VideoHelp Forum

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker or buy a VSO converter software :)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 36
Thread
  1. Here is a video without TBC https://mega.nz/#!KgcAlBRA!0bggpoCkVbGDX05F1XY3dftAMeSXM398bh3inyO7BN0

    Here is a video with 1T-TBC-GL TBC https://mega.nz/#!K1Uh2QoY!JRL36ylPHmNeGbJ7K7ofxF2nNrfRF6v-7zkQJxjQJL4

    Is this a known problem or is my unit defective? Is the bug present in the AVT-8710 too since both are Cypress products?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    Turn down the black level ("BRT") and then the white level ("CONT") if necessary.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Doesn't work for me. Several different shades of whites have been mushed together, I can't separate them out by changing the brightness and contrast. Just another crappy Cypress product. No wonder the Datavideo TBC-1000 is $400 on ebay, it's probably the only good choice.
    Last edited by digicube; 17th Feb 2017 at 12:07.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    No wonder the Datavideo TBC-1000 is $400 on ebay, it's probably the only good choice.
    Don't bet on it.

    Like many an overhyped, discontinued product priced like gold on eBay, the DataVideo TBC-1000 ain't nearly as good as it was cracked up to be. I've owned three, bought several years apart, and all sucked big-time. The typical DataVideo signature is added noise overlaid by mushy softening: that is, if the garbage distribution amp doesn't cut out the signal altogether at random. When they operate reliably, the DataVideos ARE overall more effective than the Cypress junk: the catch is finding one that works reliably. $400?? You'd likely have better luck passing your video signal thru your credit card.

    Re your white-on-white problem: thats exactly the kind of tape that the otherwise-lame TBC built into the old Panasonic AG1970 SVHS VCR excels at handling. All over eBay for $60, but perhaps not worth chasing one down unless you have at least a dozen such tapes. Sample variation would apply, as with all this old gear.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    Okay, here is some reality from me.

    I paid $99 for a TBC-1000 and it works fine. The DA is a little low on the black level but nothing I can't fix with the proc amp on my A/D card. (In fact, it's fairly easy to bypass the DA card and tap the TBC output if you want.) On some really unstable sources, like a 1/2-inch EIAJ videotape, it outperforms both the Cypress box and the Panasonic DMR-ES15.

    I had an AVT-8710 for a while. With the exception of one bug, it did a good job as a frame sync and even provided some modest horizontal timebase correction. The bug, however, was fatal: when it lost sync on a field, it would hold it frozen while the other field remained in motion. The ghosting on bad patches of tape was unacceptable.

    Outboard solutions at the prosumer level are always going to have their quirks, particularly in AGC response. That's why I keep my analog proc amp handy — to address level problems before the signal hits any digital gear.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by JVRaines View Post
    I paid $99 for a TBC-1000 and it works fine.
    Sample variation. Sample variation. Sample variation.

    eBay lottery. eBay lottery. eBay lottery.

    Those are the over-riding considerations today. I'm very glad yours works well, as I'm glad for anyone who doesn't get burned by any of the hardware we discuss. But much of this gear we post about is discontinued and/or usually gets bought used. As far as TBCs specifically, both the DataVideo TBC-1000 and the Cypress group of AVT-8710 variants suffered from "niche product syndrome" even when brand new. Back in the stone age early-2000s, when first introduced and championed on these boards, both were excellent. The DataVideo always had a minor drawback with its flimsy built-in distribution amp (that nobody asked for and would have saved DataVideo many headaches not to include). The Cypress units always had an issue with overheating that could be worked around. Overall, they were both decent, and a lifesaver in the days when no video input board or dvd recorder could handle VHS without vomiting on it.

    By 2010, both experienced a notable uptick in mfrg defects when new. Sample variation exploded into a serious problem. People were returning/exchanging the AVT two or three times at superstores like B&H until they got a "good" one. The DataVideo design became increasingly power-sensitive and the internal connections to its DA outputs became increasingly shoddy. The result was a flood of bad units into the secondary eBay market, with no way to identify the earlier, more reliable versions from the recent junk. This led to many of us migrating to the dvd recorder pass-thru option, which is more dependable and transparent.

    DVD recorders eventually became better equipped to stabilize and condition VHS signals, enough that they could sub for a DataVideo or Cypress in pass-thru to a PC unless the tape had MacroVision contamination, or was such terrible quality it required a "real" TBC. MacroVision can be handled by dedicated filters (or better yet by just buying the damned dvd or blu-ray re-release instead of wasting time on pointless VHS transfers). Tapes that are so poor they require specialized equipment or jumping thru hoops, I no longer tolerate. Life is too short. I throw those against the wall until the shell shatters, and feel better. Unless you're hopelessly addicted to fourth-generation unobtanium anime, it isn't worth knocking your head into a wall trying and discarding multiple TBCs, encoders, and recorder pass-thrus, hoping to find the magic one that will fix your really dodgy tapes. Almost anything we think is vanishingly rare turns up somewhere on cult video sites or youTube: get it from there, and save weeks or months out of your life.

    That said, I certainly understand the plight of those who absolutely venerate their personal collection of tapes, and want to make the best transfers possible. After doing hundreds and hundreds, I've just grown weary of the tedium involved, especially the unpredictability of each tape's interaction with each vcr, each TBC, each encoder. Between the second-hand abused VCRs, flaky used TBCs, and mostly-junk new encoders, pure luck now dominates more than ever.

    If a "full" TBC seems absolutely required, choose a DataVideo TBC-1000 over the Cypress (AVT, CBT) models. All the DataVideos provide "true" TBC performance, while the Cypress units vary wildly from 90% TBC capability to utterly useless. The larger DataVideo is more easily disassembled and upgraded. As JV Raines noted, the problematic distribution amp can be bypassed by anyone with basic soldering skills: disconnecting it eliminates the source of most TBC-1000 issues. Its power sensitivity may be more difficult to address: the better DataVideos came with much more powerful and stable external transformer bricks (almost as big as the TBC itself). The better the power brick, the better the TBC-1000 video performance. Later DataVideos came with a puny, less stable power brick that causes problems. Europe and Asia mostly got the large power brick, North American DataVideos mostly got the medium-size or puny version. Its possible to dummy up a top-grade custom PSU for the DataVideo, but not a task for the unskilled DIY-er.

    eBay asking prices for used DataVideos are cyclical. If prices are hovering at or above $200 at the time you need one, consider lesser-known alternatives like the professional Hotronic AP41 or perhaps Key West VooDoo TBCs. These perform similarly to the DataVideo with VHS, but are more likely to be found in reliable condition in the $200-$300 price range. Gambling $99 on a used TBC-1000 is reasonable, gambling $400 is ill-advised.
    Quote Quote  
  7. TVone 1T-TBC-GL TBC sucks balls. It loses out to JVC's internal TBC. My rackmount IDEN IVT7 works pretty well which makes me want to get more of these rackmount TBCs for $50. Check out the comparisons.
    Image Attached Files
    Quote Quote  
  8. Just got a TBC-4000 from craigslist. I assume this is similar to TBC-3000 and TBC-1000. I can't believe how bad this product is. It's even worse than TVone 1T-TBC-GL. I can't tell the difference between the source image and TBC-4000 image. I'm also surprised by how good ADVC300 internal TBC is, despite people saying it's not a TBC. Looks like the only good TBC are JVC SVHS VCRs, ADVC300 and rackmounts TBC.

    Attached are the videos.
    Image Attached Files
    Last edited by digicube; 22nd Mar 2017 at 16:12.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Search PM
    I am so sick of the TBC posts it makes me wanna nuke this sub. I posted a quick comparison of caps a while back using the ADVC-300 vs the Io-Data GV-USB2 sans TBC only to get mocked for not having one even though the video was perfectly acceptable except to the elitists on this forum who have capped hundreds of tapes. My advice to these vidiots, find another hobby.
    Lossless Workflows, Chroma Subsampling I & II, HD->DVD, A Top Ten Thread
    "flames, because of folks like you"—striving to live up to the hype
    Quote Quote  
  10. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    I'm also surprised by how good ADVC300 internal TBC is, despite people saying it's not a TBC.
    I suppose it really depends on what your reference is, i.e. what you're using to decode the uncorrected video. Different devices have a wide variation even with unchallenging tapes:

    https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/376526-VHS-waviness-in-digital-conversion-comparison-screenshots

    Looks like the only good TBC are JVC SVHS VCRs, ADVC300 and rackmounts TBC.
    There's a reason people make the distinction between line TBC & frame TBC. The DataVideo & Cypress units barely do any horizontal correction, which seems to be the only deciding factor you're using.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by vaporeon800 View Post
    I suppose it really depends on what your reference is, i.e. what you're using to decode the uncorrected video. Different devices have a wide variation even with unchallenging tapes:
    Plain old VCR connected directly to ADVC300.

    Originally Posted by vaporeon800 View Post
    There's a reason people make the distinction between line TBC & frame TBC. The DataVideo & Cypress units barely do any horizontal correction, which seems to be the only deciding factor you're using.
    Aren't horizontal errors the majority of the errors hence most important. Can someone show me the difference between horizontal correction vs vertical correction? Maybe ADVC300 also has excellent vertical correction, I've never encountered a VHS tape that has vertical errors. If the picture is bouncy, I just activate the video stabilizer on my JVC SVHS VCR.

    If I was to spend $200 on a TBC, I would rather get a rackmount TBC over a consumer TBC.
    Last edited by digicube; 24th Mar 2017 at 14:27.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    Can someone show me the difference between horizontal correction vs vertical correction?
    Stop the VCR, turn it off, go to lunch. Did the signal coming out of the TBC have perfect timing through it all? That's a full frame TBC.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    Aren't horizontal errors the majority of the errors hence most important. Can someone show me the difference between horizontal correction vs vertical correction? Maybe ADVC300 also has excellent vertical correction, I've never encountered a VHS tape that has vertical errors. If the picture is bouncy, I just activate the video stabilizer on my JVC SVHS VCR.
    Its rather a gray area, with mfrs (and us) throwing around the word "TBC" as an umbrella term for all manner of video-correction circuits that don't meet the traditional, strict definition of standalone TBC functionality. VHS is a pain in the ass, barely-functional format to begin with: its so riddled with instability that half the time the "true" TBCs can't do jack with it. The built-in circuits of dvd recorders and the fancier old VCRs concentrate on the more lurid, visually obvious flaws (which is why they often seem more effective than a plain VCR + traditional TBC alone).

    There's plenty of technobabble floating around VH to explain all this nonsense, but in layman's shorthand: separate standalone TBCs generally fix the "vertical" garbage you can't easily see, but that drives PC encoders insane (vertical referring more to timing issues than visible jitter). The quasi-TBCs (line TBCs, frame syncs, whatever the hell they're called) built into high-end VCRs and dvd recorders are more focused on clearing up the more visible "horizontal" defects. There is some overlap, with many dvd recorders being able to cure frame sync issues and some independent TBCs able to repair some horizontal issues. Then of course you have some TBCs with built-in proc amp picture controls, which can muddy the discussion.

    The point being, VHS more often than not requires BOTH types of supplemental circuit to obtain a good transfer. The standalone TBC (or the one built into some capture cards) repairs the invisible errors (frame drops, audio sync), the quasi-TBC circuits built into some dvd recorders and VCRs clears up the visible, ugly stuff (distortion, noise, color bleeding).

    If I was to spend $200 on a TBC, I would rather get a rackmount TBC over a consumer TBC.
    Actually no, you probably wouldn't. Many of us here have experimented with multiple brands and models of pro rack-mount TBCs, and found them wanting. They weren't intended for use with VHS whatsoever, they were designed for the much more stable 3/4" and 1" formats. While they kinda/sorta work with VHS, they usually suck, not least because they're old and decayed inside. There's a reason eBay is flooded with them at $50 a pop: most are useless. Here and there you might stumble on one in pristine condition thats effective with VHS, but even then they'll have odd quirks like inability to completely repair Macrovision (for that, you're stuck with DataVideo or yet another dedicated MV filter box).

    Instead of an old rack mount TBC, use a pass-thru dvd recorder like Panasonic: this will fix most common errors. For MV tapes, pick up something like The Grex and only connect it when necessary. For color and luma noise smoothing, you can gamble with a JVC or Panasonic or Mitsubishi DVHS or SVHS, but these can be pricey and risky today unless you're skilled in evaluating them.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Judging by the performance of the ADVC300, I don't think I need TBCs anymore. I'm gonna get rid of them.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Something to consider before you go all-in on the ADVC300: it can't handle dropouts properly. And that thread is by someone who likes the device.


    Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    Originally Posted by vaporeon800 View Post
    I suppose it really depends on what your reference is, i.e. what you're using to decode the uncorrected video. Different devices have a wide variation even with unchallenging tapes:
    Plain old VCR connected directly to ADVC300.
    But you're considering that your "corrected" video. Your "uncorrected" reference for determining the effectiveness of the ADVC300 appears to be "Source-Advc110.mp4". If you used a different capture device as your reference, you may find that the ADVC300 is actually worse rather than better. That's my point. Your ADVC300 sample isn't even close to 100% horizontal correction.

    Using my thread as an example, if I only owned the TV Wonder Pro and compared it with the All-in-Wonder 9800, I might think, "wow, the 9800 is such an improvement!" Whereas if I happened to start with the ATI 750 first, I would have a negative impression of the 9800.

    Of the devices currently shown in that thread, only the DMR-ES25 does a full job with the example tape. But it needs a proc amp to avoid clipping overly bright parts of these camcorder tapes.

    I keep meaning to do a harder comparison of my many "TBC" devices, with a multi-gen recording like yours.
    Last edited by vaporeon800; 24th Mar 2017 at 18:56.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Considering the quality of the source, I don't even know if it's even possible to reach 100% horizontal correction.

    What's an example of a proc amp? I might consider getting a DMR-ES25. I read you can get one for cheap when the DVD drive isn't working. I have a feeling it will fair worse than ADVC300 since your source example isn't as bad as mine.
    Last edited by digicube; 24th Mar 2017 at 19:32.
    Quote Quote  
  17. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    What's an example of a proc amp?
    PA-100. Mine died on me.
    Quote Quote  
  18. @vaporeon800 Have you ever corrected a video as bad as mine? Did you achieve 100% correction?

    Do you think the Panasonic DMR-ES25 will perform better than the ADVC300?

    I should have done my research. Looks like someone had the same problem with TBC-1000. https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/195954-Problem-With-DataVideo-TBC-1000
    Last edited by digicube; 24th Mar 2017 at 22:09.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by vaporeon800 View Post
    Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    What's an example of a proc amp?
    PA-100. Mine died on me.
    That's a bummer. Mine is still going after 7 years, although the s-video jack is getting flaky and I should check the solder joints.

    My JVC HR-S9911U would have no problem straightening the OP video; it has worked for worse tapes.
    Quote Quote  
  20. I have a JVC HR-S7600U. Dare i say the internal TBC chip is as good as/identical to JVC HR-S9911U? I have a feeling JVC uses the same TBC chip across their line of VCRs.

    ADVC300's TBC still outperforms JVC HR-S7600U's TBC.
    Last edited by digicube; 25th Mar 2017 at 01:27.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    I have a JVC HR-S7600U. Dare i say the internal TBC chip is as good as/identical to JVC HR-S9911U? I have a feeling JVC uses the same TBC chip across their line of VCRs.
    They're close enough that most people would have a hard time telling them apart. The DigiPure difference between the various JVCs seems to be the memory capacity of the buffer. Supposedly the models with more memory perform better, but I've never noticed a dramatic difference over the years and models.

    Not sure how this played out with the 9911, which was the final SVHS with DigiPure TBC/DNR. It was noticeably cost-cut, so may or may not have had the most advanced version of DigiPure (I can't remember, but some old thread here on VH doubtless contains accurate comparison info). The base VCR was the same as their cheapened entry/mid level models that year: not among their best efforts. If it weren't for the DigiPure grafted on, the 9911 would be a run-of-the-mill plastic fantastic SVHS selling for $50 today. I've had two 9911s (one bought new and one used), when they work correctly they perform similar to the older JVCs I've owned (as well as the Mitsubishi 2000 DVHS).

    Your 7600 arguably has the more solid, better-built transport mechanism compared to the 9911. Some owners feel this is an important factor, but in my experience the older transport was less reliable. Used JVCs are just ridiculously variable VCR to VCR, overall condition these days is more important than minor spec differences.
    Last edited by orsetto; 25th Mar 2017 at 12:36.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, California
    Search PM
    It 9911 is a very light build, but I have never had a problem with the transport. Then again, I am the original owner, the unit has not seen a huge amount of use, and I have scrupulously maintained the innards.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    @vaporeon800 Have you ever corrected a video as bad as mine? Did you achieve 100% correction?
    I haven't found anything that corrects my "nth-gen" tape 100%.

    Do you think the Panasonic DMR-ES25 will perform better than the ADVC300?
    Yes, but it isn't the best, either.

    I've done a bunch of captures now, but cutting and posting them will take quite some time.
    Quote Quote  
  24. I assume any Panasonic DMR--ESXX will do including those with VHS players. Is a remote necessary to use it as a pass-through?
    Last edited by digicube; 27th Mar 2017 at 14:06.
    Quote Quote  
  25. Here's the thread: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/383020-In-depth-TBC-comparison-with-bad-VHS-%28video-samples%29

    Only 3 downloads. Maybe lossless samples are too big for people to bother.

    Originally Posted by digicube View Post
    I assume any Panasonic DMR--ESXX will do including those with VHS players.
    No! Later models are said to perform much weaker correction.

    Is a remote necessary to use it as a pass-through?
    With the ES15 & 25, the Channel Up/Down buttons on the front let you cycle down to the line inputs. But importantly, you still need a remote that can access both the Display menu (to disable bad Line-In NR) and Setup menu (to set the "Lighter/Darker" IRE levels).
    Quote Quote  
  26. Welp looks like it's true that ADVC300 has audio video sync issues. I tested several VHS tapes. This is fixed by using a full frame TBC but ADVC300's internal line TBC will not cleanup the image coming from the full frame TBC which makes the ADVC300 an inferior product compared to the ADVC110. No wonder the ADVC110 is worth a lot more on ebay.
    Last edited by digicube; 5th Apr 2017 at 04:54.
    Quote Quote  
  27. How about the Panasonic DMR-ES10 and DMR-ES20? Are they as good as DMR-ES15 and DMR-ES25?
    Quote Quote  
  28. Welp looks like the TBC-4000 I got from craigslist is defective. I can see noise moving up the screen. Could it be the generic ac adapter that's causing this noise?
    It's really a gamble when you buy TBC used. You won't know it's defective until you scrutinized it.
    Image Attached Files
    Last edited by digicube; 5th Apr 2017 at 03:59.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Well, they do look like hum bars so I guess it's some sort of power related issue.

    Did you end up trying your Digital8 cam as mentioned in the other thread?
    Quote Quote  
  30. I noticed capturing as Type 1 DV file solves the ADVC300 audio video sync issues but media players such as MPCHC will stall at the problem point and you have to fast forward past the problem point to continue playback. The audio video sync issue emerges when you do conversions such as to DVD though.

    Using VirtualDub to export the Type 1 DV files to Type 2 DV files seems to keep the audio and video in sync during conversions when used with AVISOURCE.
    Last edited by digicube; 12th Apr 2017 at 15:21.
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads