WinTV-PVR-250/350/500 Which one to get?

[Bronx]

I have read a lot of reviews regarding these cards. They all sound the same to me.

Which one would you guys recommend...

[handiman876]

i own the 350 and it works well in display and recording. the 500 would be nice since you could record while watching/recording a different program at the same time. with the 350 and i assume 250, you must display what you are recording and only one channel at at a time. i would get the 500 if buying today, more features are a plus. i hope this made sense and helps. peace out.

[Bronx]

i would get the 500 if buying today, more features are a plus. i hope this made sense and helps. peace out.

It makes sense.

Any other opinions would be appreciated thanks.

[reboot]

The 500 has no remote or IR though.
If you want a remote, and the ability to watch/record two channels at once, get two PVR-150's.
One retail version with remote, and one MCE version with FM.
This gives you lots of options for additional inputs as well as the remote, IR, and FM radio.

The 250 is being phased out, replaced by the 150.
The 350 is just a 250 with additional hardware mpeg-2 DEcoding. It's output is extremely good, but ONLY for mpeg-2, so if you want to watch avi's on the TV, you should just stick with a 150 and a good video card with TV out.

[mats.hogberg]

Love my 250. If 350 can display 1 channel and record another it obviously has 2 tuners - That'd be even better! (Like having 2 cards.) Many report audio problems with the 150 card - don't know if it's fixed i later versions.

/Mats

[rumplestiltskin]

I had the 150 and it had major audio issues. I returned it and bought the 250; it works perfectly. The 350 has (IIRC) composite video out so it would directly connect to your TV. This would permit you to create a very convenient "Media Center" setup without the need for XP-MCE.

[Bronx]

The 500 is the one with 2 tuners

[yoda313]

I'll always put in a vote for the 250 as thats my card and I love it (mpeg only as mentioned earlier).

[rumplestiltskin]

In order to get "quality" video that, when burned to DVD avoids video artifacts, I use the "2-hour DVD" setting (don't remember exactly what they call it but I can burn two hours of "time-shifted" capture to a DVD+RW, watch, and then erase the disc.

[reboot]

If you have a tuner/capture card, why are you burning disks?
Just pipe it out from computer to TV, let the computer be the saving medium. Delete whenever.
Turn it into a PVR, and give away the VCR

[FulciLives]

Don't get the 150 model ... it has serious image and audio issues.

The 250 is the most popular as most people don't need the MPEG-2 output that the 350 adds.

The 250 and 350 don't seem to have the issues that the 150 model has and although the 500 is really just two 150's on a single card I have heard that it doesn't have the issues of the 150 single card but I don't know if I would trust it.

The WintTV PVR USB 2.0 model is OK too from what I hear.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[v-sharp]

Excuse me for butting in but which one of the WinTV PVR-250 or 350 or 500 has the capability to do scheduled/programmed recording (vcd or dvd) of tv shows from 2 different tv channels at the same time?

For example;

recording a 2-hr show from ch1 at 9-11pm and a 1-hr show from ch2 at 10:30-11:30pm.

or

recording a 2-hr show from ch1 at 9-11pm and a 2-hr show from ch2 at 9-11pm also.

It seemed this is the only way I can have a device close to tivo functions.

[edDV]

Excuse me for butting in but which one of the WinTV PVR-250 or 350 or 500 has the capability to do scheduled/programmed recording (vcd or dvd) of tv shows from 2 different tv channels at the same time?

For example;

recording a 2-hr show from ch1 at 9-11pm and a 1-hr show from ch2 at 10:30-11:30pm.

or

recording a 2-hr show from ch1 at 9-11pm and a 2-hr show from ch2 at 9-11pm also.

It seemed this is the only way I can have a device close to tivo functions.

You would need the 500* + PVR software like Beyond TV. Make sure the PVR software supports the card before you buy either.

Remember that a tuner box is needed for the digital cable or DBS channels. These cards only tune the lower analog channels and none of the DBS channels.

*or two of the 250/350s

[SatStorm]

I'm among the very few that don't like those Hauppauge PVR cards: On a personal level, I have issues with my PVR 250. On a general level, those cards create good picture only when you use full CCIR-601 framesizes (720 x 576 / 480). For 352 x 576 caps, the picture is considerable blured!!!

I prefer much better using a typical bt878 card with mainconcept PVR (the latest version). On my 3rd PC, an AMD XP 1700+, 352 x 576 with an average of 2500 looks perfect!
Of course, seems like I'm the minority here....

And regarding the PVR fuctions... With a specific plug-in and GBPVR, any cheap bt8xx based card, becames a PVR with realtime mpeg 2 capture abilities

[edDV]

I'm among the very few that don't like those Hauppauge PVR cards: On a personal level, I have issues with my PVR 250. On a general level, those cards create good picture only when you use full CCIR-601 framesizes (720 x 576 / 480). For 352 x 576 caps, the picture is considerable blured!!!

I prefer much better using a typical bt878 card with mainconcept PVR . On my 3rd PC, an AMD XP 1700+, 352 x 576 with an average of 2500 looks perfect!
Of course, seems like I'm the minority here....

That won't get you realtime MPeg2 encoding unless your computer is very fast. The advantage to the Hauppauge PVR cards (and similar) is that all encoding is done in hardware without affectiing CPU resources (except for video preview). The 350 puts video preview into hardware as well.

[SatStorm]

I edit my post for adding "latest version" near to mainconcept PVR

Yes, that's true, but does 1.7Ghz seems very fast to you any more?

I know the benefits of the hardware mpeg 2 encoder. But I believe, that today, any PC ~2Ghz has much cheaper alternatives (and honestly, with better picture results!)

[SatStorm]

BTW: I'm able to have realtime mpeg 2 capture using mainconcept 1.4.2 (a very "heavy" program indeed) at 352 x 576 framesize, on my Duron 1200...

I don't consider in the year 2005 those CPUs "fast"...

[reboot]

People like you and me, can tweak a system, to produce the results we want, from just about any capture card, hard or soft.
Most people don't have the time or knowledge to do things like that correctly, hence our recommendation for a hauppauge PVR card.
They produce good quality recordings, with minimal fuss.
BTW, the latest cards, drivers and software versions released by Hauppauge, have virtually eliminated the problems previously associated with the PVR-150.
If it were my budget, I would get a PVR-150 retail with remote, a PVR-500 with FM, and run it all with gbpvr.

[edDV]

I edit my post for adding "latest version" near to mainconcept PVR

Yes, that's true, but does 1.7Ghz seems very fast to you any more?

I know the benefits of the hardware mpeg 2 encoder. But I believe, that today, any PC ~2Ghz has much cheaper alternatives (and honestly, with better picture results!)

I routinely use the Mainconcept MPeg2 encoder in realtime encode mode with 2.4GHz P4 and Celerons and I can tell you that reliability is problematic unless you dedicate and tune the machine to the single task. When the buffer overflows you lose major chunks of your capture. 2.4 GHz has some risk. 2.8GHz with Hyperthreading adds enough safety factor.

Even so, at 720x480 "DVD MPeg2" we are talking compression to only around 7,000 Kbps VBR (approx 70-90min per DVD). If you push a 2.4GHz processor to compress to 6,000Kbps, the errors increase dramatically. Results vary linearly with CPU power.

352x576/480 helps but the capture quality at that resolution depends on the capture card.

There are tradeoffs with every technique. In the future, CPUs will be fast enough to handle software MPeg2 encoding with ease, but when you introduce MPeg4 capture (e.g. H.264/VC-1) you are back to needing hardware support for realtime encoding.

[SatStorm]

edDV, do you really believe that I don't know that the quality of 1/2 D1 depends on the capture card? Or that I don't know that the results varies because of the CPU power? Am I a newbie or something and I don't know it?

Reboot, you are correct, but the way you suggest in this case, is too... American. The reason I bring those aspects and alternatives on the table, has to do with the fact that this is an international forum and people from all around the world gathers here and read it, without neccessary posting (just look the site statistics if you don't believe me). Among them, many came from countries that 100$ is a month's salary. For them, a fancy new card, is not an option. They are willing to learn everything from the scratch, just to do all this the cheapest possible way.
And this way do exist and it is the only alternative they have to enter this hobby. Why we don't inform them regarding those alternatives? Why we give them the wrong idea about this scene?

I use to do this all the time couple of years back, and I stopped because I manage to gather all the flames from USA users in a very short time. But, I feel it is my duty, to point out that there are other alternatives, cheaper (not easier). Those cheaper alternatives, are needed by many from not so rich countries. Those are users and visitor of this forum too. They have the right to learn those alternatives.

Just my thoughts

[FulciLives]

I liked my BT chipset capture card until I got a new computer that would never keep sync no matter what even though it was MUCH faster and "capable" than my old computer ... which did keep A/V sync with my BT card.

I never tried realtime software MPEG capture with my old computer as it was too slow for that. It was a P3 650Mhz with 256MB RAM running WinXP Home. So on that computer I used PICVideo MJPEG on the 19 quality setting then used software (AviSyth and CCE) to convert to MPEG-2 DVD spec in (much) less than realtime.

Now I am using a stand alone DVD recorder but I miss the ability to filter my captures with AviSynth.

I may end up getting a DV capture device (like the Canopus ADVC-110 or DataVideo DAC-100) for those hard sources that need some AviSynth goodness.

Anyways I guess I am trying to support what our yellow friend is saying

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[edDV]

SatStorm, the subject of this thread is "WinTV-PVR-250/350/500 Which one to get?"

I was attempting to point out the advantage of the PVR series to encode full realtime 720x480/576 MPeg2 even on very slow computers (minimal CPU resources are consumed).

Realtime software MPeg2 encoding is still tricky and requires a relatively fast CPU to keep up with 720x480/576 resolutions. You are correct that the minimal CPU requirement can be cut if you capture 352x480/576 and I was correct pointing out that the capture card needs to directly capture at that resolution to get quality. If the capture card realtime scales to 352 from say 640, the results will be poor.

All of this is useful information to anyone considering the two approaches. I fail to see where a North American or budget bias becomes an issue. The PVR approach requires more money to be spent on the PVR card and less on the computer. Software encoding still requires purchase of a bt878 card for about half the investment of a PVR-150, but also requires a faster computer and purchase of the Mainconcept encoder license. The budget is close to equal.

The 352 compromise may tip entry cost slightly in the direction of software encoding but if you factor in that the computer is 100% consumed during TV or VHS capture, a second computer would be required for other tasks.

My software encoding 2.4 P4 machine is dedicated to TV capture. Any other activity during capture starts that overflow buffer countdown and eventually results in lost frames or even seconds..

[SatStorm]

edDV, you are right, you are not wrong.

The subject of this thread is "WinTV-PVR-250/350/500 Which one to get?"indeed, and my answer is "maybe non of them, if ...."
I'm not off topic in case you think I am.

Regarding the cost of the hardware and the software, you have it for certain that everyone buys new stuff, equipment, hardware, etc. Well, let me tell you a short story now:
I just shipped to someone in a non E.U. european country an ISA (!) capture card: A Hauppague WinTV Cinema Pro, which I had from 1996. He gonna install this card to his all brand new Pentium II at 266Mhz, he dreamed for a year (and worked real hard to buy it). With this card he will be able to capture at 352 x 288 so to convert whatever he wishes to VCD. Even realtime! (it is possible to capture realtime mpeg 1 VCD with a pentium 2 @ 233). I met this guy here, in this forum (he PM, a month ago). He enters the internet through a library that offers free access to it's members. He told me that he read some posts I used to do some years ago (me and few others), stating that all this is possible with that kind of low hardware. If those old posts didn't exist, he would thought that all this we are talking here, costs far more that he could afford.

Regarding licences, etc, all those programs have demos and trial versions. Mainconcept for example, as a demo, is fully fuctional and simply adds a logo on the screen. Many people, don't have a problem with that!
Don't mention other alternatives, rarelly presented in this forum and very much chepaer. YMPEG for example, that offers realtime mpeg 2 captures on a pentium 3 at 500Mhz using Virtualdub or virtualvcr! The cost is 25$ and there is also YMPEG SDK for free

I also know many people, that they do a format C: every second week, so to be able to re-install various demos and trials so to keep using them... They have a partition on their HD, just for this task. Dual boot of course.
You can't imagine what the human mind can think, when the circustances ask for them!

Anyway, I hope I was able to show you this different approach (FulciLives got the message, that's sure...)

[jdizzy40]

I Have 2- PVR 500 MCE's and 2 - PVR250's. Run Beyond TV. Great program and can record and watch up to 6 items at once. Comes in handy when NASCAR and Football season overlap and if there is a good movie on TCM. Beyond TV 4 now supports FM radio, so no need for another application. I have heard alot of bad press about the 150's. Your choice. If you had the money, buy a bundle deal from the snapstream web site. You'll have your TIVO but more.

[reboot]

Reboot, you are correct, but the way you suggest in this case, is too... American. The reason I bring those aspects and alternatives on the table, has to do with the fact that this is an international forum and people from all around the world gathers here and read it, without neccessary posting (just look the site statistics if you don't believe me). Among them, many came from countries that 100$ is a month's salary. For them, a fancy new card, is not an option. They are willing to learn everything from the scratch, just to do all this the cheapest possible way.
And this way do exist and it is the only alternative they have to enter this hobby. Why we don't inform them regarding those alternatives? Why we give them the wrong idea about this scene?

I agree with you 100%. Not everyone want's, or can afford the kind of hardware we're used to seeing in north america/EU countries. A viable option is a cheap BT based card, some good software, and a lot of reading and tweaking.
For the purposes of the original post topic, I stand by my previous post.

[Bronx]

Thanks for your replies,

I will be ordering the 250 today.

Again, thanks a lot......

[davideck]

I'm among the very few that don't like those Hauppauge PVR cards: ... On a general level, those cards create good picture only when you use full CCIR-601 framesizes (720 x 576 / 480).

Why do you consider that a problem? I always capture at 720.

720x480 at 8000 kbps looks great for 70 minute DVDs (1 hour within 4 GB).
720x480 at 4500 kbps looks great for 2 hour DVDs.

I have captured hundreds of Beta, VHS, and SVHS tapes, and I consider my PVR-250 to be priceless. Along with a DataVideo TBC and some good VCRs, I have a capture process that never drops frames, never loses A/V sync, always creates compliant files, and does all this in real time! No hassles. No wasted time.

I can appreciate your arguments about cost, etc. However, I do not understand why you conclude that the Hauppauge PVRs are bad. Perhaps they are good if one can afford them?

[edDV]

edDV, you are right, you are not wrong.

The subject of this thread is "WinTV-PVR-250/350/500 Which one to get?"indeed, and my answer is "maybe non of them, if ...."
I'm not off topic in case you think I am.
...

Well it is off the original topic but is a logical tangent. But where do you get the idea that you are unique in building capture solutions with old parts? I routinely do this for others and for myself as a hobby. I've been capturing and processing video back to the 386/DOS and early MAC days. Remember the Truevison Targa type boards and those for the pre Quicktime MAC back in the 80's?

There are many cheap ways to capture video and the Brooktree based cards aren't always the cheapest or best if you are running old hard drive technology. For old Pentium II and III desktops and laptops running Win98, the old Intel Pro PC Camera (CS-430, 431) has a video input that captures good quality YUV 352x288 to USB1. I've built Pentium III laptop PVR's using this camera with a VCR as the PAL or NTSC tuner source. Works great, is portable and you don't have to open the case. Osprey and others made small portable USB1 capture devices that worked just as well. I've seen CS-430's available for as little as $5 at swap meets and surplus stores. Intel recently made the XP drivers free for download.

There are many ways to get creative with old hardware. Old hardware is near free but experience is needed to get this stuff working.

You can't imagine what the human mind can think, when the circustances ask for them!

Sure I do. That is what we all had to do back in the day and do now. You wait for previous quality hardware versions to come down in price on the used market and then you apply and adapt as much new software as you can.

[SatStorm]

First of all, this was a random topic I just used to bring this point on surface again, because it simply happens and gathered some of the most active and well respected members of this community here. It was the perfect opportunity for me, to point once again this semi-forgoten subject: "People read us, we have to tell them all the alternatives they have!"

Davideck: It's not a problem, it is a different approach of this hobby! For me, all the fun is to convert 3 or 4 hours of a VHS tape to 1 DVD-R the best possible way. Using overkill bitrates and framesizes, is not the best possible way IMO. And as a hobbiest, I don't wish to teach to newcomers this attitude. We, the advance forum members, lead the newcomers with our answers. We create the future advance users. Let's teach / inform them now that they're willing to learn some stuff (later, when they manage to figure all this, won't be interest to learn more...) and as a payback, we gonna see a better overall quality level from the new forum generations!

Also, one hour per DVD5, sounds at my hears... a waste! You see, one hour of video is more than possible with CVD, so what's the point to use DVDs for that? Especially if the sources are VHS/SVHS/LD sources, Analogue TV, or Standard digital TV? (usually of 352/480/528/544 x 576/480 framesize)

Anyway, now it really turnes off topic, so I stop here!

edDV, back in the 80s I had a Sincair ZX Spectrum. I'm not that old, I'm just 31! And believe it or not, this "off topic" info you just posted here, may help many users when they hit that magic "search" button! I bet they thank you in advance!!!

[davideck]

Also, one hour per DVD5, sounds at my hears... a waste! You see, one hour of video is more than possible with CVD, so what's the point to use DVDs for that? Especially if the sources are VHS/SVHS/LD sources

My S-VHS home videos contain significant amounts of detail such that 720x480 capture at 8000 kbps is beneficial.

It sounds like we are working at different source quality levels.