Emergent help neede with regard to Canopus purchase: Should I return it ?!?

[DaveP56]

Hi all -

Thanks in advance for responding!

I have a pressing problem. After wandering around the net I purchased a Canopus ADVC300 from B&H in order to facilitate the transfer of family vhs/Hi-8 tapes to my Mac Book Pro using iMovie HD software.

My problem is that I did some further poking and found threads here suggesting that there were better alternatives out there.
If that is the case I need to request a return authorization from B&H immediately or I am stuck with it!

The backdrop is that I am not a tech genius by any means. I will simultaneously have to learn how to use whatever equipment I buy and the iMovie software.

I only want to do this once and I want to do it well as there are irreplacable memories involved.

I have a very good (but certainly not unlimited) budget to do this. I don't mind spending a bit more if necessary because I am sure that when the project is done I can sell the equipment quite readily.

Currently I have three old VCRs lying around:
Sony SLV-695HF - 1996 or so. -lightly used
JVC HR-VP634U - also 1996 or so - lightly used
JVC HR-S5902U -2003 - never used

I also have plenty of hard drive space so I am OK there.

My biggest concern is not editing at this point. It is simply to get the vids off tape and onto a hard drive. I do not intend to burn them to dvd.

Should I return the Canapus or is it a good solution for someone who is not a guru? If you recommend a Canopus unit would you recc. the 300 or the 100?

Any comments on the VCRs appreciated but the biggest question for the moment is whether or not i should return the Canapus for something else.

Thank you all in advance for your guidence.

Dave

[edDV]

The Canopus ADVC-55, 110 or 300 will get the job done and are well suited to the Mac. They require a Firewire port on the Mac. The ADVC-300 adds a limited line TBC and levels controls. An external TBC or VCR with internal TBC would be a superior solution to the ADVC-300 TBC.

Next step up is an AJA Kona ($1295) capture card but that requires a Mac Pro Tower.

If you want to go to a Windows PC with appropriate capture card, you can capture to Huffyuv.


PS: If your Mac Book lacks a Firewire port, there is a new ADVC Mini product that connects USB2. I have no experience with that version so do your user review research before going that direction.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16815299023&nm_mc=OTC-Froogle&cm_m...ley-_-15299023

[DaveP56]

The Canopus ADVC-55, 110 or 300 will get the job done and are well suited to the Mac. They require a Firewire port on the Mac. The ADVC-300 adds a limited line TBC and levels controls. An external TBC or VCR with internal TBC would be a superior solution to the ADVC-300 TBC.

Next step up is an AJA Kona ($1295) capture card but that requires a Mac Pro Tower.

If you want to go to a Windows PC with appropriate capture card, you can capture to Huffyuv.

I have seen many references to the fact that an external TBC would do a better job. Is it a night/day difference to the 300?
If I return the 300 and get a 100 which TBC and/or VCR do you recommend?

I will buy another VCR if needed.

Thanks again!

[edDV]

There are many external TBCs. Probably the most popular at the low end is the Datavideo TBC-1000.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=185957&is=REG&A=details&Q=

Lordsmurf and others have done comparison reports on VCR/TBC combinations.

[danno78]

The actual timebase correction capability of the Canopus may exceed that of the DataVideo. And if the Canopus keeps audio and video in sync during capture, then it is also providing the same benefit as a frame synchronizer.

Canopus ADVC 50, 55, 100, 110 is driven by Philips SAA7111A. Canopus audio/video synch is a feature that belong to Philips ADC with audio ADC integrated. All Philips ADC with audio conversion have this feature to link and lock audio to video at frame or field level. This is not time base correction or frame synchronizer. All devices (external devices, tv tuners for PC, etc) built with Philips ADC that have also audio conversion have audio lock. A notable exception is the SAA7130 because has only video conversion.
So, Canopus ADVC 50, 55 100 and 110 have no time base correction or frame synchronizer.
Canopus ADVC300 has but, is not working as it should be, so in practice the TBC from ADVC300 is useless.

See the whole thread: NOTE: A Canopus DV box does not replace a TBC!
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/313473-NOTE-A-Canopus-DV-box-does-not-replace-a-TBC!
My advice is to return ADVC300 and get the cheapest ADVC from Canopus (or virtual any TV tuner except those based on BT8x8 chipset) and a S-VHS VCR with TBC (JVC with DigiPure/TBC or Panasonic with TBC). Will you get a better quality with the same or lower money.
Results with Canopus ADVC, regular VCR and JVC TOTL.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/198410-VHS-player-output-quality

[DaveP56]

When I bought the 300 the salesman told me that the big advantage was that the improvements were going to take place before the capture and that was better than trying to do it after with software.

Any truth to that?

Thanks to all for your replies above!

Dave

[edDV]

When I bought the 300 the salesman told me that the big advantage was that the improvements were going to take place before the capture and that was better than trying to do it after with software.

Any truth to that?

Thanks to all for your replies above!

Dave

Yes,

- Time Base Correction cannot be done after sampling to a fixed clock. No way to correct after capture.
- Levels are best corrected pre-capture. 8 bit video has only 220 levels black to white (16-235).
- Noise creates quantization error. Noise reduction is best done pre A/D

Unfortunately setting levels before capture requires an oscilloscope (waveform monitor), so most people do it after.

[DaveP56]

When I bought the 300 the salesman told me that the big advantage was that the improvements were going to take place before the capture and that was better than trying to do it after with software.

Any truth to that?

Thanks to all for your replies above!

Dave

Yes,

- Time Base Correction cannot be done after sampling to a fixed clock. No way to correct after capture.
- Levels are best corrected pre-capture. 8 bit video has only 220 levels black to white (16-235).

Unfortunately setting levels before capture requires an oscilloscope (waveform monitor), so most people do it after.

So am I better off with the 300 then????

It seems my choices are to return the 300 and buy a TBC and a 100 and forgo the pre-capture adjustments OR keep the 300 and live with whatever TBC in can provide.

Which is generally best? I would rather not own all three.

Or is it necessary to buy a proac; which I know nothing about.

PS - I am looking to capture home video. Much of it has never been played before.

Thanks!

[vhelp]

because not every piece of equipment is the same for each person, inquiring what would be best will not get you very far--we are not wizards.

another way of approaching this and obtaining better options or suggestions..

perform a few test captures with the hardward you have, and then post them (untouched avi's) up here* the avi is criticle to post because that will give us an accurate idea of what your current device(s) and equipment charactoristics and we may be able to tell if your a-to-b is better than your a-to-b-to-c and so on.

* this forum allows 30mb filesizes. rapidshare, imageshack and other such sites are too fustrating and malicious, so please try and stay away from them if possible.

some things to ponder.. one piece of equipment ie..

--tbc1000 will not fix every video. a wise craftman will have several brand/types of tbc's up their sleeve. that goes for any other equipment used to produce, correct or fix or wortk with something.

--vcrs, same goes for them, while one vcr will play a better picture in one video, another vcr may not. and not just vcr but that goes for the media condition as well, thus, media-to-vcr-to-equip to media-to-vcrA-vs-vcrB-to-equip, and so on and so forth.

--pep talk, yada yada.. it is easy to sell a product or suggest the best equipment through optimim sales pitch.. gossip talk.. bragging, and so on. then there are those who don't really know what they are saying (or seeing) but like to boast equipment because they are accustom to sharing the same boast, and so on.

so, the smartest thing you can do is just run some tests of your own, and then post them up here for review and advice and such. when posting clips post the actual source. ie--if you capture to dv avi, then post that. open it in virtualdub and snip out no more than 30mb size and post that. in fact, you can even compress *some* dv avi's even smaller using winRAR (and set to 'use multimedia compression') or, if you capture to huffy or lagarith codec, just snip as much as you can, and upload no more than 30mb size and post that. find the best scene that reveals as much that will address and answer your questions at the same time.

-vhelp 5473

[edDV]

When I bought the 300 the salesman told me that the big advantage was that the improvements were going to take place before the capture and that was better than trying to do it after with software.

Any truth to that?

Thanks to all for your replies above!

Dave

Yes,

- Time Base Correction cannot be done after sampling to a fixed clock. No way to correct after capture.
- Levels are best corrected pre-capture. 8 bit video has only 220 levels black to white (16-235).

Unfortunately setting levels before capture requires an oscilloscope (waveform monitor), so most people do it after.

So am I better off with the 300 then????

It seems my choices are to return the 300 and buy a TBC and a 100 and forgo the pre-capture adjustments OR keep the 300 and live with whatever TBC in can provide.

Which is generally best? I would rather not own all three.

Or is it necessary to buy a proac; which I know nothing about.

PS - I am looking to capture home video. Much of it has never been played before.

Thanks!

The 300 has a weak TBC for VHS.

Better is the Datavideo TBC-1000 plus ADVC 55 or 110. Then adjust levels in software.

Better than that is to do what the pros do and get a VCR with built in TBC with levels controls and an ADVC 55 or 110 for capture. You will also need a waveform monitor to set the levels.

Better than that is get a Mac Pro tower + AJA Kona (with built in TBC) but now you are talking big bucks.

[PuzZLeR]

When I bought the 300 the salesman told me that the big advantage was that the improvements were going to take place before the capture and that was better than trying to do it after with software.

Any truth to that?

Thanks to all for your replies above!

Dave

Yes,

- Time Base Correction cannot be done after sampling to a fixed clock. No way to correct after capture.
- Levels are best corrected pre-capture. 8 bit video has only 220 levels black to white (16-235).

Unfortunately setting levels before capture requires an oscilloscope (waveform monitor), so most people do it after.

So am I better off with the 300 then????

It seems my choices are to return the 300 and buy a TBC and a 100 and forgo the pre-capture adjustments OR keep the 300 and live with whatever TBC in can provide.

Which is generally best? I would rather not own all three.

Or is it necessary to buy a proac; which I know nothing about.

PS - I am looking to capture home video. Much of it has never been played before.

Thanks!

The 300 has a weak TBC for VHS.

Better is the Datavideo TBC-1000 plus ADVC 55 or 110. Then adjust levels in software.

Better than that is to do what the pros do and get a VCR with built in TBC with levels controls and an ADVC 55 or 110 for capture. You will also need a waveform monitor to set the levels.

Better than that is get a Mac Pro tower + AJA Kona (with built in TBC) but now you are talking big bucks.

Hi edDV, I agree that among his best choices is to ditch the 300, get a 110, or even a 55 now that you put it, and get a full frame TBC. And if he gets a VCR with DNR, he furthermore won't need the 300.

And I agree why you agree with the sales rep for the TBC part, since the feeble line-based TBC the 300 has is better than nothing, and no software post-solution can do as effective a task of any TBC.

But can I get you to explain why you agree with that salesman, particularly this line in the original quote that was somehow cut off from the original?

- Noise creates quantization error. Noise reduction is best done pre A/D

Isn't the processing on this feature guilty of killing detail in many cases? I would think some software post-solutions, such as particularly with AviSynth, can do a better job after capturing alot of detail first from the Source, then processing with a good filter instead afterwards. Then again, I would however think this is more subjective than fact either way.

And how would you compare the DNR on the 300 with one on a prosumer deck, such as units in the JVC 7XXX/9XXX series (and others)?

And while we're on this subject, I will warn, the DataVideo TBC is known to soften video too whereas the AV Tools 8710, also a full-frame TBC, and half the price, does not do this.

[PuzZLeR]

perform a few test captures with the hardward you have, and then post them (untouched avi's) up here* the avi is criticle to post because that will give us an accurate idea of what your current device(s) and equipment charactoristics and we may be able to tell if your a-to-b is better than your a-to-b-to-c and so on.

* this forum allows 30mb filesizes. rapidshare, imageshack and other such sites are too fustrating and malicious, so please try and stay away from them if possible.

...

so, the smartest thing you can do is just run some tests of your own, and then post them up here for review and advice and such. when posting clips post the actual source. ie--if you capture to dv avi, then post that. open it in virtualdub and snip out no more than 30mb size and post that. in fact, you can even compress *some* dv avi's even smaller using winRAR (and set to 'use multimedia compression') or, if you capture to huffy or lagarith codec, just snip as much as you can, and upload no more than 30mb size and post that. find the best scene that reveals as much that will address and answer your questions at the same time.

For multple VCRs there's better yet. I have a JVC SR-V101US and a Panasonic AG-1980P, capture the same tape with both units and pick the best one after comparison.

I do this by cutting a representative sample from each capture, with the exact frame count after the exact scene change, and compare them with AviSynth's Interleave() function, and choose the best one after a preview.

DaveP56, I know you don't have a PC for AviSynth, but since you are not interested in editing now, and have hard drive space, you can capture with several VCRs and do a comparison in the near future this way to decide which you'll keep if you're concerned about which VCR to use. Some VCRs will capture better than others for various tapes and posting a sample for each to the forum might prove rather difficult.

--tbc1000 will not fix every video. a wise craftman will have several brand/types of tbc's up their sleeve. that goes for any other equipment used to produce, correct or fix or wortk with something.

Furthermore, the TBC 1000 is overpriced IMO, and is soft-focused. I prefer the AV Tools AVT-8710 for every case I've dealt with.

--vcrs, same goes for them, while one vcr will play a better picture in one video, another vcr may not. and not just vcr but that goes for the media condition as well, thus, media-to-vcr-to-equip to media-to-vcrA-vs-vcrB-to-equip, and so on and so forth.

I sadly agree here. I even had a couple of cases where a Wal-Mart brand VCR played a tape comparably to a prosumer model. Seriously. Probably the cheaper deck had hardware that was more similar to the original recorder (long dead) the tape came from. I personally think there is no rhyme or reason to this - it's basically trial and error.

--pep talk, yada yada.. it is easy to sell a product or suggest the best equipment through optimim sales pitch.. gossip talk.. bragging, and so on. then there are those who don't really know what they are saying (or seeing) but like to boast equipment because they are accustom to sharing the same boast, and so on.

Many of these sales people work for their commission bonuses too. It influences their "recommendations".

[edDV]

...
But can I get you to explain why you agree with that salesman, particularly this line in the original quote that was somehow cut off from the original?

- Noise creates quantization error. Noise reduction is best done pre A/D

Isn't the processing on this feature guilty of killing detail in many cases? I would think some software post-solutions, such as particularly with AviSynth, can do a better job after capturing alot of detail first from the Source, then processing with a good filter instead afterwards. Then again, I would however think this is more subjective than fact either way.

And how would you compare the DNR on the 300 with one on a prosumer deck, such as units in the JVC 7XXX/9XXX series (and others)?

And while we're on this subject, I will warn, the DataVideo TBC is known to soften video too whereas the AV Tools 8710, also a full-frame TBC, and half the price, does not do this.

It was a general statement. VHS at best has -42 dB signal to noise and detail is limited to 3 MHz so some noise reduction before A/D can only help. I haven't compared VCR NR to the ADVC-300 nor have I compared low end TBCs. I hope others share their observations.

[lordsmurf]

Dump the 300, get the ADVC-55 if you require DV input.
The 300's filters butcher the image quality (overprocessing), and the "TBC" is worthless.

Then spend the difference on a good VCR and good external TBC.

The AVT-8710 is fine.
Read this: What is a TBC? Time Base Correction for Videotapes
And this: VCR Buying Guide (S-VHS, D-VHS, Professional) for capturing video

VCR matters most for image quality, TBC needed if non-visual part of signal is crap (most VHS is).

For Mac, I'd take an Elgato over a Canopus box.

Only clueless video newbies/novices, Canopus employees and salesmen suggest the ADVC 300.
For many reasons, it's a disappointment to buyers, and unfit for most video projects (high or low end).
I get better quality from a $25 no-name Aldi Tevion card.

The ADVC-300 represents the best of video technology ... as it existed in 1998.
(Yes, yes, I know these came out in 2002 or so .... but still, it's a bygone of the Pentium III generation.)

[PuzZLeR]

Unfortunately, Canopus products are overpriced IMO, have misleading marketing regarding supplementaries (TBC, DNR, etc) and only do DV and nothing else.

But I will say, if one has a few extra bucks, possesses the right equipment (VCR, TBC, etc) and is perfectly fine with DV then Canopus will indeed do the job quite well, even with a "lower end" model like the 55 or 110.

The "higher end" model, the 300, just doesn't make sense to me as a "professional" product. Professionals have good playback decks, have DNR (or similar), and a good TBC. If choosing Canopus, why would they even need a 300 when they would be smart enough to know a 55/110 would be sufficient for DV?

So it befuddles me why a 300 is marketed as a "professional" product when it's for quite the opposite crowd - newbies that want quick solutions and that think they have the right stuff. I totally agree with Smurfy's post (if I can call him that ).

The ADVC-300 represents the best of video technology ... as it existed in 1998.
(Yes, yes, I know these came out in 2002 or so .... but still, it's a bygone of the Pentium III generation.)

Interesting comment. I bought my first capture utility in the late 90s - a Dazzle doodle that attached to the parallel printer port (really!) that captured up to 240p in glorious MPEG-1 for "only" $400+.

That was one stinker product - even back then. I truly got nothing done with it worth keeping.

Yeah, no sarcasm, the Canopus ADVC 300 would look very, very good during that era and truly "professional".

[edDV]

I was attending every NAB back then. Canopus was making a big deal that their hardware DV codec was matched to the Sony VX1000 and DSRs. My experience with the ADVC-100 has been very satisfying.

That said I rarely capture from VHS, more from SVHS, Hi8 and live NTSC/PAL.

I've used the ADVC-300 but never saw the need to buy one.

[lordsmurf]

Canopus was making a big deal that their hardware DV codec was matched to the Sony VX1000 and DSRs.

I'm amused by this. They were happy in the early 2000s that their new product matched a Sony DV cam from 1995? Really? I find that to be rather sad, and most telling.

My experience with the ADVC-100 has been very satisfying.

Under certain conditions, I don't doubt it. But my question is this ... what's your workflow like? And what's the condition of your source? I'd bet it differs quite a bit from the person with a decades-old broken down consumer VHS VCR and a stack of random tapes. That person also believing the Canopus is a magic cure-all for flawless conversion work.

a Dazzle ........ That was one stinker product - even back then.

Now or then, Dazzle products are mostly crap. I'm not at all surprised by your experience.

[edDV]

Not just the VX-1000, the full DSR line

DSR VX-1000
DSR VX-2000
DSR PD150
DSR 250/350 etc.

They all used the same hardware DV codec.

The ADVC line doesn't "cure" anything. It is intended to capture analog as it is, at correct levels and with audio in sync.

IMO, the ADVC-300 should have been redesigned with a frame TBC long ago.

[lordsmurf]

The ADVC line doesn't "cure" anything.

Obviously you and I know that...

... but salesmen and Canopus marketing (some years ago, at least -- not now) would have you believe otherwise. For years and years, all the way into 2009, in fact, Canopus products were hand in hand with bullshit. And thus come the backlash from those of us in the video community.

[edDV]

The ADVC line doesn't "cure" anything.

Obviously you and I know that...

... but salesmen and Canopus marketing (some years ago, at least -- not now) would have you believe otherwise. For years and years, all the way into 2009, in fact, Canopus products were hand in hand with bullshit. And thus come the backlash from those of us in the video community.

I never saw it in Canopus marketing data. There was controversy about the TBC in the ADVC-300.

[PuzZLeR]

Now or then, Dazzle products are mostly crap. I'm not at all surprised by your experience ... salesmen and Canopus marketing (some years ago, at least -- not now) would have you believe otherwise. For years and years...

This façade was put on by both Canopus and Dazzle for years - the salepeople really took you to town. I even got burnt on another Dazzle in 2004. Again, yet another stinker product and nothing was done productively.

At least Canopus products do have functionality to a respectible level so they can fool you with their "advanced models". But Dazzle products are so bad that I believe you can use them in divorce court if you need some leverage.

[lordsmurf]

I never saw it in Canopus marketing data.

I wrote about this here: http://www.digitalFAQ.com/forum/showthread.php/hardware-re-considerations-2759.html?p=...4014#post14014
Things like "audio lock" and "no software required" are BS, found in all ADVC model ads.