Multiple JVC HR-S9600U VCR capture comparisons?

[aramkolt]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v-ctW4kXPY&t

This was one of the more surprising comparisons I've ever seen and deserves some attention. I've long speculated that machines of the same model may perform quite a bit differently from each other and this is a really interesting example of what is considered one of the better machines out there, the HR-S9600U.

What I'd really like to know is to whether video head wear is the main explanation for differences in sharpness or not. I think think the way that you'd know is to have two decks of the same model that perform vastly differently, then swap head drums and see if the better performance follows the drum, or if it follows the electronics.

It also does imply that Natob doesn't calibrate the decks he refurbishes to have a standardized luma/chroma levels as quite a few of the differences seen/overall look are down to differing output levels of the machines. However, what should be more focused on here is detail/sharpness as well as video dropouts between the machines as luma/chroma is correctable with a proc amp and will vary from tape to tape anyway.

One might think that whichever machine looks the best to them was VHS_Decode and the worst one was a traditional capture via composite and that'd be believable. Whereas, in reality, they are just different machines of the same model with the same exact capture chain.

Curious what others think of the degree of differences seen here.

[latreche34]

The moment I read DV50 and Topaz I clicked away.

[themaster1]

auto mode or edit mode used ? ... big difference

[lordsmurf]

These Youtube videos are just more and more misleading as time goes on.

It's just randomness on top of more randomness. For starters, that was a super crappy video for showcasing VCR performance. And using anything Topaz was 100% pointless here.

I know Nate is a (very infrequent) member here, but I really don't think he knows what he's doing. Video isn't his main skill set. I find him to be a mere opportunist, simply selling "refurbished" VCRs on eBay, because those have $$$ he can extract. It's really no better than the "tested" and "working" BS from other flippers/recyclers/resellers. His entire "refurbished" claim has been questioned for over a year now. Those of us who actually refurbish VCRs know better. The volume of decks was the easy tip-off, but the samples betray it even more. He may fool newbie buyers, but he doesn't fool knowledgeable video users. I don't wish to seem unfriendly, but he put himself out there, and that's my truthful analysis of what I see.

Just take a look at his other Youtube videos. To me, that says it's a person who's just discovering the various devices and VCRs, and doing uncontrolled experiment "comparison" videos. It's all so bogus, so misleading to the untrained masses.

Want to hear something sad? I sometimes think people are better off with Easycaps or Canopus boxes, an ES10/15, and a random VCR. At least they won't be subjected to so much BS on Youtube.

[aramkolt]

Agree DV50 and topaz for deinterlacing isn't ideal, but it's otherwise the same capture chain and process, so the difference in apparent detail and luma/chroma should just be down to the different VCRs since everything else is the same.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Agree DV50 and topaz for deinterlacing isn't ideal, but it's otherwise the same capture chain and process, so the difference in apparent detail and luma/chroma should just be down to the different VCRs since everything else is the same.

The nature of DV and Topaz doesn't allow for repetition of results. It can skew. We have lossless for a reason, and scientific method dismisses the idea that "AI" (aka "do whatever it wants") software would be allowed in the mix.

I agree that it's simply a statement about deck conditions. But it wasn't presented as such.

I truly hate videos that state, or suggest, "look at this, and make up your own mind" -- which is what I saw here. Just some non-helpful captions, and "samples". Most viewers need guidance (especially on topics they know nothing about), otherwise they might walk away with stupid assumptions. For example, "S-VHS VCRs aren't good", which is wrong.

[mts1]

Speaking of comparison, is there a guide to make such?

[aramkolt]

I guess the question then becomes, if you got the same results as were shown here using a recommended capture setup and deinterlacing process, would you agree that at least with certain models, that there can be a high degree of variability among VCRs of the same model? I do suspect that'd be the case after seeing that comparison with the only variable being the VCRs.

We don't exactly know that "physical wear" is the reason that they are performing differently. Could be they performed variably when brand new, that some were originally better calibrated, or perhaps there were several minor software/hardware revisions that perform differently that we are unaware of. The variability in luma and chroma alone (which shouldn't drift over time as they are digitally set with a Jig remote on this model) suggests that they likely were this different straight from the factory. I could see the sharpness reducing over time as the heads wear though.

The takeaway I got from this was that if you like someone's capture on a certain VCR and you want to replicate it, going out and getting the same model doesn't guarantee similar results IF there's a high degree of variability within the same model.

[latreche34]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

Agree DV50 and topaz for deinterlacing isn't ideal, but it's otherwise the same capture chain and process, so the difference in apparent detail and luma/chroma should just be down to the different VCRs since everything else is the same.

The problem with Topaz being AI is its behavior cannot be trusted, It can blur parts of the picture that otherwise crispy or vise versa, so we don't know what the original picture looked like.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

The takeaway I got from this was that if you like someone's capture on a certain VCR and you want to replicate it, going out and getting the same model doesn't guarantee similar results IF there's a high degree of variability within the same model.

That I agree.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mts1

Speaking of comparison, is there a guide to make such?

That's a great idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aramkolt

, would you agree that at least with certain models, that there can be a high degree of variability among VCRs of the same model?

Yes -- and I always have. For example, we both know how variable like-condition AG-1980P can be, due to mid-production changes. But condition is always the main determiner in the 2020s, regardless of OEM-time quality of output. Current condition is all that matters.

Don't forget to include factors like humidity, smoking ("e-lung" cancer), insects, etc. All of that happens, and I've seen far too much of that of the years. It wasn't just used, it was abused. No amount of refurb can fully unring that bell. I've had C/B- grade decks (on my scale) that just refused to improve. Nate probably sources most of his decks from eBay/Facebook, so I'm not at all surprised that he sees what he sees.

Again, I'm not trying to be hard on the guy, but that video completely lacks perspective. In fact, it has neither "forest" nor "trees". Just "here's some stuff to look at". It's not helpful.

Quote:

We don't exactly know that "physical wear" is the reason that they are performing differently.

Nothing analog has a 100% certainty to it. Heck, even digital doesn't. But there are general rules, with exceptions (and exceptions never overrule rules). Or "horses, not unicorns".

Quote:

Could be they performed variably when brand new, that some were originally better calibrated, or perhaps there were several minor software/hardware revisions that perform differently that we are unaware of. The variability in luma and chroma alone (which shouldn't drift over time as they are digitally set with a Jig remote on this model) suggests that they likely were this different straight from the factory.

Yep, could be, and often were, depending on brand/model. However, it was rarely JVC, more often other brands. JVC didn't have long-lived model lines, and any changes tended to just add a new model numbers.

Quote:

I could see the sharpness reducing over time as the heads wear though.

Yep. And that's the horse (not unicorn).

Quote:

The takeaway I got from this was that if you like someone's capture on a certain VCR and you want to replicate it, going out and getting the same model doesn't guarantee similar results IF there's a high degree of variability within the same model.

I wouldn't even say "model", just "unit". The JVC model lines were fairly static, but individual units could develop problems, or be slightly shifted out of spec. Not sharpness, but luma/chroma (and noise). My main observation has always been how sloppy guide alignment was out the of factory. Grounding is another problem, but again mostly non-JVC.

Remember, I was there in the 90s/00s, buying decks minty new from B&H/etc. I saw performance. And I've seen performance degrade over the decades. Not just with my units, but all units. Most comments you see now are from people that only just now got into video capture/VCRs, in the 2020s, or the 2010s at earliest. Users that have been around for decades are probably a tiny % of the current capture community. It falls on us "old timers" to call out stuff that we know is inaccurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by latreche34

The problem with Topaz being AI is its behavior cannot be trusted, It can blur parts of the picture that otherwise crispy or vise versa, so we don't know what the original picture looked like.

^ This.

Even calling certain Topaz products "AI" is a stretch of that term.