Pioneer 220-S....S-VIDEO cables vs regular A/V cables

[budz]

I just received my 220-s recorder. Is S-VIDEO cables better to use than regular A/V cables? I'll be doing some VHS tapes to DVD conversions. Any comments will be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

[Gritz]

I would think that unless your VHS Player and your VHS tapes are both S-VHS your won't see any enhancement over the standard yellow video cable. Of course you would have to have a S-VHS player to even have the S-Video connection anyway.

[budz]

You're right I don't know what the hell I was thinking! I guess my brain is fried because it's MONDAY yet here in Honolulu! Thanks for the reply.

[lordsmurf]

Composite and s-video are not really "better" in any direction, they are just different. While s-video has potential for higher grade signals, you have to actually have that signal from the source.

[Xyscaling]

OK......... good point and good question.

I DO have a S-video player and I have done an A/B record comparison from a standard VHS tape using "A" composite and "B" using the S-Video output recording to DVD. Is there any reason that one would be better or worse than the other??? I can't see much, if any, difference at all.

Technically and/or electronically speaking should there be an advantage to using one or the other?? Using standard VHS recordings??
Thanks, Tom

[davideck]

Xyscaling -

The VHS/SVHS format is component; chrominance and luminance are separated prior to being recorded as separate signals. An S Video output allows you to deliver these two components separately to a capture card. A composite output combines them, forcing the capture card to separate them again. The separation process introduces artifacts, so it is reasonable to expect that an S Video output will yield better results.

[Xyscaling]

Thanks very much........... Since I have someone who is knowledgeable, one more question.

For years now I've understood that laserdisc technology "generally"is considered best using component output. If the comb filter in the display is better than the filter in the player, the use of the component output would be better. On the other hand, if the comb filter in the player is better, it is better to use the S-video out. Have I got this correct or backwards??

This leads to my question: I did an A/B test from my laserdisc player recording a resolution test pattern using first component and then the S-video. The S-video looked better. i.e. : there were no "rainbow shimmering" type patterns up around (in between) 300-350 lines of resolution.
Using Componment out, the rainbows were very noticable. Have an opinion?? I was recording to my DVD desktop recorder.
thanks, Tom

[steve2713]

xyscaling, I take it you meant 'composite', not component. :P

Regarding the original question, I've got SVHS recordings and I've seen a mild improvement with using S-video over composite. I tried S-video with standard VHS recordings and there seems to be VERY little difference between S-video and Composite with those, and choosing which is 'better' is probably going to be psychological more than any 'real' difference, at least with my setup (Pioneer 420 and Philips SVHS VCR). So for standard VHS recordings, it may not make much difference what you use.

[davideck]

Xyscaling -

I believe that the laserdisc format is composite. Therefore, if you substitute composite for component in your previous discussion, then your argument would be consistent.

[Xyscaling]

Yes, you are correct........... composite is what I ment..........
thanks

[vhelp]

@ budz @ XYscaling ..

If you give me a little time, I"ll post some images of a lasersidc
Composite vs. S-Video source, and split them for you so you can
see any difference.
.
However, there seems to be a little confusion going on around here,
as dubz was refering to his dvd recorder (220S) and now we're on
the laserdisc.., but still, both (any source) are good examples,
and the included notation of ..
.

..If the comb filter in the display is better than the filter
in the player, the use of the component output would be better. On the
other hand, if the comb filter in the player is better, it is better to
use the S-video out. Have I got this correct or backwards??

.
..is still true

I just love this fun stuff

My recommendation is always to use s-video in all your capturing
(video transfer) endeavors. But, with the exception of the above
notation (from XYscaling) taken into considers.

--> another plus,

-vhelp 3211

[Xyscaling]

@ budz @ XYscaling ..

If you give me a little time, I"ll post some images of a lasersidc
Composite vs. S-Video source, and split them for you so you can
see any difference.


I just love this fun stuff

-vhelp 3211

That would be great........... sorry to get so OFF TOPIC here...........
Thanks, Tom

[vhelp]

Ok. As promised. Here is a simple image demonstration of the
S-Video vs. Composite scenario. Remember, this is from a dvd
recorder's MPEG-2 source, *not* an straight AVI.

SOUR: Pioneer CLD-V2600 laserdisc player (LDP)
Movie: "Showgirls"
Port: s-video and composite (regular non-gold cables)
.
DEST: Pioneer DVR-220S dvd recorder
Qlty: fine mode
IRE: 0.0
.
Soft: vdubMOD (frame extracted from time-line)
Soft: iStitch (to split and joins two frames from alternate panes)

See Notes after pic ...




Some Notes ...

I choose IRE 0.0 because quite frankly, I had it at that setting
in a previous project, and I didn't catch it till it was too late.
Still, it's nice to have a user configurable IRE feature.

The Pioneer DVR-220-s unit includes presets for laserdisc (LDP) units,
as well as one for VCR's, plus THREE additional user memory settings.
I did try an LDP default setting in one of my tests (after this one)
and I found the color level was off a tadd. So, it deserves some later
investigation As I was saying.
.
.. Say you want to make a certain preset for special LDP movies.
.. You do/save your settings in MEMORY1, and that become your default,
.. as long as you select it (if not already)
.. Say you want to do a preset for TWO vcr's, you do/save your settings
.. in MEMORY2 for vcr 1, and MEMORY3 for vcr 2. it's that simple.
.. Three settings to choose (in addition to the THREE presents included
.. in the unit) When you want to do work with vcr 2, you just have to:
.. .
.. * LDP - = home/video/audio adjust/video adjust/memory1
.. * VCR 1 = home/video/audio adjust/video adjust/memory2
.. * VCR 2 = home/video/audio adjust/video adjust/memory3
.. .
.. and continue as you were.

Also, I found it interesting to note, that there was some color shift
in each (depending on how you look at it) from the various PORT captures,
s-video vs. composite. So, I felt that it would be best to 'push' some
color blocks onto the image frame, so that for those who have color software
tools, can analylize the frame panes for color accuracy or whatever.
.
.. Remember, I used an IRE 0.0 in this test.
.. .
.. Also, just to note here, I used a simple method of outputing char's on the
.. image, which seemed to work out very nicely and fewer lines of code inside
.. of Delphi
.. The procedure below demonstrates the schematic design for this code.
.. .
.. --> imTextOut(im, col,row, 'ooo', 10, [fsBold], clBlue,clBlue);

And last. I think that in this laserdisc scenario, that either one seemed
to look good/similar produced by the 220S unit's (s-video / composite) ports.
.
But, to really be sure what you're getting in terms of quality, will be
evident when a CQ mode encode is performed on this scenario, since CQ is
geared towards Quality. And, the lessor the noise, the lower the bitrate,
and finally, the lower the final MPEG size. Mind you, this is only if one
were to go this distant. Probably not worth it though, unless your goal
is to fit on a 'per disk' bases.
.
Also, I think that (as was indicated earlier) that differences would be
noticable pending laserdisc brand/make etc. Something to consider.

All in all, the above project proved an interesting one. I even learned
a quick new code snip (above) to apply in my other programming endeavors,
though there's much more to learn

Now, I leave you all to be the judge (based on my given setup) and
enjoy.

-vhelp 3212

[solidsnake]

a question pertaining to the original question, would it be worth it to me to just buy a 6 dollar s-video cable to hook up my s-vhs player to my dvd recorder? I figure since its only 6 bucks I might as well right?

[Gritz]

Yep ..... S-Video out = S-Video in for recording .......... better than the yellow composite RCA.

[Brent G.]

So what happens if you have an S-Video cable connected *and* still have the yellow composite cable connected? Which signal does it use?

a) Yellow composite
b) S-Video
c) Both
d) Neither. Recorder blows itself up trying to decide :P

[Gritz]

Probably S-Video .... but you could do a test burn and check it out.

[Xyscaling]

ZMy experience over the years is that the device will default to S-Video in most cases and just "ignore" the composite.

[edDV]

VHS VCRs hard filter luminance well below 3MHz so in practice, home recorded VHS tapes do not benefit from S-Video Y/C connections. Any source with > 240 lines of resolution (e.g. S-VHS, TV tuner, cable box, analog Hi8 camcorder, etc.) should benefit from the S-Video connection.

Laserdisc is encoded in NTSC or PAL, so is one exception in home class formats. It comes down to which is better, the Y/C separator in the laserdisc player or the Y/C separator in your capture card. Test a difficult scene with composite connection and then S-Video and choose which you think is the best.

[vhelp]

@ edDV (and others) ...

And, in addition to ed's resonse..

In this case (mine) it's an either.., because the pic above shows that there's
almost no difference, excecpt for the slight LUMA you see in the pic (if you
really look hard at it) That is why I pushed some color blocks onto the pic
image so that should you need to test it out with a graphics app/tool, you
could test it (pixel and blocks and all) oh my

Little OT here ...

What I want to do know, is include a feature to move the mouse around to
select a pixle and read it's LUMA value. But, I"m having a problems with
finding the formula to change between 0-200 range and 16-235 range (delphi app)
(to use to switch image luma, for finding the black level, etc) Anyways.
..end OT here

But I did notice the luma difference w/ the composite vs. s-video wires. I
thought it was strange, and I can't explain it (thats why the request above
about the formula) I'm still thinking..

-vhelp 3225

[Xyscaling]

Thanks guys.......... I tried to get this kind of discussion going with a topic I started several months ago. It didn't go anywhere.

This is so neat!!!! Tom

[davideck]

VHS VCRs hard filter luminance well below 3MHz so in practice, home recorded VHS tapes do not benefit from S-Video Y/C connections.

edDV

This may be true for bandpass filter Y/C separators.

But many comb filter Y/C separators introduce artifacts along horizontal chroma transitions regardless of the surrounding luminance frequencies. A split field color bar pattern reveals these artifacts.

Theoretically, there is no reason why a composite output should be chosen over an s-video output if the source is tape and the destination requires Y/C components. If nothing else, it seems prudent to minimize the amount of processing that any video signal is subjected to; why go through the Y/C mix in the VCR followed by the Y/C separator at the destination when both functions can be bypassed with an s-video connection?

[edDV]

VHS VCRs hard filter luminance well below 3MHz so in practice, home recorded VHS tapes do not benefit from S-Video Y/C connections.

edDV

This may be true for bandpass filter Y/C separators.

But many comb filter Y/C separators introduce artifacts along horizontal chroma transitions regardless of the surrounding luminance frequencies. A split field color bar pattern reveals these artifacts.

Theoretically, there is no reason why a composite output should be chosen over an s-video output if the source is tape and the destination requires Y/C components. If nothing else, it seems prudent to minimize the amount of processing that any video signal is subjected to; why go through the Y/C mix in the VCR followed by the Y/C separator at the destination when both functions can be bypassed with an s-video connection?

I agree but the context of this discussion has been whether one should invest in a S-VHS machine to capture VHS tapes only for the benefits of a S-Video connection (ignoring proc/TBC for this discussion).

After testing S-Video vs. composite on a wide range of vcr (including the top line JVC S-VHS models), there has not been any significant observable difference. Frequency sweeps have shown that even high end S-VHS models hard filter luminance below 3MHz when in VHS record mode. So, the remaining arguements for using S-Video for VHS tape capture come down to two rather obscure issues.

1- Your suggestion that the vcr may introduce significant luminance crosstalk near 3.58MHz NTSC or 4.43MHz PAL as it upconverts the color under components. This normally is seen as dots crawling on edges and luminance noise corresponding to the subcarrier frequency.

2- The issue of true luminance bandwidth on some commercially recorded NTSC VHS tapes , i.e. whether extended luminance bandwidth exists on some vhs tapes that may overlap the the chroma modulation around 3.58MHz. If this is true, then Y/C separation to the capture card may produce benefit.

Both of these are more second order issues for most situations. I don't think these alone justify the expense of a new S-VHS vcr. Other issues like internal vs external timebase correction can still be argued.

I agree with your last point that if you currently have S-Video capability, you should use it in almost all cases over composite.

Some have argued that some multi-generation VHS tapes show a more stable capture with composite connection. Multigeneration VHS has so many corruptions that trial and error may or may not find a formula that works.

[lordsmurf]

A lot of this tech talk sounds pretty on paper. But the answer is still "no" .... the difference between s-video and composite depends on more factors that "which is best".

They are different. Nothing more.

I have both. I use what best fits the situation.

[edDV]

a question pertaining to the original question, would it be worth it to me to just buy a 6 dollar s-video cable to hook up my s-vhs player to my dvd recorder? I figure since its only 6 bucks I might as well right?

If you are recording any S-VHS material (extended luminance) then S-Video connections should produce a better capture.

It the tuner in your S-VHS vcr has a comb filter, or if you are using S-Video vcr inputs, then E-E recording may improve with S-Video as well.

[davideck]

Frequency sweeps have shown that even high end S-VHS models hard filter luminance below 3MHz when in VHS record mode. So, the remaining arguements for using S-Video for VHS tape capture come down to two rather obscure issues.

1- Your suggestion that the vcr may introduce significant luminance crosstalk near 3.58MHz NTSC or 4.43MHz PAL as it upconverts the color under components. This normally is seen as dots crawling on edges and luminance noise corresponding to the subcarrier frequency.

2- The issue of true luminance bandwidth on some commercially recorded NTSC VHS tapes , i.e. whether extended luminance bandwidth exists on some vhs tapes that may overlap the the chroma modulation around 3.58MHz. If this is true, then Y/C separation to the capture card may produce benefit.

Both of these are more second order issues for most situations. I don't think these alone justify the expense of a new S-VHS vcr. Other issues like internal vs external timebase correction can still be argued.

I was identifying a third source of artifacts; The comb filter at the destination may introduce additional luminance crosstalk and discoloration that can be quite significant wherever the chroma changes abruptly from line to line. This occurs whether the source luminance bandwidth is high or low.

Typically, the chroma change occurs at the same location in both fields, making the visible artifact two lines wide. Animations and graphics can get pretty messy...

For low bandwidth luminance sources, a bandpass filter at the destination would probably provide better results for the reasons that you have pointed out. Strange.

[davideck]

A lot of this tech talk sounds pretty on paper. But the answer is still "no" .... the difference between s-video and composite depends on more factors that "which is best".

What are these factors?

[vhelp]

On the other hand, there must be a reasonable cause for introducing
s-video connections an as option. I don't see the logic, when all
this time, they only equipt with composite connections. Now, all of
the sudden (well, approx) they include s-video. There simply is no
clear explanation, except that there is a benefit after all
You have to wonder. You have to. Weather composite vs. s-video
and their PROS/CONS, I don't think it realy matters all that much.
.
But, I do theorize, that given an oportunity to get one's hands on an
s-video equipt vcr, than, I would definately go with the s-video
connection that the vcr includes, and skip over the composite all
together.
.
I think that the issue with composite vs. s-video only applies to
devices like laserdiscs, because of their age in circuitry w/ respect
to composite and s-video. There *may* or *may not* be a benefit when
using one or the other. And, as was indicated/hinted, that your mileage
will vary, from laserdisc to laserdisc. Don't forget (speaking on LD)
that your laser's laser beam has another play in the final results.
I had an experience with this a few weeks ago or so. I found that my
CLD-D701 's laser is dirty. I don't have a cleaner, and don't have
the time to mess around with it. But, since I do have the CLD-V2600
model as well, I found it to produce (what seems to be better quality)
from this model vs. my D701 model. So, in the mean, I'll be sticking
to the V2600 model after all (w/ s-video)

Regarding the pic I posted above ...

This is split-scene pic. I captured from the V2600 laserdisc player w/
s-video (left) and composite (right) and split the image in half and then
stitched them together. This has the benefit of being able to see any tonal
or luma difference immediately.

But, one thing I definately agree on here.., is test both, and see for
your self, which is best results. Your results could be anything from
noise, to LUMA levels, to color bleed, to anthing. Its a give or take,
and depends on each unit, and then, of course, you capture device.., be
it an Analog or DV form factor
.
With an Analog, you'll get what looks more color richness, because of
the color space algorithm in this cards shipsets, vs. DV, which is
already set to 4:1:1 color space, but you won't really notice this
because the difference is almost indistiguishable. And, in addition,
I'll go on saying (again) that in reality (IMO) that DV (my advc-100
device) and (or vs) DV, that quality'wise (color space) is the same
Maybe not, maybe so. It just all depends on your comprimise of things,
and what you *want* to believe I want to believe that I see no
difference between an Analog capture vs. a DV capture (output'wise)
But then again, that's my faith. Once you go DV, ( advc-100 ) you'll
never go back ..you just won't. Anyways.

There are other things to note (or as LS put it, more factors) with
many things on s-video and composite.., just as there w/ Analog vs. DV.

* SOURC device - it's connectors (ie, RCA vs. S-Video)
* DEST device - again, it's connectors (ie, RCA vs. S-Video)
.
* Wires - yes, wires. Some *are* crummy, while some wires don't matter, true
.
* The given source material being capture (ie, VHS vs. Cable vs. Antenna, etc)
* other - fill in here, what I missed, if any.

The above are more factors to consider/conclude/calculate or whatever, with.

There was only one person (user) here on this forum that showed some
good examples (in addition to my pic above) of how s-video vs. composite
showed no difference. And, my conclusion to that, was the fact that *that*
given Analog capture card (I think it was an AIW 7000 card) had either a:

* Even spectrum spread of sampling composite and s-video, and/or,

* Was peroperly tuned to the sample across the time-line in a single
... resolution, and once data was finalized per this sampling, that
... this data was pushed into another fine-tuned resolution scenario
... that, when used (captured setup) to other resolutions, the same quality
... level was obtained.

I believe that *that* user was Brainstorm69 who was demoing his AIW 7000
capture card's ability w/ respect to (if memory calls correctly) --

* Resolution
* s-video vs. composite

I don't remember the exact angle of the discussion that Brainstorm69 was
on about, but he did show some good results w/ his capture card
( I think at one time, I thougth it was fulci who was demoing the AIW card,
but then I realized his favorite is the AVER media card ) That was a
few months ago or so, last year. Anyways.

-vhelp 3228

[davideck]

On the other hand, there must be a reasonable cause for introducing s-video connections an as option.

This is very true. Consumer manufacturers don't just add connectors for no reason.

Dubbing was a big issue at the time. Comb filtering at the consumer level came into vogue around the same time as SVHS. The artifacts that I have described compound on every generation, so using the s-video connection was imperative.

If the destination processes components, then I can think of no reason to use composite if s-video is available. If composite appears to provide better results, then I would suspect that there are issues with the equipment.

[davideck]

Composite and s-video are not really "better" in any direction, they are just different. While s-video has potential for higher grade signals, you have to actually have that signal from the source.

This statement is incorrect for the reasons described in my previous posts.