Who uses a DVD recorder as a line TBC, and what do you use?

[jagabo]

And Jagabo, when you said S-VHS TBC is better, did you include the VCR i wrote about up ahead?
The one with DNR/TBC?

You mean the JVC HR-S9600U? According to the manual it has a line TBC:

http://resources.jvc.com/Resources/00/00/99/LPT0241-001.pdf

Your VCR is equipped with the Digital TBC (Time Base Corrector) that removes jitter from fluctuating video signals...

I can't vouch for how good it is.

[zerowalker]

Well it´s probably the same: http://www.tradera.com/-jvc-super-vhs-hr9600-auktion_170204_149812854
Well, anyone here that has it?
Would really like to see how much the DNR ruins the image.

[Mini-Me]

Well it´s probably the same: http://www.tradera.com/-jvc-super-vhs-hr9600-auktion_170204_149812854
Well, anyone here that has it?
Would really like to see how much the DNR ruins the image.

It's pretty subjective. In general, people who hate noise love JVC's, whereas people who love detail hate JVC's. Of course, everyone loves detail and hates excessive noise, but it's a matter of where your priorities lie. Here is a thread that compares the JVC 9600 with the Panasonic NV200 (AG1980):
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/267958-VCR-comparison-JVC-HR-S9600-Panasonic-NV-FS2...-%28AG-1980%29

Put these two pictures in tabs and flip between them:
https://forum.videohelp.com/images/guides/p1695245/001%20%28jvc,%20notbc,%20nodnr%29_f02058.jpg
https://forum.videohelp.com/images/guides/p1695255/2.jpg

It's important to note that the NV200/AG1980 has DNR too, but it's much less aggressive with the luma grain than the JVC 9600. You'll notice several differences between the two images:

• This particular JVC has a pinker hue, whereas this particular Panasonic has a greener hue. Neither one looks dead-on accurate, but I personally prefer the JVC's color presentation here.
• The NV200 has far more noise, as well as some artificial sharpening of the noise and edges...
• ...but the NV200 also has more genuine detail, which the JVC washes away in a manner that can never be recovered from.

Some people dismiss the additional detail as "mind tricks" and say, "you're just seeing the extra noise," but that isn't actually true. For instance:

• Look at the blue tiles on the right: Vertical lines dividing the tiles are present on the NV200, but the JVC eliminates them almost entirely, making them look like horizontal slabs, except maybe at the corners. I'm not sure if this is because of more aggressive DNR or if the JVC simply has worse horizontal resolution. (I think both are the case: The AG1980 had its sharpness slider set too high in the test images in this thread, but the JVC showed lower horizontal resolution and more fuzziness in general.)
• Ignoring the additional noise, you can also see more detail in the man's hair and face on the NV200. He has a five-o-clock shadow that's almost totally absent on the JVC, and the JVC's smearing alters the shading of his face in a way that makes him look younger and more well-rested.
• Check out the wrinkle on his brow: It's clearly present on the NV200, but it's so faint on the JVC that no amount of sharpening would ever recover it without making the rest of the image look like something out of your worst nightmares. Since no amount of sharpening could bring the wrinkle back from the JVC, it's obvious that it's not simply the result of artificial sharpening on the NV200. It's real, actual detail that the JVC either failed to get from the tape or eradicated with its DNR.

Someone on that thread attempted to use NeatVideo to denoise the Panasonic image, but I wouldn't put much stock in their results: Decent Avisynth denoisers can easily get rid of the grain (every last bit) at the cost of a bit of softening, and NeatVideo especially is honestly capable of MUCH better. If you're capturing to a DVD recorder, that's pretty irrelevant, so you'll have to compare the two images as they are. If you're capturing to a PC and planning to denoise, you can pretty much just imagine the Panasonic image without the grain but maintaining the additional image detail...since NeatVideo really can do exactly that. (It's pretty amazing.)

I should clarify that I'm not a Panasonic partisan either, and I have issues with the way my AG1980 presents images: It has a sharpness slider, but the default setting isn't neutral, so it's difficult finding the correct unsharpened position. Its DNR still has some temporal artifacts, and it "reshapes" the noise instead of simply removing it...and for that matter, it's still not nearly as detailed as the original camcorder for my VHS-C tapes. It loses a significant amount of vertical detail, so its detail resolution can still use improvement (...and I'd like something better for my regular VHS tapes). Nevertheless, the evidence indicates it's more detailed than JVC S-VHS decks, and it's still more detailed than my other VCR's (barring my original camcorder) when its DNR doesn't get in the way.

If I were just viewing the above video casually, I might prefer the image presentation of the JVC. Actually, I might even prefer the JVC if I were capturing cartoons. However, capturing all of the available detail is important to me when I'm digitizing VHS home movies, so JVC S-VHS units are just not an option for me (plus, I don't want to risk destroying my tapes with them). Your priorities might well be different.

[zerowalker]

The JVC is blurred, does it look like that even with the DNR off?
If so i really won´t like it.
As you said, More detail and more noise can be used to make more detail remain than an automatic Denoiser will.

[Mini-Me]

The JVC is blurred, does it look like that even with the DNR off?
If so i really won´t like it.
As you said, More detail and more noise can be used to make more detail remain than an automatic Denoiser will.

I can't say for sure, since I don't have one...but whenever I've seen a test image on this forum from any JVC S-VHS deck (except the older 7600), it's been blurrier/fuzzier than any of the other decks being compared.

[zerowalker]

Well i will probably try to get another one than, i thought JVC was the best, but apparently it isn´t, maybe the most "Stable".

[Mini-Me]

Well i will probably try to get another one than, i thought JVC was the best, but apparently it isn´t, maybe the most "Stable".

"Most stable" is a good way of putting it, I think (as long as stable refers to noise, not tracking...I hear they aren't the best trackers). Working JVC S-VHS units are the best for people who hate, hate, HATE noise and want smooth, buttery captures without the noise distracting them. It's hard to find working ones though, and the broken ones are hazardous...so as orsetto frequently points out, anyone who likes the JVC look would be better off getting a Mitsubishi HS-HD2000U or one of the JVC D-VHS units, which all have similar DNR circuits. I wonder if those are any better at maintaining resolution, or if they suffer the same blurry fate?

The JVC legend also has to do with their TBC functionality. Few other VCR's have a good line TBC, and I've read that the AG1980/NV200 used to be too expensive to really consider. Moreover, DVD recorders with good TBC's didn't exist back in the day (like the very early 2000's), so that also added to the uniqueness of JVC S-VHS VCR's. There still aren't a great number of options nowadays, but at least we're not limited to JVC anymore.

[zerowalker]

Well it´s really good for them, but for myself, i really like to get so much detail as possible. And rather manually denoise and restore the film as i like it.
Hmm, will try to see if i can find anything else and ask for recommendations.

[sanlyn]

Well, the exact amount of degradation is more interesting to me from the standpoint of comparing it with other DVD recorders with passthrough TBC's. For instance, I have a Philips DVDR3475 and a Toshiba RD-XS34, and I'm curious how they both compare to the Panasonic ES-10/ES-15 in terms of performance and image quality.

My XS-34 has mostly transparent picture output aside from levels changes: It sharpens a bit (at least using composite in, S-Video out), and it deals with levels very gracefully by reducing my source's contrast and preventing any/all clipping (which is good, since the camcorder I'm using it with otherwise clips into my AIW 9600). Unfortunately, its TBC isn't nearly as strong as the DVDR3475 or the one built into the AG1980 or JVC S-VHS lineup, and it rewrites the sync information, preventing any further correction. If I get some time, I might upload a clip of it to compare with the two I posted here.

I posted sample caps and videos using pass-thru with the Panasonic ES20 and the Toshiba R-DK2 (or is it the "D-RK2"? I can never remember). They're posted here and here. But my log on the download site shows several people viewed all the Panny shots, but only 1 view of just one of the Toshiba shots. I notice this a lot in this forum: say JVC or Panasonic in any thread, and readers swoop onto it en masse. Say Toshiba or Pioneer, and the readership falls below ground level.

Anyway, the Panasonic sometimes seems to look "sharper" (but also a little grungy somehow) and the Toshiba shots look "cleaner". But I find that the results often depend on the tape and the player, so I can't say whether a Panny or Toshiba is "better" than the other in some respects.There are also two shots showing how tbc's handled frame tearing, and the Toshiba RD-RK2 and XS34 produced better work. Very few views of the tearing samples, and Panasonic won the name recognition contest, again. None of those repairs are perfect -- how would a relatively simple tbc chip in these consumer units with a consumer tape player possibly outshine a $5000 studio tbc and a pro-level deck?

Unfortunately the player I used for those tests didn't put out a lot of wiggly verticals. I wonder if that old Panasonic PV-4662 had a basic tbc in it? (Nothing in the menus or literature). It has the smoothest playback of my other VCR's, and didn't grunge up the images with artifacts the way my JVC's did. If it weren't for copy protection on some tapes, I wouldn't even need a tbc with that VCR to get a smooth image with little or no jitter or wiggles. It thankfully doesn't have the flagrant oversharpening or juiced-up contrast of later Panasonics.

I fail to understand why people poo-bah the use of tbc pass-thru's. I believe they expect the performance of a $5000 VCR or pro broadcast gear. There's no way you can get broadcast-level performance on a consumer budget. The alternative is to ruin your tapes with the typical JVC player, take your chances on half-dead AG-1980's on eBay (and those have their problems, even when they work), or just capture a tape with no tbc at all from the godawful DVD/VCR combos being sold today.

As for the Panasonic ES10, -15 -20, I don't see any difference between them. I used all three. The ES10 died 4 months into its life cycle, the ES15 did about the same, and I went thru two ES20's one of which I still own, but seldom use because the Toshiba D-KR2 and RD-XS34's seem to give better results.

[orsetto]

Hmm, will try to see if i can find anything else and ask for recommendations.

Save yourself the effort of looking, at least among the VCR options: there really isn't "anything else" available in PAL format. Its pretty much a choice between the Panasonic NV-SF200 and whatever JVC you can lay hands on. As Mini-Me very carefully described, the Panasonic offers more detail and more realistic motion presentation, but sample variation from VCR to VCR is significant and no two play exactly alike. The DNR, while more realistic, shapes the noise rather than conceals it completely. This shaping can result in unpredictable artifacting, most noticeably in night scenes. You cannot disable the DNR but the TBC is independently switchable, which can be helpful when using additional extrnal processors.

The JVC design is more "stable" if by "stable" you mean "consistent presentation." The JVC TBC/DNR circuit functionality is similar from model to model, year to year: if you've seen one, you've seen them all. You either like the JVC filtered look, or you don't: it creates a very clean image but scrubs away all fine detail in the process. To some degree you can compensate this by adjusting a detail/sharpness slider in the setup menu, but some detail will always be lost. Unfortunately the JVC TBC/DNR work in tandem, both are always on or always off. With the circuits switched "off" the high end JVCs tend to perform wretchedly: tracking is subpar and the unfiltered video unexceptional.

The JVC DVHS models are somewhat better: the higher-spec mechanics extract a small bit of extra detail, just enough to often break thru the over-softening of the DNR. DVHS was not as widely promoted in PAL as it was in NTSC, so finding an affordable unit might be much cheaper or much more expensive than in USA (where DVHS is currently enjoying a second wind, with second-hand decks fetching a premium). The Mitsubishi HS-HD2000 is a reliable DVHS with TBC/DNR similar to the JVC (even the menu settings are the same). The finest consumer VCRs you can buy are the JVC analog-HDTV WVHS series, the few lucky owners here on VH report spectacular transfer results with no other hardware necessary between VCR and encoder. Sadly WVHS was NTSC only, so not an option for PAL tapes.

If your priority is fine control over the image, you would likely be happier spending your budget on multiple "flavors" of passthru units like Panasonic ES10, Philips, and Toshiba, plus an external proc amp. Swapping these in and out of the chain will give a wider range of signal filtering effects than relying on any particular TBC/DNR vcr, with more flexibility for PC post-processing.

[sanlyn]

If your priority is fine control over the image, you would likely be happier spending your budget on multiple "flavors" of passthru units like Panasonic ES10, Philips, and Toshiba, plus an external proc amp. Swapping these in and out of the chain will give a wider range of signal filtering effects than relying on any particular TBC/DNR vcr, with more flexibility for PC post-processing.

Personally, I'd prefer the flexibility. What set me onto the path of pass-thru and external tbc years ago was my first experience with copy-protected VHS. I was happy as hell to find my Panasonics and Toshibas used as pass-thru ignored most copy protection (but of course they wouldn't record those media internally). Some tapes, however, still required an external full-frame tbc. VHS copy protection comes in many flavors. That discovery was a fortuitous accident: I started capturing a copy protected tape with the Toshiba as pass-thru and noticed during capture that I had not re-connected my full-frame tbc .

The other nudge into using external components was when my tbc-equipped JVC/s refused to play old, damaged tapes, and ruined some others.

[zerowalker]

Well there must be atleast a standard VCR that is "normal" but can output in S-video atleast.
As TBC can always be solved later, and it varies from tape to tape, but it´s always a bit wavy though.

But i saw one , something NV H800 or something like that, though it was sold, can´t find it now;S

But will be back if i find it or similar, the important thing to begin with is, standard with S-video, no Blur smooth or anything, or Hyper Sharpen stuff.

PS: i got a SHARP vcr currently, and i use the Super P which makes the image a bit sharper (atleast it looks good?). Anyone know if it´s bad, as i has not done some deep test in comparison.

[sanlyn]

Well there must be atleast a standard VCR that is "normal" but can output in S-video atleast.
As TBC can always be solved later, and it varies from tape to tape, but it´s always a bit wavy though.

It's wavy because you're not using a line-level tbc. s-video alone won't solve that problem.

All of the captures and videos I referred to a couple of posts back used composite-output VCRs. I posted samples using both composite-only and composite/s-video combinations. The pass-thru's were Panasonic and Toshiba DVD recorders. The VCR was a Panasonic PV-4662 made in 1996. I bought it on eBay about 6 months ago for about $50 USD. That around the least you'd expect to pay most of the time for an old but competent VCR in decent shape. This one was pristine.

But i saw one , something NV H800 or something like that, though it was sold, can´t find it now;S

I believe orsetto has mentioned that one.

PS: i got a SHARP vcr currently, and i use the Super P which makes the image a bit sharper (atleast it looks good?). Anyone know if it´s bad, as i has not done some deep test in comparison.

You don't say which model Sharp you have. No matter. I'm not crazy about their output, but at least they'll track just about the most damaged tapes I've ever seen.

[sanlyn]

BTW, those samples were video samples were posted in response to your request:
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/331681-s-video-artifacts?p=2140657&viewfull=1#post2140657

[zerowalker]

What i meant was S-video alone will solve all my problems i got thanks to my capture card having a really poor Y/C filter.

What capture card do you use?
Does it fully support PAL?

Thanks

Well don´t know the model, will look up, but i don´t think it´s necessary if it isn´t known to break or make artifacts etc.

[sanlyn]

Well, no, s-video alone won't straighten lines, help prevent jitter, or repair tearing. I know that the Toshiba units had y/c comb filters, and I read here that the Panasonic has one as well. I think the Toshiba's y/c is more effective.

All captures were made in VirtualDub to huffyuv YUY2 AVI, using either an ATI All In Wonder 7500 Radeon 64MB or an ATI All In Wonder 9600XT 128MB. The ATI TV-Wonder cards from the same era give similar results. The later ATI X- series PICe cards followed them. ATI made PAL versions of most of their capture cards. The Toshiba DVD's were the R-DK2 and the RD-XS34.

The actual Sharp model isn't necessary, as they're pretty much alike and I used to have one. The earlier models from the late 1990's are regarded as the best.

[orsetto]

Well there must be at least a standard VCR that is "normal" but can output in S-video at least. As TBC can always be solved later, and it varies from tape to tape, but it´s always a bit wavy though.

That should be easy enough: just look for a non-"pro" (non-NV series) consumer Panasonic SVHS model. Plenty of SVHS models were sold without the TBC/DNR feature: aside from JVC inexplicably flogging it in 50% of their lineup some years (accounting for a plethora of suspect vcrs), Panasonic was the only other brand that bothered with it (and only in the top-line consumer and semi-pro units). The tricky thing about TBC/DNR is that the VCRs that have it do not function nearly as well with it turned off, compared to an ordinary SVHS with no TBC/DNR at all. Yet another reason most of us end up owning a half dozen VCRs to cope with a variety of tapes.

At this late date, you'll want to avoid most Sony and Mitsubishi SVHS, the final post-2001 Panasonic consumer SVHS, pretty much everything except mid-1990s Panasonics. The fine but cursed Sony SVHS line had one horrible engineering bug after another, repairs can be expensive or impossible. Most classic Mitsubishis have loading slots that crumble into dust unexpectedly (later models like the 748 made after 2000 are OK). Panasonic vcrs made after 2001 are very poorly made compared to earlier versions, especially the tiny "compact" silver-face SVHS. Sharp made a few nice SVHS but they aren't easy to find. Philips made a couple decent SVHS in the late 90s. Some of the "low-end" JVC SVHS models (without TBC/DNR) of the late 90s were OK if found in good condition, they tended to have better mechanical quality control than the very expensive top JVC models (although JVC in general doen't track well with tapes made on other VCRs).

[zerowalker]

Well in Europe S-video is nearly impossible to find on VCR, atleast the standard models;S
And what i mean with "lines" are the dot crawl i get, they are lines instead of dots, and it´s very apparent so i really need to fix that.

Hmm well will be glad if i find atleast one model with S-video, all i have found are the super pro models that all has more weaknesses than advantages.
But will ask about it here as there are probably made from an US model so there is probably known if there is problems with the unit.

[Mini-Me]

I posted sample caps and videos using pass-thru with the Panasonic ES20 and the Toshiba R-DK2 (or is it the "D-RK2"? I can never remember). They're posted here and here. But my log on the download site shows several people viewed all the Panny shots, but only 1 view of just one of the Toshiba shots. I notice this a lot in this forum: say JVC or Panasonic in any thread, and readers swoop onto it en masse. Say Toshiba or Pioneer, and the readership falls below ground level.

That's odd; when did you check your logs? I know I viewed all of the "sitting down at the dinner table" shots in full size and flipped between them about a week and a half ago or two weeks ago or so.

I agree with you though: To an extent, I can understand people's eyes glazing over when they read about brands and models they're unfamiliar with. I really don't know anything about Pioneer for instance, other than that they make unusually expensive TV's. Still, I noticed the prejudice that goes around regarding brands and product types the very first day I read the forum, and it's highly resilient and stubbornly persistent even in the face of evidence and logic to the contrary.

Anyway, the Panasonic sometimes seems to look "sharper" (but also a little grungy somehow) and the Toshiba shots look "cleaner". But I find that the results often depend on the tape and the player, so I can't say whether a Panny or Toshiba is "better" than the other in some respects.There are also two shots showing how tbc's handled frame tearing, and the Toshiba RD-RK2 and XS34 produced better work. Very few views of the tearing samples, and Panasonic won the name recognition contest, again. None of those repairs are perfect -- how would a relatively simple tbc chip in these consumer units with a consumer tape player possibly outshine a $5000 studio tbc and a pro-level deck?

Unfortunately the player I used for those tests didn't put out a lot of wiggly verticals. I wonder if that old Panasonic PV-4662 had a basic tbc in it? (Nothing in the menus or literature). It has the smoothest playback of my other VCR's, and didn't grunge up the images with artifacts the way my JVC's did. If it weren't for copy protection on some tapes, I wouldn't even need a tbc with that VCR to get a smooth image with little or no jitter or wiggles. It thankfully doesn't have the flagrant oversharpening or juiced-up contrast of later Panasonics.

I fail to understand why people poo-bah the use of tbc pass-thru's. I believe they expect the performance of a $5000 VCR or pro broadcast gear. There's no way you can get broadcast-level performance on a consumer budget. The alternative is to ruin your tapes with the typical JVC player, take your chances on half-dead AG-1980's on eBay (and those have their problems, even when they work), or just capture a tape with no tbc at all from the godawful DVD/VCR combos being sold today.

The $5000 broadcast TBC comparison is interesting to me, mainly because I've never seen anyone here advocate for them. They MIGHT be better for our purposes, but does ANYONE here actually own one to know that for sure? Maybe LordSmurf does, but even he doesn't advocate using them. I've gathered that their astronomical price comes from esoteric broadcast features like genlocking, multiple inputs and outputs, etc., but that units like the AVT-8710 and Datavideo TBC-1000 are supposed to be just as good for our purposes. They're held up as the gold standard of TBC performance on these forums, but in terms of actual time-base correction, they both leave me underwhelmed (I own one, and I've seen disappointing videos of the other).

What I find ironic is that despite being dedicated devices, the oft-recommended full-frame TBC's are actually lacking for the purpose of correcting actual time base errors, manifested as wavy lines and "tearing."* They make a modest effort, but some of the DVD recorders we're talking about are actually BETTER at the job of correcting actual time base errors.

For instance, my XS-34 is slightly better than my AVT-8710 at that job. I'm not especially impressed with it, but it does fix some of the errors and reduce the magnitude of the rest, and it does so without harming the picture (unlike full-frame TBC's). I haven't tested it enough to know how good of a job it does at frame syncing, though.

Meanwhile, my Philips DVDR3475 is virtually perfect at the time-base correction job. It's only "good" at frame syncing rather than 100% perfect, but if we're only competing on the basis of geometric corrections, I wouldn't hesitate to put it up against a $5000 unit, no joke. I've never, ever seen the slightest hint of a squiggly line get through, which is why I'm shouting its virtues from the rooftops. The AG1980 is known to have one of the strongest TBC's around (arguably better than the one in JVC's?), but even my AG1980 seems slightly less precise than the Philips (high-contrast edges show a hint of subpixel wavering with the Panasonic, but that's it). If you have a proc amp to correct its flickering problem and you want a totally rock solid line TBC, I'd definitely jump for the Philips.

I just received my proc amp today, by the way: It's a Studio 1 Productions dual proc amp, and I can confirm it completely corrects the flickering/levels issue with the DVDR3475. The proc amp isn't quite as transparent as I imagined it would be, and it adds a bit of grungy noise, but...totally worth it. Even the noise might be fixable...I suspect my proc amp might have a blown cap or two, because messing with the saturation can make it go haywire with flaming red mist. I can't complain though, because it does what I need, and I got it for a great price.

Anyway, only a full-frame unit is likely to defeat Macrovision in its many demonic forms, but the line TBC's built into certain VCR's and even some DVD recorders flat-out win at "time base correction," defined literally.

*I never liked the word "tearing" for describing the "hockey stick" effect at the top of the screen though. The reason is, my screwy AVT-8710 has an occasional artifact where it literally tears up the image into a couple pieces and renders them as different frames when it hits a really rough patch in the signal. My AG1980 does it too to a lesser extent: Sometimes the first 38-39 columns of a field will be torn from the rest of the image and made to display part of a different field. I even made a script once that selected the most consistent, less torn field from multiple captures (on a per-field basis), based on the edge-detection around the 38-39 column boundary.

As for the Panasonic ES10, -15 -20, I don't see any difference between them. I used all three. The ES10 died 4 months into its life cycle, the ES15 did about the same, and I went thru two ES20's one of which I still own, but seldom use because the Toshiba D-KR2 and RD-XS34's seem to give better results.

It's good to know you find the XS-34 gives better results than the ES-10/ES-15: You just helped eliminate any remaining temptation I had to blow more money and check out the performance of the Panasonics.

Is it common for these DVD recorders to die on passthrough though? That's a bit worrying, given they're relatively hard to come by.

[Mini-Me]

Well in Europe S-video is nearly impossible to find on VCR, atleast the standard models;S
And what i mean with "lines" are the dot crawl i get, they are lines instead of dots, and it´s very apparent so i really need to fix that.

Hmm well will be glad if i find atleast one model with S-video, all i have found are the super pro models that all has more weaknesses than advantages.
But will ask about it here as there are probably made from an US model so there is probably known if there is problems with the unit.

FYI, you might actually have more choices in Europe than we do in the US. I've read that Panasonic put out a bunch of subtly different prosumer PAL models. The NV-FS200 is the PAL version of the AG1980, and the NV-FS100 is supposed to be similar in some ways to the AG1970 (but as orsetto said, the resemblance is probably not 1:1), but there are a bunch of others in the NV-FS and NV-HS lines, many (or all?) of which will have S-Video output.

You seem pretty dedicated to finding a good VCR. If I were you, I'd read completely through the VCR buying guide from start to finish. The first post is very NTSC-oriented, but keep an eye out for posts further down about PAL models, and run a number of forum searches on each one that looks interesting. (If I lived in PAL country, I might be interested in something like the NV-HS1000, NV-HS960, NV-HS930, or NV-HS860...but I might be off base, too.) This thread came up in one of my searches too...not sure how useful it will be, but it's worth checking out. Actually, HERE is a great post on that range.

People familiar with PAL equipment seem to post a bit less than people familiar with NTSC gear, so you may not have much luck waiting for replies to your own posts...but if you use search liberally and scour the old threads on the forum, I think you're bound to find more recommendations and details regarding PAL models.

[sanlyn]

Is it common for these DVD recorders to die on passthrough though? That's a bit worrying, given they're relatively hard to come by.

The Panasonics didn't die on pass-thru. The ES10 dropped dead before I got to using anything as pass-thru's. The ES15 decided it didn't want to record any more, which caught me on a bad hair day and ended up in the recylce bin. The first ES20's optical drive wouldn't recognize any disc; I saved it for parts and bought a second one refurbed that still works.

Mm, no, I didn't say "no views" on those samples, I meant the Toshiba samples were mostly ignored while the masses mobbed the Panny posts wholesale. No big deal, though, who the hell wants to download all those 23-MB samples anyway. The points behind the demos were that pass-thru does work (within the limits you mention), some might work better than others, and composite-only and composite-in/svideo-out has advantages. And rather than just say "I like the Toshiba" more than another, I thought I'd post what I get using it with a cruddy old VHS tape that's about ready to turn into confetti. Anyone can come to their own conclusions.

Thanks to you, I'm spending too much time looking for that Pioneer .

[Mini-Me]

Is it common for these DVD recorders to die on passthrough though? That's a bit worrying, given they're relatively hard to come by.

The Panasonics didn't die on pass-thru. The ES10 dropped dead before I got to using anything as pass-thru's. The ES15 decided it didn't want to record any more, which caught me on a bad hair day and ended up in the recylce bin. The first ES20's optical drive wouldn't recognize any disc; I saved it for parts and bought a second one refurbed that still works.

That's good to know. The last thing I want to do is hunt down replacements for equipment I like, now that I finally have some good hardware!

Mm, no, I didn't say "no views" on those samples, I meant the Toshiba samples were mostly ignored while the masses mobbed the Panny posts wholesale. No big deal, though, who the hell wants to download all those 23-MB samples anyway. The points behind the demos were that pass-thru does work (within the limits you mention), some might work better than others, and composite-only and composite-in/svideo-out has advantages. And rather than just say "I like the Toshiba" more than another, I thought I'd post what I get using it with a cruddy old VHS tape that's about ready to turn into confetti. Anyone can come to their own conclusions.

AHH, I see what you mean. I really should have checked out the videos first, but I ended up just buying it so I could do a direct comparison with the rest of my stuff. I totally agree with putting up samples though. It's work, but it helps you substantiate your opinion and offer a reference point for what you mean by subjective assessments like, "It's pretty good."

Thanks to you, I'm spending too much time looking for that Pioneer .

It's actually a Philips...that might help you find it better. The DVDR3475 is the cheapest; I got mine for $51 shipped, which is a far cry from the $260.99 they're selling for from one of Amazon's sellers right now. When I bought mine a month ago or so, there was another one with a Buy It Now price of $80 or so and ridiculous shipping charges of $40. I'm not sure if it was eventually picked up or became unlisted, but just so you know, it was sitting up there unsold for days and days.

The DVDR3575 and DVDR3576 are more expensive, since they're more full-featured models with hard drives (like the Toshiba RD-XS series, I guess?), but I included those in my searches too. I think the ones with hard drive usually sell for around $170 to $230 on ebay, though IIRC I did see a highballer who paid something like $300.

You'll find one for a reasonable price (under $100) sooner or later...just make sure you have a proc amp too, or the AGC will drive you totally nuts!

[jagabo]

*I never liked the word "tearing" for describing the "hockey stick" effect at the top of the screen though. The reason is, my screwy AVT-8710 has an occasional artifact where it literally tears up the image into a couple pieces and renders them as different frames when it hits a really rough patch in the signal.

I prefer the term flagging. Tearing (parts of two different frames in one frame) also occurs in gaming or video playback where the frame buffer is switched while the graphics card is drawing the frame (rather than during vertical blanking). You end up seeing a "tear" where the top part of the frame is from one frame, the bottom from another.

[Mini-Me]

*I never liked the word "tearing" for describing the "hockey stick" effect at the top of the screen though. The reason is, my screwy AVT-8710 has an occasional artifact where it literally tears up the image into a couple pieces and renders them as different frames when it hits a really rough patch in the signal.

I prefer the term flagging. Tearing (parts of two different frames in one frame) also occurs in gaming or video playback where the frame buffer is switched while the graphics card is drawing the frame (rather than during vertical blanking). You end up seeing a "tear" where the top part of the frame is from one frame, the bottom from another.

Yup: That's precisely what I think of tearing as. The tearing is usually vertical rather than horizontal in the case of my AG1980 and AVT-8710, and the incorrect part of the frame or field is not always necessarily from the previous frame or field, but that's the same kind of visual defect I'm talking about.

Maybe I should start using the term flagging too for the "hockey sticks." Didn't LordSmurf coin that one? If so, good move, LS!

[sanlyn]

Thanks to you, I'm spending too much time looking for that Pioneer .

It's actually a Philips...that might help you find it better.

Oops. You're right. I have to have at least one typo per post, or I don't recognize my own work.

[Mini-Me]

Oops. You're right. I have to have at least one typo per post, or I don't recognize my own work.

Who would have thought though? Philips of all brands! I guess you never know what you're going to get.

[vhelp]

i could not locate the original tbc performance test pattern, so i rebuilt one from an original png i located on the web recently and cleaned it up some and re-created a new one for testing tbc performance.

from composite connector available on the vcr. i recorded to a high quality standard vhs tape, (polaroid pro 8hr ep) brand since this is equiv to the high quality fuji pro ep tapes i used in my jvc deck. these two brands performed the best results on my vcrs.

pass 1 .. png -> mpeg-2 -> dvd video disc -> toshiba dr-430[composite] -> sharp vc-h960 -> rec to vhs tape

pass 2 .. sharp vc-h960[composite] -> [composite]toshiba dr-430[s-video] -> ads instant videoxpress usb2 dev

[Brad]

Here's one to avoid like the plague: LG LGR435 DVD recorder. This model number is unique to Canada but I imagine it has a corresponding US number.

Screenshots and files are from DVD recordings, but the passthrough is no less messed up. I started off thinking it was decent...



... but it has crazy AGC inconsistencies. These two images were the same test pattern. It starts off too bright, and just goes up from there.




And then there's this insanity when I tried a different VCR:



It appears to feature non-defeatable DNR. Apart from that, stable input from a DVD player shows none of the issues that VHS input causes.

[ajk]

I thought I'd chime in with some results as well. I am in the process of transferring a bunch of Hi8 tapes, and one of them had a sequence of a motorboat ride. The camcorder didn't cope with the vibrations too well and the recording is very distorted.

However, when run through a Panasonic DMR-ES15, the image is remarkably stable. Whether one should call this functionality a TBC or not, it sure straightens out the signal well. I've attached a small side-by-side comparison clip.

[Brad]

Nice to see the PAL model performing well too.

I noticed it's not quite perfect; if you bob the video and watch frames 700-703 you will see that the motion jumps backwards briefly because it goes 700, 701, 702 [700dupe], 703 [701dupe]. It happens several times during that section. Ah well, it's much better than the input at least.