I was intrepreting the phrase:

As indicating the JVC as having a cleaner picture, however based on what you are saying the intent is more aimed at sharpness and color.

This is actually very useful to me, I am currently keeping my eye on a Panasonic 1970, I did most of my recording in the longest speed to that I could fit more on the tape.

I think you are confusing the meaning of the word "clean" with "clear". I take exception to that statement as posted. Every user has their favorites in VCR's. JVC's noise reduction is too strong and should be turned off, in my opinion. If detail is destroyed by strong filters during capture, there is no way to restore it.

There are two schools of thought. One group of users insists that a capture is superior if it contains very little noise, even if noise reduction destroys many elements of the image. The other group of users prefers milder noise reduction because post-processing filters are more sophisticated and will retain more of the original image. The first group has little time or patience for post processing, the second group feels that post processing is more work but results in more convincing results.

A great deal depends on your video source. Much of the "detail" in analog source is actually noise, or else it is accompanied by high noise levels. Removing too much noise by using the primitive blurring techniques of legacy VCRs can cost too much detail. Often the typical JVC noise reduction circuits, or sometimes to a lesser extent the Panasonic AG-1980, will over-filter the results -- this produces a soft image and what are called "clay-face", soft-focus, or posterizing effects. I am of the school that too much noise reduction during capture destroys the image along with the noise, throwing out the baby with the bath water. So, for very noisy tapes I often prefer less noise reduction such as with the Panasonic AG-1970 or the JVC SR-V10/V101 series, or non-tbc AG ancestors such as the Panasonic non-tbc PV-S4670 SVHS from 1996 with Dynamorphous metal heads. I formerly owned two copies of the JVC SR-7600 series and always felt that they softened the image, blurred motion too much, and were fairly useless with slow-speed tapes, of which I had more than 150 tapes. I also owned a JVC 9911, the first copy of which was defective and the second copy of which couldn't compete with the AG-1980 for tracking home made tapes.

I think you will find that based on my experience and on my observations from many posts in this forum and other websites, I'm not the best advocate for JVC players, although many people prefer them. However, you should note that the main reason a recommended player appears on the posted list is not based entirely on its noise reduction abilities -- after all, noise reduction is a modification of the original image, and is sometimes a flawed modification at that. Rather, players appear on that list for their ability to track more accurately and to inflict less damage onto the signal than lesser players do. Cheap, poorly made players produce distortion and really ugly playback effects.

Like most advanced users, you will eventually find that owning more than one VCR with varying playback characteristics will solve different problems. One of the players may do a better job of tracking the same tape than the other, or contrast or color might look better through another player. Ultimately I prefer more detail retention and better tracking -- but on the other hand many of my tapes were improperly stored and poorly recorded and would require more work and more post-processing cleanup regardless of the player used.

I was going to reply to chickensalad (great name :laugh:).

But sanlyn got to it first. Great reply. So I'll just reply to his, add a few more comments... :)

Clean = NR applied, less noise
Clear = what was seen on the tape, including undesirable image effects

Fair enough. :2cents:

No, no. There is a middle between your two descriptions, and I'd suggest it simply this:

1. Some NR during capture, maybe more post capture if needed.
2. All NR post capture.

I want a clean signal, but I'm also not willing to sacrifice lots of details for it to happen.

One of the primary problems with "no NR" is chroma errors. Those are not as easily fixed in software. Trying to correct chroma noise in software loses more details that fixing chroma noise in hardware. So it's a catch-22 at times. This must be remembered. If this was NOT the case, I'd probably opt for "NR off" more often than I do now.

Now then, yes, clearly there will be some people out there who approach video with your dreaded first description, with NR cranked to the hilt. But it happens both ways for them, software and/or hardware. We both see it. They've not learned "too much". To make matters worse, it's not even good NR in most cases.

The first group bought the hardware and wants to use it. :P

If good NR can be accomplished in hardware, to avoid more time-consuming software work, then do that. If more careful processing is needed in software, do that.
One should never be a purist, but rather cater to the needs of the tapes.

Yep. :thumb:

And you forgot another aspect: the Panasonic over-sharpening issue. By default, at least the AG-1980 is pumped too high, and results in false "details" (mosquito noise) and halos/ringing. You have to tune that down some, using the deck slider bar. The default/0/unity setting is too strong. It's doesn't go all the way left, but it probably needs to cover 25% of the distance between default and unsharp.

Apparently I'm part of both schools. I like my AG-1980s equally to my JVCs. I just think JVC is cleaner at times, so it's my first stop when playing a tape. If results are not satisfactory in the JVC, I try to 1980 next. Whatever is best is what gets used!

This may have just been worn heads. Those are some of the things that start to happen.

Yep, well known that AG-1980P usually tracks EP better than most JVCs. And especially those EOL units like the 9911 and SR-V101, which had weaker transports. Too loose, too much plastic, most did NOT age well after 10-15 years (~2003 model). The SR-V101 heads also seems to wear easier, and go software more frequently than any other JVC that I've ever seen.

Correct, not entirely NR...

But that's also not entirely it, either! :P

True, the transport and ability to retain full quality from the tape matters. And NR makes the video looks better than the original tape. So what did you forget?

The internal line/field TBC. ;)

VCRs are ranked on all the merits. I'm actually planning to grade that list soon, as it needs to be known that not every machine is an equal. For example, a D-VHS deck is no match for certain other JVCs, or Panasonic AG-1980s. It's not bad, but when given a choice between two decks, you may wish to choose the other instead. Hence my forthcoming list updates.

Yep. :congrats:

Interesting information, I'll keep it in mind.
Right now I am keeping my eye on a Panasonic AG-1970, any thing wrong with this model? I've seen reviews that say something critical, but what they are saying is hard to understand, something about not playing back original tape, which doesn't make sense given the context.

I don't know what to say about "not playing back original tape", nor would anyone understand the context. The critical eye toward the 1970 is usually a comparison between it and the 1980, but the two are different machines. The 1980 is great when it works well, but it's a maintenance nightmare and a black hole when it comes to upkeep cost. Really, a shop with a maintenance budget wouldn't mind the 1980, but for the average user expect a year to 18 months before it starts hungering for alignment tweaks and some specific precision replacement caps, which is what its maintenance manual calls for on a regular basis. And there's nothing like that 1980's finicky s-video and color boards, which are usually the first to start complaining. The 1970 has a similarly robust tracking mechanism but isn't nearly so picky about capacitors, which are mostly mainstream and will stay within tolerance far longer than you could expect from the 1980. The 1970's tbc isn't as powerful as the 1980's (which is why many people make up for it with an affordable pass-thru line tbc device, which has been recommended here and elsewhere many times over). Noise reduction is less than you'd get with a JVC or the 1980, but it's cleaner than your average VCR -- and anyone who tries to sell you on super-clean VHS capture without the need for post processing, regardless of the VCR used, is selling you a bill of goods.

Frankly, I'd prefer something that doesn't over-filter a tape playback and gives me what's on the tape, assuming other aspects of the player are working properly. And my own 1980 is starting to give me fits again, after only 200 hours of capture (which is one its maintenance-due intervals). My personal favorites are the 1996 PV-46xx line of rugged Panasonic Dynamorphous head players, which were ancestors of the pro "AG" series and can still generate images that look an awful lot like those from an "AG". They need some post-processing and color work, but what tape doesn't? I have two copies of Panasonic's 1996 PV-S4670 SVHS players that I've worked to death and they still perform like champs. Sometimes I think I'll just leave my AG-1980 out of the picture and stick with the 4670's. After a bit of cleanup, the results from both player models look pretty much alike.

The review I say was some sort of aggregated one, most were positive but there was a weird one that looked like a badly translated manual:

"This Equipment is a Commercial unit, but you cannot playback Original video tape on the AG-1970 vcr when playback a Original tape get bright and red and bright and red, not all Original tape have copy protection so look for the one ."

I figured I should double check in case anyone knew what it meant.

Which is another reason why I am glad
I am asking questions, I don't have the luxury of maintenance, don't have the space to do it or any place to have it done.

With my tapes my main concern is the ones that don't playback well, I have a gotten quite a few to play back cleanly with regular vcrs but I have no idea what the cut off point is for good quality.

The passage seems to mean that the player honors copy protection on retail tapes. Playback will display copy protection effects unless an external frame-level tbc is used, which is true of all VCRs.

Quality levels in many respects can be a personal matter. If you don't mind a lot of noise and other defects, those defects are signs of low quality work. Other than decent playback with a good VCR, the other factor that brings improvement in final quality is post-processing (filtering and cleanup). Most users learn to analyze and repair video problems by browsing restoration threads (there are thousands of them in this forum alone) and by submitting samples of captures for analysis by others who have solved the same or similar problems.