Second opinion on digitising VHS home videos

[Kaos-Industries]

Any i3 CPU should handle Lagarith with ease. If your HDD can write sustained 8 MB/s, you shouldn't have to worry about performance. My positive experience with multitasking while capturing without frame drops on a system of approximately the same capability as yours is also based on Win7 and a PCIe capture card, though. Win10 & USB might be different.

That's good to know, thank you.

Originally I was going to capture to Lagarith too. I'd recommend checking into UtVideo.

I actually was looking into UtVideo a few hours ago, it does seem like it was designed to be the best of both HuffYUV and Lagarith, and it's useful that ffmpeg supports encoding to UtVideo when it only allows decoding of Lagarith.

How are you finding AmarecTV, and is there a reason you chose it over VirtualDub?

Also I'm curious, if you don't mind me asking, what are you charging your customers per tape to make back on the equipment? Or if not per tape, do you use a different pricing model?

[Tig_]

I used Virtualdub for my first couple hundred captures because it seemed to be "the" app to use. It had occasional audio sync issues and frame drops that only amounted to mild inconveniences but did lead me to try AmaRecTV — boom, no more issues. I'd be content with Virtualdub but this has just proved easier for the same result.

After doing my own personal tapes I posted on Facebook, being completely up-front about my lack of experience but explaining my research/gear/approach, and asking if anyone wanted some VHS transfers done for $15/tape. $15 is half the typical fee in my area and I had 200 tapes to capture in two weeks. Once people started getting their videos, they told friends. I list $40/tape as my "normal" fee but generally do each for $25; everyone likes getting a deal, and that's plenty for the time I spend on it, especially since I can get other work done at the same time.

People get their digital files (a lossless master plus a smaller AVC encode) on a USB drive provided at cost on top of the per-tape fee. Plus $2/DVD if they want those — which I discourage and most don't.

In all honesty this is a side gig, and I treat the content I'm capturing seriously but the business of it pretty informally. It funded the preservation of my own family's videos and the work matters to me (I'm a father and teared up multiple times capturing the videos of that little boy…) so if all my hardware breaks tomorrow and I just come out even, hey worth it.

[ItaloFan]

+1 for AmaRecTV being a good capture app to have in your arsenal. I agree it somehow has less audio sync trouble. Still, it's quirky. But so is Virtualdub!

[Tig_]

Italo, have you found Virtualdub to be better for any kind of tape in particular? I basically switched to AmaRecTV and never looked back — maybe I should be doing more testing with Vdub.

Totally random but now I'm capturing tapes of a local couple meeting their adopted children for the first time, in Peru. I really love this.

[ItaloFan]

No, I'm basically in the same boat as you, Tig_. I quickly realized everything "just works" in AmaRecTV, so that's what I've been using for most captures, for now.

Try out different things and see what works well and what features you like. Having more than one option, be it for software or hardware, gives you more flexibility. I like having choices in general, knobs to twiddle, options to tweak...but sometimes I surprise myself and go for the dumbed-down options because usability and simplicity is a factor for me, too.

[Kaos-Industries]

I used Virtualdub for my first couple hundred captures because it seemed to be "the" app to use. It had occasional audio sync issues and frame drops that only amounted to mild inconveniences but did lead me to try AmaRecTV — boom, no more issues. I'd be content with Virtualdub but this has just proved easier for the same result.

After doing my own personal tapes I posted on Facebook, being completely up-front about my lack of experience but explaining my research/gear/approach, and asking if anyone wanted some VHS transfers done for $15/tape. $15 is half the typical fee in my area and I had 200 tapes to capture in two weeks. Once people started getting their videos, they told friends. I list $40/tape as my "normal" fee but generally do each for $25; everyone likes getting a deal, and that's plenty for the time I spend on it, especially since I can get other work done at the same time.

People get their digital files (a lossless master plus a smaller AVC encode) on a USB drive provided at cost on top of the per-tape fee. Plus $2/DVD if they want those — which I discourage and most don't.

In all honesty this is a side gig, and I treat the content I'm capturing seriously but the business of it pretty informally. It funded the preservation of my own family's videos and the work matters to me (I'm a father and teared up multiple times capturing the videos of that little boy…) so if all my hardware breaks tomorrow and I just come out even, hey worth it.

Looks like AmaRecTV it is when I'm eventually ready to do this. And I really appreciate the insights about the business side of it, it's good to know that I might able to recoup my costs while making people smile. I've worked on a lot of different projects over the years but I don't think any of them will hold a candle to the potential sentimental value and appreciation (by both myself and others) that capturing VHS will, just because of how legacy it is. Legacy tech = legacy memories, I suppose.

[Tig_]

A ton of documentation, conversation, and filters have developed for Virtualdub over the years — I'm not qualified to steer anyone away from it. Despite using AmaRecTV for all of my captures now, if it ever fails I'll be glad to have spent time with Vdub and have it as an alternative.

I'm about ten minutes from the end of my last tape of that couple who adopted their kids from Peru — and Bolivia, as it turns out. Y'know that Jesus statue in Brazil? Fun fact, there's a bigger one, modeled after it, in Bolivia. Never knew that until now. I love this work. And I love that you're drawing from a variety of opinions and experience on your journey.

At this point I hope some more established users will chime in to rebut what I've said here. We all gain from vigorous discourse.

[orsetto]

Re the links back to vintage posts by PuzZLeR and myself: some clarification and updated context may be of help. Those posts were written circa 2014, which was probably the lowest point, worst-nightmare era for aficionados of the Panasonic AG1980. The intersection of AG1980 decay rates with attrition of techs willing or capable of working on them was about as bad as it got. Already, there were only two or three techs in all of North America known for their decent work on this infuriating VCR, and right around that time two of the three retired or bailed. This was disturbing, because the repairs were not cheap and almost always needed to be redone every few years: if all the specialist techs disappeared, the AG1980 might as well not exist. Hence, the couple years of Chicken Little posts.

Almost all of the advice on the topic of VHS transfer projects here and at DigitalFAQ is long since written in stone and has seldom changed over the past fifteen years. The trend of availability for various discontinued pieces of hardware in good condition generally gets poorer as each year passes, which stinks because many VHS PQ issues need to be fixed inside the VCR before the signal even exits to your capture chain. However, the AG1980 has had a couple of white knights ride in to its rescue the past couple years. Two repair specialists have expanded their interest in taking on service requests for the 1980, and have refined their repair techniques to make the restoration more durable than it was a few years back. The drawback, of course, is money: getting an AG1980 properly rebuilt was never inexpensive but today the rate is higher than its ever been. The good news, is that its at least once again possible (at a price) to lay hands on a fully functional AG1980. If you're in a hurry and can afford the ready-to-roll premium, TGrant photo usually has a pre-reconditioned AG1980 for sale in the $1500 range. If that is beyond your budget, buy a used 1980 from wherever for $300 then ship it out to TGrant or Deter for a $600 overhaul.

Whether the cost is worth it is subjective to the individual person and the emotional/monetary value they place on their own tapes. My personal experience since 2009 has been that the AG1980 lives up to its reputation: it really is unique and irreplaceable. During the period when repairs were unobtainable/unreliable, I managed with a single half-functional 1980 supplemented by a couple Mitsu 2000s I had bought new in the box back in 2006, plus a couple of JVC SVHS with DigiPure. Overall, from my collection of 3000 tapes spanning nearly 40 years, I'd say most play the best (to my eyes) in the 1980. The Mitsubishi DVHS periodically beats the AG1980 in some respects but not in others: many times it is splitting hairs to pick the winner.

The JVCs I tolerate but never truly like: they are beloved by gurus here, but to my eye they rob every scrap of realism from the image in favor of maxxed-out noise reduction. Depending on the tape or your personal visual taste, you might lean more toward the JVC or Panasonic AG1980 rendition, while IMO the Mitsu 2000 splits the difference (with a decided skew toward the JVC interpretation). Where the 1980 really aces the other options is tracking predictability and range: it excels with steadiness of HiFi audio lock and slow-speed EP/SLP tapes. The Mitsu 2000 units are fickle with HiFi lock and widely variable with SLP/EP (perversely, cheaper Mitsus like the HS-U748 lack TBC/DNR but are tracking stars comparable to the AG1980). The many JVC models vary noticeably in their tracking ability (broadly speaking, the older top-line JVCs have a nicer overall picture but more finicky tracking, later JVCs inch closer to the 1980 in tracking performance but their video presentation is a hair less impressive than older models).

Regarding your questions about dropped frames, the computer itself contributes less to this than the encoding device you attach to it. Some have a minimal tendency to drop frames, while others like badly-made EZcap clones or Black Magic HDTV-optimized units will drop frames like the Three Stooges on roller skates. At the very least, most capture devices will require a good dvd recorder used as a pass-thru frame synchronizer, but more often than not the depressing fact is you'll wind up needing a dedicated TBC to eradicate dropped frame issues. At this late stage, the only one you should even consider buying second hand for VHS work is the DataVideo TBC1000. These cost a minimum $600 in working condition, with the average closing price now approaching $1200. While sturdy and for the most part repairable, they had some build quality issues and some parts are no longer replaceable, so make sure you get an ironclad return/refund guarantee from the seller.

A few months ago I unexpectedly acquired a somewhat rare and extremely interesting broadcast-quality Sony SVP-5600 SVHS VCR (actually a player, since it has no record features, the recording version is SVO-5800). These were marketed between 1997-2003, among the very last of the "pro" SVHS iterations. Most "broadcast" VCRs are terrible choices for making digital transfers, due to minor spec incompatibilities with consumer tape playback, decaying electronics and lack of digital-compatible built-in TBC/DNR. But these Sony beasts are a rare exception, built with premium-grade ultra-durable electronic parts (vs competitors from JVC and Panasonic pro lineups, most of which are landfill fodder now). Their advantages are threefold: they track consumer tapes as reliably as the Panasonic AG1980, they track HiFi and minimize HiFi audio tracking noise comparable to the scarce, amazing JVC WVHS units, and include as standard a bespoke VHS-optimized integrated pro TBC that blows external TBCs like the DataVideo into the weeds (transparent, rock steady signal output even with MV-infested Hollywood tapes, no frame drops ever). Disadvantage is they're SP-speed only (no EP/SLP), they're impossible to find, and if the mechanicals break down they're door stops (since zero-nada-no VCR techs will touch broadcast models anymore).

[Tig_]

Every detail orsetto just shared about the Mitsubishi v AG-1980 v JVC meshes with my experiences. Including that even when Mit beats the 1980s, there's some splitting of hairs going on. Actually I think his post ties up a lot of loose ends here. Not sure if I've ever said it before: thanks orsetto for all your contributions here.

[orsetto]

Thanks for the feedback, Tig_!

Although now I'm even more embarrassed by my bad habit of not noticing where an OP lives before rushing to reply.

Apologies, Kaos-Industries, for not initially seeing you are located in UK. The models I was talking about are NTSC, and the repair options USA-based, which may not be of any relevance to you. In PAL countries like UK, availability in general and models in particular were different from North America (i.e., the AG1980 does not have an exact counterpart in Europe: the closest PAL version was NV-FS200). The NV-FS200 had roughly comparable performance to the AG1980, but used different mechanicals and (at least until recently) more-durable electronics. My understanding from friends in UK is that the NV-FS200 has now caught up with the unfortunate repair quagmire that plagues the AG1980. Unlike North America, which never got an update to the AG1980, EU received several evolutionary followup models, the most well-regarded (IIRC) being the NV-HS860.

Re the Mitsu 2000, AFAIK the DVHS format was not marketed extensively outside Japan (primarily) and North America, so the HS-HD2000U may not be an option available to you in UK. Fortunately, JVC did manage to keep most of its DigiPure SVHS models aligned from country to country, so most of the model-specific info you read about here and elsewhere concerning USA/Canada JVCs will apply to UK models (tho there might be slight changes to the model numbers). LordSmurf keeps an excellent, comprehensive, updated list of PAL models suitable for transfer work (and how they relate to better-known NTSC variants) in the VCR Guides at his DigitalFAQ website, check there for accurate EU model numbers.

The DataVideo TBC1000 remains the standalone TBC of choice in both PAL and NTSC markets. In UK you had/have a couple better-known alternative TBCs like CBT-100: these can be problematic, and again the DigitalFAQ guides document these issues.

My sidebar remarks about the Sony SVP-5600 and SVO-5800 are strangely more relevant in EU than North America: these models are rather scarce in USA but seem oddly available in EU (where the PAL model numbers are predictably the same but with a P at the end, i.e. SVP-5600P). Sources like eBay price these Sonys in the stratosphere, way way higher than reasonable, but you might get lucky and stumble across one for a couple hundred euro like I did. While not as desirable as a Panasonic AG1980 etc (no "broadcast" deck is, they all will unpredictably mess up with some home-recorded tapes), these Sony twins have a fantastic built-in full-range TBC that equals and often betters the external DataVideo (as it should, since these VCRs sold new for upwards of 4000 euro). If you can find one for a good low-ish price, one of these Sonys can be an ideal source player for certain classes of tape like commercial Hollywood movies (as the built-in TBC eliminates MV contamination and frame drops more cleanly than any external TBC).

[lordsmurf]

Interesting. Most of those come down to driver issues, although it's understandable where a manufacturer is dead or if Windows 10 actually gets rid of card drivers.

No. Newer OS sometimes change, even fundamentally change, or remove, aspects upon which the card was built. For example, ATI AIW connects to DirectX9 and DirectShow. That's OS, not card drivers. Media Foundation isn't 100% compatible. Other cards are affected as well.

and it's basically become a hobby to make people aware of the dangers of network-connected EOL OSes.

Video capture systems should be offline systems. Connecting to the interwebs will causes dropped frames more often than not, due to excess I/O or CPU activity. (Yes, excessive CPU, even now, because per-core speeds are still slow, and capture is a single-core task. Other software messes with the core being used for capture.)

or if this could all be done via virtualisation,

Video capture does not work in VMs.

but I find it annoying that thanks to the card manufacturers the only way to do this is by exposing yourself to vulnerable systems,

You're offline. No risk, unless connected HDDs have malware.

[lordsmurf]

2. TBCs

Philips DVDR3576H > Panasonic DMR-ES10 and ES15, DataVideo TBC-3000, and AVT-8710

(Notes: 1. I'll use "~TBC" to refer to true external full-frame TBCs and related passthrough devices etc. 2. I didn't test ~TBCs with the consumer-level decks. 3. I didn't try this, but maybe the Magewells could run on a PCIe XP rig with Win7 drivers. No idea but will test if there's interest — might open doors for some folks. 4. Some ~TBCs can "clean up" or "enhance" the image, but I don't use them for that because extra devices — especially ES10 — in the signal chain can cause data loss and artifacts. I only use ~TBCs to solve specific problems.)

On Windows 10, the Magewells usually need no help; 7/~1100 tapes have warranted a ~TBC. My Philips 3576 was most transparent while addressing the problem on all. It even cleaned up some artifacts introduced by other ~TBCs (e.g. dot crawl from my green 8710).

On XP, I only tested ~75 tapes. Over half required ~TBC; apparently the Magewells replace a lot of this functionality. The best ~TBC varied tape to tape — so on XP you probably want a variety on hand — exactly as is widely recommended here. I can at least say that the TBC-3000 never bested the 3576, and that I'd only use the ES10 where absolutely necessary as over-processing made captures look like Walmart jobs.

MY PERSONAL CONCLUSION

Yes you can get best-possible capture in Windows 10, though maybe it's not for the everyman. Yes a good VCR and ~TBC are warranted. I'd recommend saving up for AG-1980, 3575/equivalent, and Magewell (but it doesn't hurt to at least try the capture device you have first.)

Regarding other ~TBCs, at the end of the day I sold my TBC-3000 and AVT-8710 for a fraction what I paid. I'd probably keep the 8710 if I were doing XP captures.

Some here will vehemently disagree with what I've said (especially about Win10 and ~TBCs), and they have many years of experience and who knows how many thousands of captures on me. Hear them out. I'm not here to debate or convince anyone of anything, no dogs in this fight and nothing to sell.

TBCs have nothing to do with OS.

Magewell (and other HD cards, like Blackmagic) actually need TBC more than ever. The big problem with these HD cards is that frames are dropped, and not reported as dropped. So if you have "no problems", odds are that you have problems that you've not yet noticed. You won't see this until actually watching all of the capture footage. Of course, by then, it's too late. And you'll be far too disgusted to re-capture a mountain of tapes.

[Kaos-Industries]

Thanks for the feedback, Tig_!

Although now I'm even more embarrassed by my bad habit of not noticing where an OP lives before rushing to reply.

Apologies, Kaos-Industries, for not initially seeing you are located in UK. The models I was talking about are NTSC, and the repair options USA-based, which may not be of any relevance to you. In PAL countries like UK, availability in general and models in particular were different from North America (i.e., the AG1980 does not have an exact counterpart in Europe: the closest PAL version was NV-FS200). The NV-FS200 had roughly comparable performance to the AG1980, but used different mechanicals and (at least until recently) more-durable electronics. My understanding from friends in UK is that the NV-FS200 has now caught up with the unfortunate repair quagmire that plagues the AG1980. Unlike North America, which never got an update to the AG1980, EU received several evolutionary followup models, the most well-regarded (IIRC) being the NV-HS860.

Re the Mitsu 2000, AFAIK the DVHS format was not marketed extensively outside Japan (primarily) and North America, so the HS-HD2000U may not be an option available to you in UK. Fortunately, JVC did manage to keep most of its DigiPure SVHS models aligned from country to country, so most of the model-specific info you read about here and elsewhere concerning USA/Canada JVCs will apply to UK models (tho there might be slight changes to the model numbers). LordSmurf keeps an excellent, comprehensive, updated list of PAL models suitable for transfer work (and how they relate to better-known NTSC variants) in the VCR Guides at his DigitalFAQ website, check there for accurate EU model numbers.

The DataVideo TBC1000 remains the standalone TBC of choice in both PAL and NTSC markets. In UK you had/have a couple better-known alternative TBCs like CBT-100: these can be problematic, and again the DigitalFAQ guides document these issues.

My sidebar remarks about the Sony SVP-5600 and SVO-5800 are strangely more relevant in EU than North America: these models are rather scarce in USA but seem oddly available in EU (where the PAL model numbers are predictably the same but with a P at the end, i.e. SVP-5600P). Sources like eBay price these Sonys in the stratosphere, way way higher than reasonable, but you might get lucky and stumble across one for a couple hundred euro like I did. While not as desirable as a Panasonic AG1980 etc (no "broadcast" deck is, they all will unpredictably mess up with some home-recorded tapes), these Sony twins have a fantastic built-in full-range TBC that equals and often betters the external DataVideo (as it should, since these VCRs sold new for upwards of 4000 euro). If you can find one for a good low-ish price, one of these Sonys can be an ideal source player for certain classes of tape like commercial Hollywood movies (as the built-in TBC eliminates MV contamination and frame drops more cleanly than any external TBC).

Thanks for the input, I do appreciate it, I suppose I have some thinking to do. Regarding the NV-HS860, is it really comparable to the AG-1980? It seems to be going for quite a bit cheaper than the 1980 so I'm slightly skeptical about how good it is.

[lordsmurf]

AG-1980 NTSC = NV-FS200 PAL

Pricing is different largely due to caps.

[Kaos-Industries]

AG-1980 NTSC = NV-FS200 PAL

Pricing is different largely due to caps.

orsetto seems to suggest that NV-HS860 and others in that range like the HS-960 and HS1000 are successors to the NV-FS2000 - so does this mean they're better than the AG-1980?

[lordsmurf]

AG-1980 NTSC = NV-FS200 PAL

Pricing is different largely due to caps.

orsetto seems to suggest that NV-HS860 and others in that range like the HS-960 and HS1000 are successors to the NV-FS2000 - so does this mean they're better than the AG-1980?

Not better, just different.

[orsetto]

orsetto seems to suggest that NV-HS860 and others in that range like the HS-960 and HS1000 are successors to the NV-FS200 - so does this mean they're better than the AG-1980?

Regarding the NV-HS860, is it really comparable to the AG-1980? It seems to be going for quite a bit cheaper than the 1980 so I'm slightly skeptical about how good it is.

Price is often but not always commensurate with the performance of a VCR model. Panasonic PAL models do not have a pricing structure as consistent as second hand JVCs, mostly because Panasonic re-invented the wheel every year while JVC largely made the same VCR over and over again. JVCs are a known quantity: with trifling exceptions, the PAL DigiPure models all contain much the same TBC/DNR circuit. There isn't really much performance difference between models, they all deliver on the legend, and none have the suicidal caps issue. With Panasonic, you almost need a Magic 8 Ball to figure out the PAL model variations and decide which version will best suit you. So those less versed in the minutiae tend to flock toward the one best-known model, the one that looks most like the endlessly discussed American 1980: the NV-SF200. Later models like 860 that perform as well, but look chintzy and have no forum buzz, can fly under the radar and sell for less. Plus of course, you have to factor condition vs asking price.

As LordSmurf and I noted, the closest PAL equivalent to the AG1980 was the NV-SF200. From that basic fact, things proceed to get a bit more complicated and shaded in UK vs USA.

The NV-SF200 was styled to look very much like the 1980, and engineered with similar TBC/DNR improvements, but because analog PAL is distinctly different from analog NTSC, Panasonic could not simply clone the AG1980 one hundred percent. So the NV-SF200 employs different mechanicals, reputedly offering comparable tracking performance to the 1980 but slightly less reliability in the loader (statistically insignificant: there are plenty of AG1980s with dead loaders as well). In terms of video rendition, the 200 is considered comparable to the 1980 but in some ways slightly better, arguably due to PAL format having some inherent advantages over NTSC to begin with. A handy advantage of the 200 is ability to individually switch the TBC and DNR features in or out of the video path as might be needed with some tapes (the 1980 allows the TBC to be disabled but the DNR is always active). Electronic build quality of the two units is similar, although their reliability profiles diverged in early years before catching up over the past decade. The 1980 had a much higher initial decay rate in its many caps, but eventually the 200s began having similar failures at a rapidly increasing pace, to where they are now both a huge expensive pain to repair.

Panasonic evidently considered the 1980 utterly perfect for the North American market, so never bothered to update it with followup models. It remained their one and only SVHS with TBC/DNR from the day it was introduced until Panasonic exited that business. The situation in Japan and EU was quite different: for whatever reason, Panasonic felt far more compelled to keep iterating new and improved versions, with varying results. On one hand, they very quickly corrected the "vulnerable surface mount caps and transistors prone to failure" design: followups to the NV-FS200 have fewer discrete parts. Usually this is a good thing, but some have argued that despite its failings the NV-FS200 can at least be rebuilt if necessary, while if the more integrated electronics in the later models do blow up they cannot be repaired.

OTOH, these followup models have more controversial video performance. If functioning properly, the 200 is considered fairly well-rounded with few glaring PQ issues. Later versions are more variable, even within the same model year (i.e., the 860 is thought by some to be the pick of sequels to the 200, with the more premium 960 not quite matching it). The 1000 (aka 4700) is a frustratingly "improved" 200: PQ, TBC and tracking are slightly better, but it omits the DNR of the 200, electronics a bit more reliable, but if a power surge fries it no repairs are possible. And so on, thru several more Panasonic offshoots.

One VH member's overview of the x60 series can be found here: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/327630-Panasonic-NV-HS860-and-others-in-that-range Recently, I've begun to suspect x50 and x60 series might be infused with JVC DNA, quite possibly switching from the Panasonic-exclusive TBC/DNR of the 1980/200/1000 to the JVC Digipure circuit (or copycat variant as used in the Mitsu 2000). The giveaway is the promotion of "3D" noise reduction and some subtle design cues of the casing and faceplate. In North America, Panasonic did sell a few re-branded or slightly modified JVC SR SVHS models toward the end of the AG series, which would have been contemporary to the 860.

Every so often, I run across the Japanese-market NTSC version of the PAL 860 and consider buying it just to verify the type of TBC/DNR it employs, but get spooked by the need for a voltage step-down transformer and kanji-only menus/displays. It would be interesting to know if the 860 (and its Japanese NTSC variant) combines the Panasonic Type Z transport with JVC DigiPure TBC/DNR, or retains an evolution of Panasonic's own 1980/200 TBC/DNR circuit. Either possibility would offer a distinct "third path" alternative to the duopoly of JVC + Panasonic traditional models.

[lordsmurf]

You made a typo.
NV-FS200 -- not SF200.

Trivia: Did you know the NV-FS200NX is an NTSC unit, identical to AG-1980P? I've only ever seen one to date.
Not even TGrant had heard of these before.

I hate the AG-1980 decks. I now have 4 units with bad caps that need repair. All had been repaired in the past decade, some as recently as 2018. It's caused repairs to require more in-depth repairs, with 100% of all caps needing swaps (not just bad caps). The "good" caps will go bad eventually, make no mistake. Those 1980 repairs costs as much as a "new" (new to me) JVC deck.

Panasonics are a necessary evil when you do what I do. For casual users, it's honestly just sadism.

[Truthler]

I have the responsibility of digitising some (regular) VHS home videos my dad filmed in the late 90s, and need to purchase a VCR to do so (I've decided on a ~£20 USB capture card from Amazon, which is already expensive enough for me but the cheapest one with decent reviews: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Capture-Converter-Recorder-Transfer-Camcorder/dp/B08F4FFB8G/r...r_1_4?dchild=1). I'm an out-of-work web dev and know my way around the command line, so am fairly technically adept, but being born in the late 90s, I don't know a massive amount about VHS and VCRs.

I'm also broke af, so cost is a significant issue for me.

I'm here asking for a second opinion, as I previously posted over on the digitalFAQ forum, where it seems there are a lot of knowledgeable people about this stuff. This is the summary of how the thread went:

£30 is insanely cheap. Quality capture cards were routinely in the $300+ range in the 2000s, and fell into the $100-150 range in more recent years. Those sub-$50 cards are almost always Chinese junk cards with all sorts of issues, ranging from exposure to AGC on quality, and often with driver issues and poor quality software (use VirtualDub, not whatever junk it came with).

If you want any sort of quality from your conversions, without issues, then yes, you want a S-VHS deck with line TBC. A beater deck is in the under-$200 range, while better maintained decks are often in the $300-400 range, while refurb'd-like-new decks are in the $500+ range. In UK, decks are wee bit less costly, but not by much. Beaters are still under £150-200, while a quality deck imported is about 400€ after VAT (VCRshop.nl, but he does also sell some models on eBay sometimes).

But again ... buy it, use it, resell it. This gear holds value.

A workflow is VCR > TBC > capture card
You must have some form of TBC, it's not optional. You can try to scrimp by with an ES10/15 unit, for under £100. It's minimalist, and not actually a TBC. But if funds matter more than quality, it's probably the only avenue if really pinching pennies.

Remember this forum has a marketplace. Sometimes members have PAL gear in there. Sometimes I have both NTSC and PAL, though I rarely have PAL decks available. You're not limited to eBay, which has become a video dumping ground more than not (but UK is a wee bit better here, not as many scummy sellers).

Thanks to all for the input, I'm inclined to agree with those who say it's about priorities and pragmatism. From my own experience and experience of dabbling in many different fields, when it comes to certain topics that we're experts on, our threshold for quality tends to be a lot higher than the average consumer in that field. A regular consumer using regular hardware to listen to their music doesn't pick up on 10% of the things that an audiophile does, for example. I know for a fact that my mum would prefer being able to watch her wedding video, videos of us as kids, etc. over nothing at all, and I also think it's likely that she - and maybe not even I - would notice half the problems that the experts on this forum would, having never been exposed to that quality of VHS captures. You-don't-miss-what-you've-never-known sort of thing.

- You'll notice wiggle. The picture looks "alive" from movements where movements should not exist. Non-video people easily notice this defect. This is what a line TBC corrects.
- You'll notice a loss of audio sync, as caused by dropped frames.
- You'll notice color bleeding, color smearing.
- You'll probably notice chroma noise, aka the red/blue amoeba dancing all over the picture.

This is what I refer to. You don't need to be a "videophile" to see these obvious issues.

BTW, I think "audiophiles" and "videophiles" are mostly nuts, either making a big deal about a minor issue, or outright imagining problems that don't exist (ie, CD vs. vinyl).

So is this true? Will I really need to shell out for the more expensive hardware if I want to avoid severe issues like wiggle, audio syncing, bleed, smear and the like? It's not that I don't trust the user in question, but that forum seems to mostly be funded by its own marketplace where such specialist hardware is sold, so there's a natural bias against places like eBay and cheaper products, and I'm after additional expert opinions on these claims so as to make sure I'm not unnecessarily saving up a lot of money just for capturing VHS.

Please, never use VD2 for capture! Use OBS!

[orsetto]

You made a typo.
NV-FS200 -- not SF200.

Oof. I try so hard to remember its "FS" but my brain wiring seems to think "SF" is correct. Then they switched to "HS" in later models and threw me completely off! Still, I guess easier to keep track of than the JVC PAL model numbers.

Trivia: Did you know the NV-FS200NX is an NTSC unit, identical to AG-1980P? I've only ever seen one to date.
Not even TGrant had heard of these before.

Wow! No, never heard of an NTSC 200- cool find! Wonder why it never popped up in Panasonic literature anywhere? Unless it was a bespoke model for some influential client, or brief marketing experiment. The whole "NV" vs "AG" thing always throws me a little: I'm old enough to have played with one of the reel-to-reel half-inch Panasonic PortaPaks back in the early '70s when I was a teenager (15 lb "portable" VTR, big heavy BW camera, 32 mins per tape). Back then, it was a simple worldwide naming convention: "NV" meant "pro" or "industrial" gear (actually anything video related), a few years later when consumer VHS came along "PV" meant "consumer" video gear. Somewhere in the '80s they added the "AG" moniker, initially to kick off their prosumer VHS lineup beginning with AG-1950, but "NV" was still used for broadcast/studio. Then suddenly "AG" applied to all non-consumer North American models (both broadcast and prosumer) and in Europe "NV" got slapped on nearly everything. A few years later, whatever naming convention remained got upended when they randomly began using "AG" for some EU semi-pro models. Most notorious example being the NV-HS1000 / AG-4700 scam: essentially identical PAL prosumer VCRs, but the AG had a beige cabinet and 50% higher picetag. Perhaps prompted by Mitsubishi's HS-U80 / BV-1000 gambit.

JVC was an oasis of clarity by comparison, always neatly laid out in three model naming categories: "HR" for consumer, "SR" for prosumer, and "BR" for broadcast/post-production.

I hate the AG-1980 decks. I now have 4 units with bad caps that need repair. All had been repaired in the past decade, some as recently as 2018. It's caused repairs to require more in-depth repairs, with 100% of all caps needing swaps (not just bad caps). The "good" caps will go bad eventually, make no mistake. Those 1980 repairs costs as much as a "new" (new to me) JVC deck.

Panasonics are a necessary evil when you do what I do. For casual users, it's honestly just sadism.

Yep :the 1980 (and PAL 200) are definitely not for the squeamish of personality or light of wallet. But for some of us, it is indeed a necessary evil. After sitting on a pile of derelict AG1980s for years and years, the pandemic finally motivated me to take the plunge into learning how to tear them apart. A horrific undertaking: once you do it, you totally understand the staggering service fees professional techs need to charge. Since I had so many of these broken units sitting around (bought way back in 2009 when half-dead 1980s sold for $50), I lucked into having enough "good" parts on hand to Frankenstein three fully operational VCRs from the pile of nine derelicts. This has given new life to my endless transfer project, as many tapes were on hold waiting for a properly-functioning 1980 (and I haven't had the funds required for pro service). Hopefully my hacking will hold up for at least a few months.

[lordsmurf]

Please, never use VD2 for capture! Use OBS!

PSA for readers: Truthler is a 2020 VH troll shilling for OBS in multiple threads. Ignore.
Continue using VirtualDub for quality VHS transfer.

once you do it, you totally understand the staggering service fees professional techs need to charge.

Just by removing the lid to an AG-1980, I can already see the overcomplicated nature of the machines.

[dellsam34]

He is crapping all over the place, He deserves the nickname Truthless.

[orsetto]

Just by removing the lid to an AG-1980, I can already see the overcomplicated nature of the machines.

And it isn't only the infamous surface-mount caps that are difficult (I make no attempt to deal with those, my crude soldering skills extend no further than replacing the AC cord in a table lamp). Before you can even get to the stupid caps, or access any of the transport areas that typically fail, you need to conquer over a dozen hell-spawned connector clips Panasonic uses to wire the boards to the transport and the daughtercards to the main board. This alone nearly defeated me: I had my first 1980 half apart when my fingernails were so scraped and bloody I had to set the damn thing aside for a couple days (or I would have taken a jackhammer to it and flushed the carcass down the toilet).

Bad enough these flimsy plastic connectors come in three sizes (small, smaller, microscopic), and are fused together tighter than a spot weld: they operate in such a manner that the only practical way to unclasp them is if you have unimpeded access from above to fiddle with them. But what did Panasonic in its infinite sadism do? They designed the 1980 with the main board upside down, so that most of these connectors become an utter paradox: they can't be undone unless you can reach them, but you can't reach most of them because the damned board is mounted upside down. You can't cheat by getting at them from the bottom panel, either, because Panasonic thoughtfully impedes access to all but the last-to-go connector and one drive belt with the bottom cover off: this you discover upon removing 19 screws and cutting your hand on the sharp pot metal bottom cover. Why the thing even has a removable bottom cover is a mystery: there's almost nothing accessible with it off. About all you can do is use your fingers to manually spin the loader drive shaft to (tediously) force a tape out if the loader mechanism fails.

After a great deal of trial and error, while referring to the remarkably unhelpful dual service manuals (main chassis + transport) that fail to mention a couple absolutely necessary steps required to even begin disassembly , you eventually realize all four sub assemblies (power supply, transport, front display and motherboard) to some degree need to be eased out or disconnected simultaneously before you can access the majority of areas that need service or replacement. Only two parts can be popped right out independently with no need to tear apart the entire deck first: the power supply and the video head preamp module. Everything else is gonna be a real bumpy ride (I still haven't figured out how to release the fussy connector clips fastening the TBC and audio cards to the motherboard).

The most infuriating and frustrating aspect is the AG1980 / NV-FS200 / NV-HS1000 internal design makes no sense whatsoever from a mfr standpoint: its unnecessarily complex to mfr, and would have been a huge time sink for warranty repairs. One simple change would make it 10x easier to service: mounting the motherboard on the bottom facing upwards, as in every other consumer and prosumer VCR Panasonic ever sold. Or if they just had to mount it upside down for some inexplicable reason, at least don't size the board so that it overhangs the damned transport mechanism , forcing you disconnect and partially remove it before you can take out the transport (which itself should be more accessible from the bottom cover, without needing to yank the entire assembly out for minor fixes).

Oh, and as a final middle finger to the intrepid service person: of the nine or so cables connecting transport to mother board, Panasonic randomly soldered one to the transport instead of using their usual fiddly plastic clip. If not for this single soldered cable, you could take out the transport independently instead of needing to partially remove the PSU and entire electronics harness to get at and unclip the other end of it. I suppose a pro would just unsolder and resolder that one connection to get around that complication, but I'm personally not too keen on using a soldering iron so close to the head drum.

Great, unique VCRs when working 100%, but deliberately engineered to thwart repair at every turn. Comparable JVCs (and the Mitsu 2000) are easy-breezy by comparison, tho some of their transport adjustments can be way more finicky.

[Tig_]

I haven't read the latest responses. Too tired. To the OP, here's a quick compilation of Michael.
https://www.degner.studio/d/20201225/Compilation.mp4

I'm sure this will be dissected by people with agendas. I'm curious to see which OS, card, ~TBC, etc. they'll guess captured this version (I have others ready for comparison, proof will be in the pudding).

But frankly I don't care. What a beautiful little boy.

[Alwyn]

Filler, what a great family memory!

[lordsmurf]

here's a quick compilation of Michael. https://www.degner.studio/d/20201225/Compilation.mp4
What a beautiful little boy

All video quality considerations aside, those look like some great family memories there.

I'm sure this will be dissected by people with agendas.

If having quality is an agenda, then so be it.

I'm curious to see which OS, card, ~TBC, etc. they'll guess captured this version (I have others ready for comparison, proof will be in the pudding).

Unsure. But I do see telltale signs in the overall workflow.

These are pretty bad:
- motion is really choppy, more than normal, frames were being dropped somewhere (and/or 29.97 deinterlace, which can be rough on bad handheld work).
- contrast is boosted way too high, which has further crushed over- and underexposed scenes, you've lost a lot of image detail

These are obvious, but not deal breakers, tolerable errors, but still distracting at times (goal should be no distractions)
- sharpening halos
- deinterlace? seems rough in some places, like a fast-process Yadif jaggies
- dot crawl

Where those came from in a workflow, between tape and the final encode, I don't know. I'd bet JVC VCR in use here, if not VHS+ES10/15. The frame drops could be lack of frame TBC, or maybe it really is a deinterlace issue. Why it this 23.976? Capture card is harder to tell when source color values are unknown. You can see before/after, but just an after isn't helpful.

I don't notice any timing wiggle, or excessive chroma noise, so some sort of line TBC had to be used here.

At about 20 minutes, I see a Power Ranger zord toy. That means 1990s, and VHS, yes? Or was it a Japanese precursor from 70s/80s? Most of the video more closely looks like what I'd expect to see from a film>VHS conversion (rougher than VHS should be by far, yet this would have been decent for a film>VHS job).

, but you can't reach most of them because the damned board is mounted upside down.

When a tape gets stuck, I get pissed. I have to remove the deck from the rack (PITA), set it on a worktable, flip it (NEVER good to flip VCRs, gravity is NOT your friend!), unscrew covers, then use jeweler screwdrivers to SLOWWWWWLY coax the wheel to release the tape (PITA, PITA, PITA!)

The most infuriating and frustrating aspect is the AG1980 / NV-FS200 / NV-HS1000 internal design makes no sense whatsoever from a mfr standpoint: its unnecessarily complex to mfr, and would have been a huge time sink for warranty repairs. One simple change would make it 10x easier to service: mounting the motherboard on the bottom facing upwards, as in every other consumer and prosumer VCR Panasonic ever sold.

Whoever designed these decks needs to be hit on the face with a shovel. Some sadistic SOB.
It's unlike any other deck out there.

Even reading your rant (justified rant!) makes me want to pick up one of these decks, and throw it against a brick wall. Because I know EVERYTHING you refer to here.

I don't get frustrated often, but these AG1980 decks are really starting to piss me off now, after almost 15 years of use. Money pits. Each deck, in the end, AND AGAIN NOT WORKING, has each cost at least $1k each. At least one is closer to $2k, and again, NOT WORKING ANYMORE. So 4 decks, about $5k, current status = boat anchors. And people wonder why I refer to AG-1980 as 2nd behind JVCs, and try to baby the units (even though I do myself, and piss all good that did). Deter has new methods to fix these, so fingers crossed, about to go all in on that.

I feel better now. Thanks for commiserating with me.

[Alwyn]

I guess I won't be buying a 1980 then...

[lordsmurf]

I guess I won't be buying a 1980 then...

Unless you have the ability to repair it, or can find somebody willing to repair it outside USA, I'd (unfortuntely) avoid the deck. It's a great deck, but ownership is expensive on an ongoing basis. JVCs are not like that.

[lordsmurf]

Unfortunately, even without CPU/RAM/etc. maxed, dropped frames are possible. They skyrocketed on one of my XP rigs when I tried to multitask despite <50% CPU and RAM utilization. Hasn't happened to me in Win10 yet but I'm sure it could, regardless of OS.

One aspect to always remember is reporting. For example, BM cards dropping, yet not reporting the drops. Some DVD recorders do the same, drop without reporting (because no way to report). You can also screw up VirtualDub settings (sometimes defaults are also bad), and it can cause drops, or overlook drops. All bad stuff.

On one hand, PuzZLeR says claims of ES10 posterization "have been proven unfounded" but I've identified it (and it's not subtle) from my ES10 in blind A/B comparisons. On the other, maybe my ES10 is crap — I've only owned one.

I've had multiple ES10 and ES15 over the years. It's always present. Sometimes certain sources and content are better at hiding it, but it's there. It's not usually 100% present, but a more annoying in-and-out as it chokes on various scenes. It's also harder to see on HDTVs that filters the snot out of your video, or in tiny VirtualDub preview windows. So I can see how some folks may miss it. But it's there.

Originally I was going to capture to Lagarith too. I'd recommend checking into UtVideo.

Ut has quality issues -- is it really lossless? far too many noise reports out there -- and resource overhead issues worse than Lagarith. Huffyuv is still most ideal for VHS capture, and using VirtualDub.

[orsetto]

I guess I won't be buying a 1980 then...

Would you need one? I seem to remember you finishing your own transfer project, but perhaps I'm thinking of someone else... if you're still in the thick of it with the rest of us, yikes.

Anyway in Australia you'd be dealing with NV-SF200 PAL variation of 1980: similar repair gremlins. If you're lucky, Aus/NZ might also have received the later EU/UK x50 and x60 Panasonics, which have the good TBC/DNR but not the horrible repair history. Nice to have those PAL options: here in the States and Canada we're stuck with the one 1980 aka 5710 model. No other NTSC Panasonics have TBC/DNR competitive with JVC (the previous AG1970 and older disastrous PV-4990, 4270, etc don't come near the TBC/DNR performance of the 1980, 200, x50 or x60 units).

Despite our complaints, its useful to remember none of these "premium" VCRs was actually engineered to last decades: for all their faults from today's perspective, they were perfectly fine and reliable within their intended 7-year initial lifespan. The problems come in because 20+ years later we still want to use them as workhorse transfer players: most of them are now worn out, and the efficient affordable mfr repairs available in their heyday are unavailable. Our expectations are also skewed by the unusually long lifespan of common consumer-level Panasonic VCRs: everyday $20 VCRs like the Panasonic PV-4500 from 1995 still run like tops, and will probably still be functional at the end of nuclear winter. Sadly for us now, most of our preferred TBC/DNR Pannies and JVCs are doddering fragile artifacts by comparison. Back in the '90s you could get performance OR durability (but not both qualities in the same VCR).