Panasonic AG 7750.. is it worth it for VHS --> DVD ?

[rbatty11]

Still working on my old VHS to DVD xfrs.. the VHS tapes are pretty bad (EP recordings, dubs, etc.).

I'm currently using a JVC DVHS VCR (40000 model) to a JVC M100S DVD recorder.. The Panasonic AG 7750 is a pro deck and can be bought used for relatively cheap.. Would using a the Panny AG 7750 in lieu of the DVHS VCR make a noticeable improvement in my old VHS to DVD xfrs?? marginal? or none?

[lordsmurf]

Another member here and myself talked about this exact VCR in a PM one time. Here's part of that message:

It's a big, heavy broadcast type unit with a built-in TBC, Proc Amp picture controls, genlock, time code, XLR audio ins and outs, etc. It has some type of Faroudja noise reduction processing, too. Video playback quality is very, very good... but not any better than a JVC SR-W5U. It has some sensitivity to MV, and the TBC has to be switched on for a stable playback on some VHS tapes. Having a built-in Proc Amp and adjustable Y and C noise reduction is pretty cool, though. The unit does not seem to have an edge enhancement feature like the JVC's do.

So it's good, sure. Better than a JVC S-VHS, probably not.

The JVC S-VHS tends to do more than a JVC D-VHS, although the D-VHS has some functions that can help tapes when an S-VHS will not.

So, yes, sort, the Panasonic may help you sometimes, and do better than the D-VHS. Other times, maybe not.

I wouldn't spend more than $200-300 on it, at very most. A good JVC S-VHS unit (SR/7600+/9600+) can be gotten used for $150-200, and new for $250-350, so keep that in mind.

[rbatty11]

Thanks, that helps..

Yes, the 7750 looks rock solid/stable with a lot of features and controls.. It's amazing that a consumer S-VHS can easily be comparable in quality to a pro deck (even though it's an older model).

Closely related.. What does a detailer do? I don't think any of the discussed VCR's have a detailer feature, correct? Is it a must for older EP recorded, unstable VHS tapes?

[lordsmurf]

Detailers enhance the sharpness of video. It makes blurry VHS not so blurry.

[rbatty11]

OK.. from the sounds of it.. looks like I really need a good full fram TBC and a proc amp.. thanks.

[gshelley61]

Thanks, that helps..

Yes, the 7750 looks rock solid/stable with a lot of features and controls.. It's amazing that a consumer S-VHS can easily be comparable in quality to a pro deck (even though it's an older model).

Professional broadcast machines don't necessarily have better playback image quality than some high end consumer VCR's. The reason they are so expensive is that they are designed and built to run for tens of thousands of hours, and to be easily repaired and maintained. So, they are super heavy duty - using cast aluminum tape transports with large direct drive motors. They also have plug in circuit board modules that can be easily removed and replaced when they go out of spec.

[MovieMan000]

I think the 7750 is an excellent choice and use them all the time. I mainly transfer s-vhs to dvd on these, and not vhs.

The 7600 and 9600 are good units, (of which I have 1 7600 and 2 9600's - from days gone by)but there are many tweaks on the 7750's that can enhance playback, and tracking is very solid, which is important in my opinion --- Most of my consmer jvc's eventually end up with the same inherent problems...comet tails on the screen and shutting off after rewinding...

Richard

[VCRcomp]

I haven't been happy with AG7750 for VHS-to-DVD transfer. The video has too much noise and the picture is too soft. Although the built-in TBC is superior to any external TBC I've ever used, I don't use this machine for video transfer, only for playback and rewinding. However, I recently found one really interesting feature - a stereo mic input. What's so special about these inputs are an exceptionally good, low noise preamps. I'm not a professional sound recordist, but I'd previously used many consumer recording devices, such as ZOOM H1 and mic input on Sony mini DV camera and those devices had a lot of noise, while the Ag7750's preamps turned out to have a significantly lower noise. So if anybody is thinking about trashing the unit, it might still be useful for a different purpose. I'll say again, I'm not a professional sound recordist and haven't tested a frequency response or anything else, but the noise in these preamps was VERY LOW for my expectations. Best preamps I ever had, to be honest.

[jman98]

VCRcomp - Were you bored today?

You dug up an 8 and a half year old thread to tell us that you don't like this ancient VCR. Wow. I'm sure that everybody has been waiting 8+ years to know that. And you spend most of your post telling us about stuff (the microphone input) that is irrelevant to the original post.

Just leave these old threads alone. We've had many recent threads started by newbies who only now want to transfer their VHS tapes to DVD and the general consensus is that all of the old "recommended" VCRs from about 10 years ago are now very expensive and not reliable any more. At this point people who are only now starting to do this kind of transfer would be better off to just find a decent working VCR and use it than to worry about models recommended 10 or so years ago.

[VCRcomp]

As you have figured out, these machines are getting very old and are not reliable as a VHS players anymore. You might not find my info useful, but I'm pretty sure that some day somebody will. And even if it's only 1 person making a decision based on my info, than that's a good enough reason for me to post it. Many young people with low budgets are trying to start a home studio for recording their music. I could start a new thread about the Ag7750 on some audio forum, but they probably wouldn't know what the hell an AG7750 is. Most of the people around here know about this machine and if any one of them ever needs a good preamps, they'll know where to find them. I think it would be totally unnecessary to start a new thread.

[PuzZLeR]

Well, just in case someone did land here in a search, and is considering such a purchase from eBay, or some corner flea market, etc, etc, keep in mind such units are broadcast level, and not necessarily for the home.

What that can mean is that they can have high picture quality for higher end stuff, like commercial tapes, high quality SP recordings, and professional S-VHS, but would choke on lower end stuff, such as 2nd gen, EP/SLP TV recordings, etc.

I don't have a 7750, so don't say this with any experience, just from what's been posted about similar decks, so I urge a prospective buyer to consider this beforehand.

Then again, at the time of this post, such decks are now so old, they may as well be problematic due to age.

I do agree with Jman98 in that today, if you want to do any transfers, you are better off with a VCR that is in good working order. I'm even going to venture to say that such "super VCRs" are super over-rated anyway - even if you do get lucky and score one fully working. I have 3 different models of them, and the regular 4-head, composite, HiFi units that I have outdo them on a number of tapes coupled with today's post processing resources.

Today, you don't need a "super VCR". Their output is not so appealing in this present age of software denoisers/correcters/etc, bigger hard drives for lossless, and CPU/RAM for processing. Why bother with 198X-199X tech for such stuff, especially when these units will likely be problematic now anyway?

Unless you want to consider VCRcomp's posts about this unit's audio features, I'd say, for at least the 2014 era, and likely from here on - PASS on this unit.

[VCRcomp]

Just to clarify my post, I never encouraged enyone to buy this unit from ebay or any second hand market. What I wanted to suggest was to think twice before you throw it away in case you own it and don't know what to do with it. Or maybe if you get a chance to get it for free or really cheap and are in need of a good mic preamp, you can at least try it before buying an expensive preamp. Even if the heads or anything else is broken, the mic preamp might still work. That's all.

[NJRoadfan]

I do agree with Jman98 in that today, if you want to do any transfers, you are better off with a VCR that is in good working order. I'm even going to venture to say that such "super VCRs" are super over-rated anyway - even if you do get lucky and score one fully working. I have 3 different models of them, and the regular 4-head, composite, HiFi units that I have outdo them on a number of tapes coupled with today's post processing resources.

Today, you don't need a "super VCR". Their output is not so appealing in this present age of software denoisers/correcters/etc, bigger hard drives for lossless, and CPU/RAM for processing. Why bother with 198X-199X tech for such stuff, especially when these units will likely be problematic now anyway?

All of those fancy filters still can't clean up horizontal jitter/time-base errors. Its still easier to take care of this in the analog domain and the JVC Digipure units happen to do a good job of taking jittery video and correcting it. There are other dedicated time-base correctors that do it, but many of them are just as old (and broken), or don't perform as well. It doesn't help that the term "time-base corrector" has been abused over the years to cover things like frame synchronizers (the popular AVT-8710 is one such unit) and has resulted in units that do everything but actual time-base error correction!

[PuzZLeR]

Hi NJRoadfan,

This jitter you describe, as long as it isn't exceedingly, almost to exaggerated levels, high, is well taken care of in post-processing with an app like Neat Video, when you activate its motion analysis with the temporal filter on - better than any VCR's that I've seen.

In fact, it's the output from one of my so-called "super" VCRs that is most problematic with this, ironically the JVC (the SR-V101US), which on several tapes overcompensates and jitters the other direction (and doesn't get any much better with even an overnight of fiddling and experimenting with the settings ). Does this unit have this DigiPure feature? Regardless, unless I've missed something, I have not been all that impressed. I'm sorry my friend.

Don't get me wrong - this JVC is great-to-awesome-to-unbeatable on newer, or even commercial, tapes, but very bad with older EP recordings at times. I have the Panasonic AG-1980 for these stubborn tapes, but even my "ordinary" VCRs, such as a Panasonic PV-V4521-K or Memorex MVR4046a, believe it or not, rival the AG-1980 and kill the JVC on (way too) many of these tapes, especially with a little help from post-processing, which is shameful.

I agree though that the term “TBC” has been used too loosely, and abused, and over-abused, over the years. And the 8710 (of which I also own) is indeed great at cleaning the signal and reducing frame drops, but people seem to also think it will miraculously have a healing effect on that erroneous tape jitter. It does a bit (which in scale is much progress regardless) but is certainly not "The Cure"!

[lordsmurf]

This jitter you describe, as long as it isn't exceedingly, almost to exaggerated levels, high, is well taken care of in post-processing with an app like Neat Video, when you activate its motion analysis with the temporal filter on - better than any VCR's that I've seen.

No. You cannot fix jitter (technical horizontal "jitter", not up/down motion) in software. Period. Many have tried, all have failed. It cannot be done. I wish. I've worked with many filter devs on this in the past decade.

In fact, it's the output from one of my so-called "super" VCRs that is most problematic with this, ironically the JVC (the SR-V101US), which on several tapes overcompensates and jitters the other direction (and doesn't get any much better with even an overnight of fiddling and experimenting with the settings ). Does this unit have this DigiPure feature? Regardless, unless I've missed something, I have not been all that impressed. I'm sorry my friend.

The SR-V10U can vary highly, from unit to unit. I detected many variants even in the half dozen decks we have. Yours may just be defective in some way.

Don't get me wrong - this JVC is great-to-awesome-to-unbeatable on newer, or even commercial, tapes, but very bad with older EP recordings at times. I have the Panasonic AG-1980 for these stubborn tapes, but even my "ordinary" VCRs, such as a Panasonic PV-V4521-K or Memorex MVR4046a, believe it or not, rival the AG-1980 and kill the JVC on (way too) many of these tapes, especially with a little help from post-processing, which is shameful.

Was that also the VCR where those tapes were recorded? I'd be curious exactly what aspects of the signal are "better" in your eyes, Too often, I find people confuse noise with detail, and thus like the noisier signal.

I agree though that the term “TBC” has been used too loosely, and abused, and over-abused, over the years. And the 8710 (of which I also own) is indeed great at cleaning the signal and reducing frame drops, but people seem to also think it will miraculously have a healing effect on that erroneous tape jitter. It does a bit (which in scale is much progress regardless) but is certainly not "The Cure"!

Yes, I've been saying this for years. I still fondly recall my many interactions with davideck, as I tried to establish a better definition of what a "TBC" is.

[PuzZLeR]

In fact, it's the output from one of my so-called "super" VCRs that is most problematic with this, ironically the JVC (the SR-V101US), which on several tapes overcompensates and jitters the other direction (and doesn't get any much better with even an overnight of fiddling and experimenting with the settings ). Does this unit have this DigiPure feature? Regardless, unless I've missed something, I have not been all that impressed. I'm sorry my friend.

The SR-V10U can vary highly, from unit to unit. I detected many variants even in the half dozen decks we have. Yours may just be defective in some way.

Well, I did buy it new some 5 or so years ago for a rather huge price tag on eBay. I do believe the seller when the unit came like new, and smelled like new, and is reliable and does play some tapes excellently, so it can't be "defective".

The unit works fine, but if there was a high standard deviation in Q/C at the factory, then maybe that could be a possible problem.

I personally hate it now, and it collects dust.

Don't get me wrong - this JVC is great-to-awesome-to-unbeatable on newer, or even commercial, tapes, but very bad with older EP recordings at times. I have the Panasonic AG-1980 for these stubborn tapes, but even my "ordinary" VCRs, such as a Panasonic PV-V4521-K or Memorex MVR4046a, believe it or not, rival the AG-1980 and kill the JVC on (way too) many of these tapes, especially with a little help from post-processing, which is shameful.

Was that also the VCR where those tapes were recorded? I'd be curious exactly what aspects of the signal are "better" in your eyes, Too often, I find people confuse noise with detail, and thus like the noisier signal.

No. The tapes were not recorded on any of the VCRs mentioned, and given that they are a decade or more old, they were recorded on a variety of VCRs previously owned.

As for what's "better", I can go on. Blades of grass, strands of hair, freckles, etc, show better on my "ordinary" units when the JVC smears them. Many of the JVC captures came out looking "fatter" (such as with sports players on a field). Upon closer inspection it was jitter that caused that "weight gain".

The JVC's filters to clean noise over-smooth, and over-brighten in some scenes, and much of the video comes out plasticky looking, and other artifacts. I'm not impressed.

(Yes, I use EDIT mode.)

[PuzZLeR]

This jitter you describe, as long as it isn't exceedingly, almost to exaggerated levels, high, is well taken care of in post-processing with an app like Neat Video, when you activate its motion analysis with the temporal filter on - better than any VCR's that I've seen.

No. You cannot fix jitter (technical horizontal "jitter", not up/down motion) in software. Period. Many have tried, all have failed. It cannot be done. I wish. I've worked with many filter devs on this in the past decade.

Then hopefully your wish has come true. I'm actually using a jittery sample from the said JVC in this case ("before.avi"), and correcting it with Neat Video ("after.avi"). Not perfect, but a tremendous improvement.

PS: This is from an old Ford commercial. No copyright infringement is intended. Just a cute example.

[Brad]

The before video doesn't have notable jitter (vertical lines that wiggle/bend left and right), apart from the garbage at the bottom.

[PuzZLeR]

The before video doesn't have notable jitter (vertical lines that wiggle/bend left and right), apart from the garbage at the bottom.

Huh?

The before video has jitter shaking all over the place. Did I miss something?

(Yes, forget the garbage at the bottom - that's just the JVC's way of NOT handling tracking all that well on this tape.)

Past 2am here now - will report back later. Good night all.

[lordsmurf]

so it can't be "defective".
The unit works fine, but if there was a high standard deviation in Q/C at the factory, then maybe that could be a possible problem.

JVC QC was poo-poo on the SR-V10 and 101 (rebadged 7900). It can still be bad. I had to fix 1-2 "new" ones myself. The VCR is fine, and JVC took a heavy beating for the EOL final models.

I personally hate it now, and it collects dust.

It's no 9800, but has it's uses. I've seen it outperform the AG-1980 and JVC HR's at times. It's interesting.

Tip: Always try tapes in multiple decks. You may be surprised at times.

As for what's "better", I can go on. Blades of grass, strands of hair, freckles, etc, show better on my "ordinary" units when the JVC smears them.

I've observed this on tapes recorded on a certain VCR (a Magnavox from 1995, would have to look up model again). But that's pretty much it. On those tapes, I use the AG-1980. Again, not all VCRs work well with all tapes. VHS was a chaotic format.

The JVC's filters to clean noise over-smooth, and over-brighten in some scenes.

This is heavily affected by both the tape itself and the capture device. Blaming the VCR is the easy way out, but generally not the correct one.

(Yes, I use EDIT mode.)

On the specific "blurred" tapes, EDIT doesn't make a difference. Normal VCRs all play these tapes ghastly, so the choice is JVC vs Panasonic.

[Brad]

The before video has jitter shaking all over the place.

It is certainly noisy. But the trees, for example, aren't wiggling.

Here is a jittery sample with crosstalk. Is it enough to work from?

[SixFiftyThree]

Regarding JVC Digipures, I refer just to my own experiences which have, for the most part, been excellent. I've seen them work wonders on tapes that all other VCRs played sub-optimally, with perfect tracking and PQ, and then I've seen all their cons - namely the jittering (up/down) TBC, transport problems, and noticeable smearing (particularly on grass and hair as mentioned). I can't say if it's due to design, condition or QC. One of my JVCs is without issue, another is questionable despite appearing to be in good condition and of similar vintage.

The JVC's filters to clean noise over-smooth, and over-brighten in some scenes.

This is heavily affected by both the tape itself and the capture device. Blaming the VCR is the easy way out, but generally not the correct one.

I don't know if I'm actually agreeing or disagreeing with this. Suppose it's the way you interpret it. The JVC filters are just designed that way, for better or worse, and they're just not compatible with every tape. Nor should they necessarily be used unless efficiency is desired. Personally I like a little hardware filtering at times.

And just to address something indirectly - JVC is not inherently soft as many believe. It just has less range, in both directions. Compared to the Panasonic slider, it can actually match its midpoint sharpness in Edit mode + R3; which is usually more than you would want. Ironically, it's the level of softness it can't match; say if you had severe ringing you had to eliminate. It just works differently.

The before video has jitter shaking all over the place. Did I miss something?

Yes, as already mentioned, this is not the correct example (though it is a nice one). Technical jitter, visually identified as wiggling, bent lines, can absolutely not be fixed in software. A line TBC is the only solution. There have been software attempts, most notably by jmac698, but ultimately unsuccessful. And while we're on the topic...

I still fondly recall my many interactions with davideck, as I tried to establish a better definition of what a "TBC" is.

I actually have this saved, its one of the best explanations of TBCs by davideck:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/221219-TBC-Fundamentals

[PuzZLeR]

The JVC's filters to clean noise over-smooth, and over-brighten in some scenes.

This is heavily affected by both the tape itself and the capture device. Blaming the VCR is the easy way out, but generally not the correct one.

I don't know if I'm actually agreeing or disagreeing with this. Suppose it's the way you interpret it. The JVC filters are just designed that way, for better or worse, and they're just not compatible with every tape. Nor should they necessarily be used unless efficiency is desired. Personally I like a little hardware filtering at times.

And just to address something indirectly - JVC is not inherently soft as many believe. It just has less range, in both directions. Compared to the Panasonic slider, it can actually match its midpoint sharpness in Edit mode + R3; which is usually more than you would want. Ironically, it's the level of softness it can't match; say if you had severe ringing you had to eliminate. It just works differently.

Yes, "soft" is not exactly accurate, it was an actual sharpness that gave it that crisp look but a smoothing that gave it that clean look (but took details away). I actually don't understand it to be honest, but it was unique. But it didn't work for many of my "rough edge" tapes though.

There was something special about those filters for certain commercial tapes however. They worked real nice here. But I don't have use for much commercial tape transfer since many are available on DvD anyway, so this JVC unit has been a waste for me.

I did tend to use EDIT+D/R3. Still lost much detail on many lower-end recorded tapes. And got much jitter too.

@Lordsmurf. I do blame the VCR when comparably in the same chain it does not perform well against others. I do try a tape in multiple VCRs before every capture to see which is better all the time, which I too believe is good practice.

I still don’t believe it’s defective. I believe it’s just a bad product (for some purposes).

The before video has jitter shaking all over the place. Did I miss something?

Yes, as already mentioned, this is not the correct example (though it is a nice one). Technical jitter, visually identified as wiggling, bent lines, can absolutely not be fixed in software. A line TBC is the only solution. There have been software attempts, most notably by jmac698, but ultimately unsuccessful.

Well I could swear some things were wiggling, such as the van's side frames as the trunk was open. That, and the clothesline, and even hubcaps - although nothing was perfect - all showed great improvement and less shimmering in the processed version. Certainly, it would be less havoc on compression if transferring to DvD for example. De-interlacing would improve things further (but that's another story with other issues).

And software attempts, such as on Doom9, with long, boring scripts can put one to sleep. And rarely do any work.

At any rate, then allow me another shot.

This is a cap from an "ordinary" Panasonic VCR (that beats the JVC unit IMO on pretty much every non-commercial tape). I captured some text this time.

As you can see in the before2.avi, it has crosstalk from the composite output, and has that jittery look. This one is savable since it's not at exaggerated levels (as I mentioned a few posts ago). Applying median methods to remove glitches, removing the crosstalk, then applying a good dose of Neat Video, and a cosmetic bit of sharpening and letterboxing, results in a much, much improved after2.avi, and certainly a much better "straightening" than from any VCR internal filters I've seen. (I can give details if anyone's interested.)

I hope this is more at par.

I could do better, but I was in and out of work this morning. But my point is that I just don't care as much for high-end VCRs, when a good, clean "ordinary" unit from a good brand produces arguably similar results with a little boost from post processing IMHO. Keep in mind, this was one bad and very abused tape (instructional video used many, many times over a number of years).

BTW - I'm also curious how your DVR/TBC/passthrough performs in such cases with similar movement in the video. I hear some things about it with jitter. Myth or real?

[PuzZLeR]

Here is a jittery sample with crosstalk. Is it enough to work from?

Thanks for the sample, but this is something from a bad VCR and likely no TBC. One can make improvements here, but it really is over the top.

I personally make claims of cleaning up jitter based on a good VCR/TBC/proc amp/etc., and jitter that is not overly high (or even exaggerated in some cases).

But I can try something when I have a bit of time later tonight or tomorrow - no promises of perfect results though.

[PuzZLeR]

There is current and similar discussion in an adjacent thread, mostly regarding the Panasonic AG-1980, if anyone's interested here:

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/364064-Restored-Panasonic-AG-1980-worth-the-price

[SixFiftyThree]

Yes, "soft" is not exactly accurate, it was an actual sharpness that gave it that crisp look but a smoothing that gave it that clean look (but took details away). I actually don't understand it to be honest, but it was unique. But it didn't work for many of my "rough edge" tapes though.

Then you weren't just using the Soft mode. What JVC has on by default, IIRC, is Auto + R3 (edge enhancement). Depending on the tape, Auto can resemble either Norm or Soft. Combine it with DNR and you get that plasticky look. There's also Sharp mode, which is NR + EE and provides the same undesirable look. Soft on its own is definitely not crisp, it is simply as its name implies.

By using JVC filters inadequately, it is possible to totally ruin your video. It's probably why JVC PQ is so polarizing - but undeservedly so. Used sensibly, the filters can be helpful, though I would try to stick to plain Edit mode, or Norm. It's actually the JVC audio I'm not fond of, as my Panny decks have much better output.

Anyway, certain tapes have made me do extreme things with VCRs that I would never do eg. pushing the Panny slider to max sharpness(!) because a retail tape had a trailer that, confusingly, was entirely blurred. It still looked awful, but I at least made it discernible. Same with JVC I've done odd things for the benefit of the tape.

I did tend to use EDIT+D/R3. Still lost much detail on many lower-end recorded tapes. And got much jitter too.

In Edit + R3 you would be squeezing all the detail you can out of the JVC, probably more than I'd usually like (but it depends). JVC naturally suppresses more degradation, and unfortunately more natural detail, when compared to Panasonic which basically exposes the tape as it is - for better or worse. I can't imagine you would've lost a lot of detail though.

Thanks for the sample, but this is something from a bad VCR and likely no TBC. One can make improvements here, but it really is over the top. I personally make claims of cleaning up jitter based on a good VCR/TBC/proc amp/etc., and jitter that is not overly high (or even exaggerated in some cases).

I know what you mean but using the term jitter is just causing confusion. Because technical jitter is literally what those geometric distortions/wiggles are, that can only be cured by a line TBC. That's why you can't fix space-jam-jitter.avi in software. So your restoration is mostly just addressing noise (though it is nice restoration).

But my point is that I just don't care as much for high-end VCRs, when a good, clean "ordinary" unit from a good brand produces arguably similar results with a little boost from post processing IMHO.

I agree that prosumer VCRs aren't necessary or ideal today. But I firmly believe line correction and frame sync is. It's the bare minimum of correction that's needed to optimise the signal for capture and post-processing.

[PuzZLeR]

Well, yes and no to software corrections of technical jitter.

Yes, you can do something for that type of jitter in the space-jam-jitter.avi. (Attached)

EDIT: Attached next post.

Yes, it sucks. I know. But it was just a minor demo to show that there is some software hope for milder cases. I could do a bit more and cheat with editing, but will leave it at that.

Although much of the jitter was calmed, I do admit it is far, far from perfect, and may even look worse. It's got blurs, and is not the highest quality. You would only do this for the text parts of the video, but fragmenting it all over the place would be a pain, and such procedures wouldn't help with embedded text in actual non-flat background scenery. As well, it needs a wide, wide temporal range (such as multiple passes of Neat Video) due to the high deltas in movement, and slows processing even on i7s.

So no, software isn't the total cure for such jitter. I agree a line TBC becomes more necessary.

But personally, I wouldn't work with such content. I do believe the VCR was not a good one to begin with. And maybe no TBC - even a full-frame unit, which would help somewhat.

I still stand with the fact that if the VCR is a good one, you can reduce that jitter to levels where you can at least nicely disguise it (which is what filtering is supposed to do, right?) as I did in my previous example. I did clearly say that as long as the jitter is not at a high level - which can be expected from even a commonplace VCR unit, as long as it's clean and a good model.

Having said that, it's obvious a line TBC can only help, and due to posts I've been watching with interest lately, and even from recommendations from 653, I am proud to announce being the brand new owner of a Panasonic ES15 as of an auction I just won this morning.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Panasonic-DMR-ES15-DVD-Recorder-Burner-Player-DIGA-DVD-RAM-DVD...p2047675.l2557

[PuzZLeR]

Here is the attachment. Just realize I didn't properly upload it last post.

Such processing would not be necessary with proper gear, even with a commonplace VCR. If I had this tape, I'd even apply median/blend methods, with multiple captures, to correct lots of these errors before processing.

[Deter]

Had a few of these or maybe other models. The keypad or controls are old school, all 1's and 0's. Felt like the picture was pretty good, a lot less chroma noise than what you normally get with VHS. If the sound is in Hi-Fi and didn't have any damage (cracks/pops/drops) you will get really good audio. A few drawbacks to these machines, mostly only playing SP tapes.

[jeffpeck]

I am looking to transfer some old home movies recorded on a camcorder from the 1980s to a digital format (probably save them as MPEGs on a spare hard drive and transfer some to DVD and put some on YouTube/Vimeo to share).

I have ordered a USB video capture device, which should arrive in the next day or so. And I already have an old VCR that plays the tapes well on a regular TV. But, I keep on reading that I need a TBC (Time Based Corrector).

The TBCs that I am finding on eBay seem to go for around $400. But, it looks like the Panasonic AG 7750 goes for around $100 or less on eBay, with claims that it is "fully functional" by reputable sellers (with good feedback).

It looks like this unit has built-in TBC. So, why is this unit so much cheaper than stand-alone TBC devices?

I keep on reading about "frame TBC". Is that something different? I am new to the world of VHS-to-digital and would appreciate any help.

From the previous discussion on this thread, it seems like the AG 7750 would not be good for home movies anyway, but I am mostly curious about why this is so much cheaper than a TBC, despite having TBC built-in.

Also, can I buy this unit and run a signal from a regular VCR through it to use it's TBC ability?

I realize this thread is already many years old, but if anyone is still listening or finds this, I'd appreciate the help.

Thanks!