Who out there who doesn't have a VCR with a line TBC uses a DVD recorder in their capture chain as a line TBC (example of Panny ES10 used as line TBC shown in this post: (https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/299682-Wavy-video?highlight=ES10+line+TBC)? What do you use and how good a job does it do?
Can you post some examples like the thread I referenced?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 191
I borrowed a Panasonic ES15 for a few tapes. Worked fine for me. My sources had pretty clean hsync to start with though (much better than the samples in the link).
Most don't recorders DO NOT have an actual TBC inside. At best, many of them have a frame sync, while others just have various filters that do varying degrees of TBC-like or sync filter-like tasks to incoming video. You can't honestly expect a $100 TBC to be inside a $100 DVD recorder.
Read more about TBC, in this analysis of devices that exist, and claim to have a TBC inside, and analyzing what they doMany DVD recorders, including the ES10, do damage to the video quality input, be it luma values, temporal NR, or other artifacts. Watch for this. Only use a DVD recorder for a TBC when the source needs improvement. For a "clean" solution, get a real TBC.
I'll use an ES10 when it helps, but it's a poor solution for a full-time TBC.
I don't think cost has much to do with it. If the device already has memory to store a frame of video, not to mention processing power to encode MPEG video, then adding TBC functionality to this is more about implementation than cost.
A DVD recorder has almost every component needed in a standalone TBC. Support to align scanlines is a trivial addition. They also benefit from economy of scale.
From my experience TBC built-in Panasonic recorders (made with own chips) are very effective, just like a TBC from high end VCR.
Just to be clear about things...I already have 3 JVC VCRs with TBCs (7600, 9500, 9900) and 2 stand alone TBCs (Datavideo TBC-3000 and I.Den IVT-7). However, the standalone TBCs don't do a particularly good job of what the JVC VCRs' TBCs excel at, that is, correcting the timing of the scanlines so there is no waviness in the image. I specifically want to know if there is a device (for instance the ES10) that I can use as a passthrough device with VCRs other than the JVCs to obtain the effect of the JVC TBC (not considering the DNR aspects of the JVCs).
I already knew of the ES10, but as LS says, there may be other issues caused by the ES10 that may not make it suitable for use in most cases. What I am really looking for is something that can align scanlines like the ES10 can do, but maybe with less of the undesireable issues the ES10 is alleged to cause, so I can use it most of the time in my capture chain. Or if someone wants to tell me the ES10 doesn't really do anything all that bad to the image when used as a passthrough device, I'm open to listening to that also.
I seem to recall in the past some people also claiming that Toshiba DVD recorders (RD-XS34's and a RD-2) could do the same thing as the ES10, and maybe without some of the undesireable side effects. I'm just asking people for their experiences to decide whether it may be worth checking out ebay for a used machine that may be helpful. So, if you use a DVD recorder in your chain for this purpose, please let me know about your experience, good or bad. I want to know what I should consider, and what I shouldn't consider, and why.
Last edited by BrainStorm69; 13th Apr 2010 at 13:44. Reason: edited to be clearer about using the device as a pass-through device, not to record with it. Also to add reference to specif
There is two types of time base errors. One type affects horizontal synchronization signals that causes wavy lines. These errors are corrected by Line TBC incorporated into the high end VCR and some DVD recorders (ES10).
The other type of error affects vertical sync signals that cause dropped frames. These errors are fixed by external TBC who have frame synchronizer. A DVD recorder should have inside at least this type of TBC but some don`t have even this type of TBC. The line TBC found in Panasonic and JVC vcr don`t heal vertical synch.
However, the standalone TBCs don't do a particularly good job of what the JVC VCRs' TBCs excel at, that is, correcting the timing of the scanline so there is no waviness in the image.
LS exaggerate side effects made by ES10 in passthrough mode. I assure you that the losses caused by ES15 are significantly smaller that those caused by DataVideo TBC.
Anyway, if you want maximum quality should avoid using external TBC. Inside external TBC and DVD recorder in passthrough mode occur two conversions (analogue signal is converted in digital form and after the digital signal converted in analogue signal).
The ideal workflow have only two devices: VCR>>capture card. Inside one of these you should make all corrections (fix TBC errors, fix problems related to Proc Amps, Detailers and Image Enhancers). In this way you avoid losses causes by repeated conversions. Unfortunately there is no consumer capture card with TBC built-in and advanced Proc Amps settings.
If you want to fix wavy lines and by-pass the noise reduction made by JVC DigiPure I suggest to buy a Panasonic S-VHS VCR with TBC or insert in chain a TBC that fix H-synch errors (ES15).
Last edited by danno78; 13th Apr 2010 at 14:25.
LS exaggerate side effects made by ES10 in passthrough mode.
I'm not saying it's a bad unit, but it's also far from being transparent passthrough.
The Philips 3575 DVD Recorder is a great TBC. The Toshiba RD-KX50 is better than the DataVideos but not as good as the Philips.Life is better when you focus on the signals instead of the noise.
davideck - long time no post to. Good to read you again.
I did some searching for other posts of yours about the 3575 and it sounds pretty darn good. Unfortunately, its also still about $250 or more refurbed on ebay. Any idea if the 3475 (no HDD, also doesn't look the same and was not marketed as a high-end unit) has the same line TBC ability? They are much cheaper on ebay.
BrainStorm69 - Nice to see you back, too! Are you looking to replace your AG-1980?
I don't have a clue about the other Philips units. You should PM orsetto. He might know.
LS - IIRC, Gshelley praised the Toshiba for its transparency as a proc amp and frame synchronizer.Life is better when you focus on the signals instead of the noise.
Id highly recommend using the ES10 as a pass through if you have the JVC 9600/9800 or similar SVHS decks.
I got one because of Lordsmurf's advice and it does do a great job of helping some of the jitter found on vhs tapes.
Also, ive used a Toshiba DR4 (I believe the model was) as a pass through and it really didnt help jitter like the ES10 does.
LS, it'd be great if you could do some testing and let us know about the results.
davideck, maybe I'll try asking him. They are definitely less expensive.
duece8pro, thanks for another data point on the ES10.
Finally, my recollection was that my Pioneer DVR-220 doesn't really work as a line TBC. I did a little pass-through testing tonight that confirmed that once again.
I don't know if anyone has any experience with the Toshiba D-R4, but under the "Detailed Specs" tab on this page, it mentions "Time Base Correction" as one of the features of the D-R4.
Yeah, but I've gone over that before: http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/showthread.php/alternative-avt-8710-1853.html?p=9889#post9889
I could write "Ferrari" on the side of a station wagon, but it's not necessarily accurate.
Gshelley and I corresponded offline a good bit, too, and I think some of his notes are handwritten and/or typed papers in my file cabinet. Oh boy, research time.
I had a Toshiba DR-5 last September, for testing, and it definitely DID NOT help analog input sources. It barfed on my VHS tape test, saw "copy protection" on a 1985 HBO recording. Tape looked good, but audio was noisy. Same for my S-VHS-ET test, the recording halted.
Although I see some of you guys at other places too (duece8, 2B), it's nice to see the "old gang" in a single thread. It's been years.
Last edited by jagabo; 15th Apr 2010 at 09:08.
On the other hand, I don't know that I can disagree with it either.
I read a quote like that and the first thing I think is "aw hell" because it's going to take some deep though to fully process it.
For starters, I always get my directions messed up, vertical vs horizontal. (Why? Well, it's not because I'm stupid. It's not the same as not knowing your left from your right. Rather, it's a case where something that appears vertical is measured horizontally, and is therefore considered "horizontal", such as analog resolution. And that causes a traffic jam in my brain, trying to remember what is and is not handled that way.)
There's "jitter" that moves/wiggles horizontally, and then there are signal imperfections that I don't know that I could assert are only measurable along one axis. These errors can cause the vibrating up/down bounce or jitter of an image, but they can just as easily cause dropped frames and trigger anti-copy detection.
Note that "jitter" in quotes is a technical term in video, while jitter outside quotes is not. Jargon is fun, huh!?
The differences between frame syncs and TBCs are often clearer on paper than they are in practice. I'm also not a broadcast engineer, which is what hampers my speed at grasping some of these topics in their more advanced form. I'm an end-user, like most everybody else here, although I try to wrap my head around these complex topics. Unless my memory fails me, Gshelley was a former(retired?) engineer, which is why I always enjoyed our chats.
That said, some folks may think "well then you don't know what you're talking about". That too, is still not the case! These same discussions are had in pro circles. I've seen similar discussions, found in trade magazines like Broadcast Engineering. SignVideo even has some articles on this topic. Even the engineers can't agree on definitions, because the topic is so muddied in how the things are implemented (and/or merged into single processes).
I argued with davideck for years on trying to pin down a definition, but I had to give up. I simply do not feel comfortable trying to define these things anymore. The best that can be done is empirical analysis of the types of devices that exist, and then base definitions off of that research data. That's the best I can come up with. Trying to define "TBC" and "frame sync" was about 5-6 years of effort that had no outcome. I've probably owned or had access to 50+ pieces of hardware, in the vain search for definitions, with many failed experiments and re-written hypotheses. As often as you can say "a TBC does this", you'll find a handful of "TBCs" that won't do that. Same for the frame sync.
Based on what I see, to call the device inside a DVD recorder a "TBC" is a bit of a stretch. That's my opinion on the matter, you're free to disagree. However, you'll find it hard to create a definition for "TBC" when few of them seem to act alike.
Some of my travels on this topic are found on this site's restoration forum, as well as the digitalFAQ restoration forum.
I don't even want to get into AGC. When AGC leaks into TBC discussions, I tend to run away. Too much crap in one place.
I also would not say anything I've said is "vague" or "general" -- I cover very distinct aspects of what the devices have failed or passed at doing, once the video is released by the TBC/sync.
Last edited by BrainStorm69; 15th Apr 2010 at 12:38.
Last edited by deuce8pro; 15th Apr 2010 at 12:56.
Panasonic ES10 A>D "losses":
First pictures from first post are crap (PowerDVD sceenshots). Go to 11 post to see the real analogue to digital performance.