Cleaning Signal -- What Options Exist?

[MrEightThreeOne]

Hello all! New to the forum but have been posting a lot on DigitalFAQ about my setup; however, since this forum tends to be more casual with users running the gamut in terms of solutions, I thought maybe for something like this it would be better to ask on here!

So, I've got some moderate-to-good stuff in the pipeline for my workflow. I've got a JVC SR-V101US VCR (S-VHS with the TBC/DNR system), a GV-USB2 (not the greatest, but generally considered at least adequate as a capture card), and...well, that's all for now. But one thing that I am missing is any sort of signal cleanup method -- obviously, the easiest but absolute least budget-friendly option is the time base corrector. While I know this would do what I need it to, I admit the sheer cost of it coupled with what the hassle of finding and keeping a good working one has made me really nervous about trying it. However, if the goal was taken a step back from "cut out frame drops entirely" to merely "reduce frame drops", what options are there? I've dealt with frame drops before and generally my setups tend to keep audio sync, and if it's a really bad case it's no big deal for me to resync it. But for example, there's one home video of ours where the picture briefly vertically rolls, which makes the GV-USB2 very unhappy and causes the video to totally cut out. I would rather have a rolling picture than have it freeze.

So...what all is out there? I know there are frame synchronizers, and I know DVD recorders exist -- though I've seen more on this forum about using them as a substitute for line TBC VCRs than what I'm going for -- but I'm just interested in knowing what all there is, running the gamut on budget and effectiveness. Even if it just makes the signal a little better, I'm interested. I know there's no such thing as a solution that doesn't take some hit to the video quality so I will keep that in mind too.

Any help would be appreciated!

[jagabo]

Frame drops while capturing are usually preceded or followed by frame duplicates. With AviSynth it's possible to discard those duplicates and insert a motion interpolated (or blended, or duplicate, or whatever) frame to restore the dropped frame. So in a sequence like ABCDDFG the second D could replaced by a motion interpolated E.

[Alwyn]

Just spend ~$100 on Panasonic DVD recorder such as an ES-10, ES-15, EH-57 (PAL) as a stabiliser and be done with it. If one of those won't fix your issues, you've got a shocker tape on your hands. The assembled wisdom is, when using the external recorder/stabiliser, switch off the internal TBC.

S-Video in and out of the recorder. This is what they will do to your wonky tapes (my site):

https://www.aaproductions.net/stabilisers.htm

Absolutely nothing wrong with the GV-USB2. It is telling that the primary sledger of it flatly refuses to put up an comparison of the GV and say one of the the ATIs.

[MrEightThreeOne]

Frame drops while capturing are usually preceded or followed by frame duplicates. With AviSynth it's possible to discard those duplicates and insert a motion interpolated (or blended, or duplicate, or whatever) frame to restore the dropped frame. So in a sequence like ABCDDFG the second D could replaced by a motion interpolated E.

I do appreciate the suggestion, but not really what I'm looking for -- I'm trying to see if I can salvage the information that makes my capture card ache, and adding in artificial frames that don't exist in the capture isn't really what I was aiming for. Thank you though!

Just spend ~$100 on Panasonic DVD recorder such as an ES-10, ES-15, EH-57 (PAL) as a stabiliser and be done with it. If one of those won't fix your issues, you've got a shocker tape on your hands. The assembled wisdom is, when using the external recorder/stabiliser, switch off the internal TBC.

S-Video in and out of the recorder. This is what they will do to your wonky tapes (my site):

https://www.aaproductions.net/stabilisers.htm

Absolutely nothing wrong with the GV-USB2. It is telling that the primary sledger of it flatly refuses to put up an comparison of the GV and say one of the the ATIs.

Thank you! Yeah so when it comes to horizontal picture errors, the VCR tends to do the job really well -- the vertical picture errors are what I'm after more so. One of those videos seems to point to the idea that it can handle it to an extent -- I see it seems to be adjusting the vertical picture bounce to an extent, but the bounce is small enough that I'm still skeptical.

If you've had experience, how well have you seen it do with vertical picture rolling and bouncing? And, if it does occur, does it still feed a signal the capture card is happy with when it does that? Or does it still drop those frames even when it's being passed through? The moment in the tape is brief, it's not like it has this issue constantly through the whole thing -- but I'd like to know if the Panasonic DVD recorder can handle it too. Avoiding using the DVD recorder, to my understanding, is the ideal scenario, since I've seen people around here say it does mess with the color and blur the picture some, but I'm even open to the idea of splicing in the video error when it happens on the DVD recorder and let the VCR work its magic for all else -- obviously, it will be jarring to see the color and clarity suddenly change, but if the picture is rolling during that moment anyway, are you really going to notice it? I'm also interested because I wouldn't want to just throw money at one of these recorders with so little gain.

I'm curious to know, how come you need to switch off the VCR's internal TBC when passing through the DVD recorder? The JVC also does some really nice DNR and I'd hate to lose that in the chain (you can't have one or the other on, they both are either on at the same time or both off), but if there's a genuine reason for it, let me know.

As far as the GV-USB2 goes, I think I'm pretty content to use it. I don't doubt there's better around, but I do think I'd be hitting diminishing returns on anything better so I'll let that be.

Thanks for the help!

[Alwyn]

If you've had experience, how well have you seen it do with vertical picture rolling and bouncing? And, if it does occur, does it still feed a signal the capture card is happy with when it does that?

None that I can recall, but I have never had a tape through the ES-15 that gives crazy frame drops (I use AmarecTV), even though it is visibly a really wonky tape.

it will be jarring to see the color and clarity suddenly change

In my experience, this is a over-reaction. Have a look at this video again, which shows the effect of the ES-15; hardly any:

https://youtu.be/J4vFq4S4nJ0?list=PL-dhdjQ1_Yu3X5OedB368O01V0WHg0DW4

That was PAL; maybe NTSC stuff is much worse...

I'm also interested because I wouldn't want to just throw money at one of these recorders with so little gain.

Better than spending multi-hundreds/thousands on a proper TBC!

how come you need to switch off the VCR's internal TBC when passing through the DVD recorder?

That's the general advice. I've never actually experimented as I don't have a TBC'd VCR.

[lollo]

I've got a JVC SR-V101US VCR (S-VHS with the TBC/DNR system), a GV-USB2 (not the greatest, but generally considered at least adequate as a capture card)

Your VCR is a nice machine The IO/Data GV-USB2 (together with the Hauppauge USB-Live 2) is an excellent card, providing excellent analog captures and working on modern OS.
Use it with AmarecTV, the recommended (and best) analog capture software for cards with integrated audio/video capture.

I've dealt with frame drops before and generally my setups tend to keep audio sync, and if it's a really bad case it's no big deal for me to resync it.

If the tapes are ok, you should have 0 dropped and 0 inserted frames in a capture. If they happen, the problem is in the workflow.
If there are defects in the tapes, only an external TBC may (or may not) correct thems. In general, if the defect is important, not even an external TBC can fix it.

But for example, there's one home video of ours where the picture briefly vertically rolls, which makes the GV-USB2 very unhappy and causes the video to totally cut out. I would rather have a rolling picture than have it freeze.

Post a sample of the captured video to understand the nature of the problem. Better, post how it appears on the TV, without involving the capture card in the process.

So...what all is out there? I know there are frame synchronizers, and I know DVD recorders exist -- though I've seen more on this forum about using them as a substitute for line TBC VCRs than what I'm going for -- but I'm just interested in knowing what all there is, running the gamut on budget and effectiveness.

One of the recommended DVD-Recorder used in pass-through mode helps in fixing jitter and flagging in the picture. It is generally more effective than the TBC inside the VCR, but introduces other variables, so it should be used only when needed.
The TBC of the VCR bakes in its outputs the correction, so a later time base correction by the DVD-Recorder has no impact.
It should then be disabled when using a DVD-Recorder in the signal path, leaving to the last the correction.

In any case, if the defect in the tape is problematic, the DVD-Recorder won't fix it, and also an external TBC may fail.

Back to the subject of "capture card", a high-end card like Ensemble Design BrightEye 75, a Snell & Wilcox TBS800 or a Canopus NX may help, because they have internal time base correction for bad incoming input signals (to be assessed versus the results of using an external TBC anyhow). But once more, if the source is clean (high-end SVHS VCR and eventually an external TBC), a Hauppauge USB-Live 2 or a I-O Data GV-USB2 are adequate.

Absolutely nothing wrong with the GV-USB2. It is telling that the primary sledger of it flatly refuses to put up an comparison of the GV and say one of the the ATIs.

After all this time you should have learned to just ignore lordsmurf, having a big conflict of interest in the subject.

About cards like IO/Data GV-USB2 and Hauppauge USB-Live 2, and softwares like AmarecTV he has 0 (zero) credibility on the manner, as proven by many threads and posts with real datas and examples shown in the past. He is my friend, but while he can write all his lies and bullshit on his forum about these cards and software, he is not allowed to do the same here in Videohelp forums without our reply

[MrEightThreeOne]

None that I can recall, but I have never had a tape through the ES-15 that gives crazy frame drops (I use AmarecTV), even though it is visibly a really wonky tape.

To give an idea of what we're dealing with here -- the video error gave frame drops in the ballpark of 400 or so. The capture card *really* doesn't like it. That only translates to a few seconds of video lost, but if there's a way to salvage more of it, I'm just interested in knowing.

In my experience, this is a over-reaction. Have a look at this video again, which shows the effect of the ES-15; hardly any:

https://youtu.be/J4vFq4S4nJ0?list=PL-dhdjQ1_Yu3X5OedB368O01V0WHg0DW4

That was PAL; maybe NTSC stuff is much worse...

Admittedly I definitely notice a color difference there. The DVD recorder passthrough is more washed out and overbrightened compared to just the VCR; perhaps it's fixable in post to an extent, but look at the woman's nametag at the beginning in particular -- you can see with just the VCR, you can still read it pretty well, but the DVD recorder completely obstructs it. Perhaps YouTube compression is to blame there, and the nametag does come into view later, but still, don't want to recklessly ruin any video information!

Better than spending multi-hundreds/thousands on a proper TBC!

Haha very true! And that's exactly what I'm searching for!

Your VCR is a nice machine The IO/Data GV-USB2 (together with the Hauppauge USB-Live 2) is an excellent card, providing excellent analog captures and working on modern OS.
Use it with AmarecTV, the recommended (and best) analog capture software for cards with integrated audio/video capture.

I can vouch that it's a really good deck! The playback quality is incredible. The one downside is how bad its linear audio playback is, as it has this horrible buzz it adds to it that progressively worsens with each slower tape speed (and I've had it confirmed across three distinct machines that this issue is on it, so it's not a defect with mine).

GV-USB2 from what I can tell is the best "cheap and easy" solution -- any better is either going way back to old cards or spending thousands on high end ones. And for my purposes I suppose it's good enough for that.

Unfortunately, I think it's best for me to stay away from AmaRecTV. I've had a really frustrating experience with it in which needlessly inserts a frame once every 10 or so seconds -- VirtualDub does not exhibit this issue. And no, it's not the tape; it does this even when I just have my VCR stopped with nothing but the blue OSD showing, something that should be 100% error-free. Two computers I've tried capturing on have this issue, and one of them has the issue on my other older device too (Dazzle DVC-100).

If the tapes are ok, you should have 0 dropped and 0 inserted frames in a capture. If they happen, the problem is in the workflow.
If there are defects in the tapes, only an external TBC may (or may not) correct thems. In general, if the defect is important, not even an external TBC can fix it.

Post a sample of the captured video to understand the nature of the problem. Better, post how it appears on the TV, without involving the capture card in the process.

Yeah, that's fair. I'll avoid posting the sample for now since it's an old family home video and I don't know how they'd feel about me posting it to a public place (admittedly, there's absolutely no personal information to be found in the problem point, as no human shows up in it and it's literally just a video tour of the innards of a house, but I want to be sure I'm being respectful). I don't mean to be difficult, just better safe than sorry.

One thing I have tried is that the JVC VCR actually has a second mode called Video Stabilizer, which is supposed to help with picture bounce, the one downside being you have to switch off the TBC/DNR in order to use it. I did try another capture with that, but it made little difference, I guess since it's a roll more than it is a bounce. To best illustrate it, the effect is sort of like when Technology Connections internally sets his TVs to not vertically sync properly so he can show what's in the vertical blanking interval, if you watch his channel. Here's a video in which he does it -- in my source, it happens faster than this, but it's the same general effect. https://youtu.be/l4UgZBs7ZGo?si=aUWh-uVOVX7RPjo7&t=858

One of the recommended DVD-Recorder used in pass-through mode helps in fixing jitter and flagging in the picture. It is generally more effective than the TBC inside the VCR, but introduces other variables, so it should be used only when needed.
The TBC of the VCR bakes in its outputs the correction, so a later time base correction by the DVD-Recorder has no impact.
It should then be disabled when using a DVD-Recorder in the signal path, leaving to the last the correction.

In any case, if the defect in the tape is problematic, the DVD-Recorder won't fix it, and also an external TBC may fail.

That makes sense. Unfortunate, but I felt if I could even make it look just a couple ten percent better, it may have been worthwhile. At the end of the day though, spending $80ish or so on something that's just good to have around for improving my captures is not the worst idea, so I may go for it. I'll continue to think on it. Thanks for the help!

Back to the subject of "capture card", a high-end card like Ensemble Design BrightEye 75, a Snell & Wilcox TBS800 or a Canopus NX may help, because they have internal time base correction for bad incoming input signals (to be assessed versus the results of using an external TBC anyhow). But once more, if the source is clean (high-end SVHS VCR and eventually an external TBC), a Hauppauge USB-Live 2 or a I-O Data GV-USB2 are adequate.

Most of my sources are thankfully clean! The worst offenders in our home video library are just about everything taped in 1999 -- the camcorder's tracking fell way out of alignment, causing borderline unwatchable video if you're using a normal VCR. The JVC VCR works wonderfully to clean the image up; I'm curious to know how the DVD recorder would fight it in a competition. Most of the time, the picture just wiggles back and forth rapidly, and sometimes it pulses in and out. The former it's great at fixing, the latter not as much but it's still improved. There are video errors in it that are unfortunately baked into the source and can't be fixed (such as the color randomly going out), but I'm glad I've been able to salvage what I have. Those high end cards are way out of my price range; I appreciate the suggestion, but for the cost they're going for I almost feel a separate TBC may be more worthwhile. Thanks for the suggestion though!

Respectfully about the last point I will have to disagree on it. You didn't know, but I can certainly vouch that AmaRecTV has given me trouble with it unnecessarily inserting frames. I can say it's incredible at keeping audio synced even when frames are dropped left and right (I don't know how good VDub is at that), but overall with VDub not exhibiting the issue, I think I'll have to go with it. I'll maybe experiment with how good it is at keeping audio synced; one thing I can do while a tape (or even game console) is going is to wiggle a composite cable while capturing and see even after I introduce video errors if the audio sync is still okay. I'd do S-video but composite is easier to wiggle in and out like that so I'll use it for experimenting.

As far as lordsmurf goes, while I know many people have disagreements with him here and I'm not without mine, he's been tremendously helpful in getting me up and running on this setup. And the fact that Virtualdub helped with an issue that AmaRec was giving me does give some credibility to his preference there (again, I understand you didn't know this at the time -- but I just want to mention that). His VCR buying guide helped me years ago to find a good TBC VCR and it's served me incredibly well, and I have gotten a lot further in my setup from the last few weeks of posting on DigitalFAQ. Again, I don't agree with all he says, but I don't want to discredit all the great input he's given me.

I don't want to discredit all people have said here either though -- you all have been a great help to me and I'm getting ever closer to a satisfactory setup. I'll keep my eye out on the DVD recorders and see what they may be able to do, and I guess if it doesn't work out I can always sell it back. Thank y'all!

[lollo]

GV-USB2 from what I can tell is the best "cheap and easy" solution -- any better is either going way back to old cards or spending thousands on high end ones.

Way back old cards are no better; and thousands high-end helps more on problematic input signal than overall intrinsic quality.

Unfortunately, I think it's best for me to stay away from AmaRecTV. I've had a really frustrating experience with it in which needlessly inserts a frame once every 10 or so seconds -- VirtualDub does not exhibit this issue. And no, it's not the tape; it does this even when I just have my VCR stopped with nothing but the blue OSD showing, something that should be 100% error-free. Two computers I've tried capturing on have this issue, and one of them has the issue on my other older device too (Dazzle DVC-100).

With all respect, you have no idea of wtaht you are talking about. The blue OSD showing is all but a standard analog signal to capture. It proves nothing. If you have inserted frames is not because AmarecTV.

One thing I have tried is that the JVC VCR actually has a second mode called Video Stabilizer, which is supposed to help with picture bounce, the one downside being you have to switch off the TBC/DNR in order to use it. I did try another capture with that, but it made little difference, I guess since it's a roll more than it is a bounce. To best illustrate it, the effect is sort of like when Technology Connections internally sets his TVs to not vertically sync properly so he can show what's in the vertical blanking interval, if you watch his channel. Here's a video in which he does it -- in my source, it happens faster than this, but it's the same general effect. https://youtu.be/l4UgZBs7ZGo?si=aUWh-uVOVX7RPjo7&t=858

In general, Video Stabilizer should be turned off, and sorry, but I refuse to watch any video from that youtuber, he knows little and spreads misinfomation.

Respectfully about the last point I will have to disagree on it. You didn't know, but I can certainly vouch that AmaRecTV has given me trouble with it unnecessarily inserting frames. I can say it's incredible at keeping audio synced even when frames are dropped left and right (I don't know how good VDub is at that), but overall with VDub not exhibiting the issue, I think I'll have to go with it.

The problem is not on AmarecTV and VirtualDub is not better than it about dropping/inserted frames. On the other hand, the second is not as good to keep audio and video in synch.

For the rest, you can follow whateven suggested direction you want. I just wanted to point out the difference between blah-blah versus real facts.

Good luck with your captures.

[MrEightThreeOne]

Way back old cards are no better; and thousands high-end helps more on problematic input signal than overall intrinsic quality.

I think that's highly dependent on a case-by-case basis, I'm just making a general statement here.

With all respect, you have no idea of wtaht you are talking about. The blue OSD showing is all but a standard analog signal to capture. It proves nothing. If you have inserted frames is not because AmarecTV.

In general, Video Stabilizer should be turned off, and sorry, but I refuse to watch any video from that youtuber, he knows little and spreads misinfomation.

To be honest, your overall tone here really came off impolite. It's fine to have opinions and disagreements, but statements like "you don't know what you're talking about" and your remark about TC were uncalled for. You don't have to like him, but you also don't need to make such statements when my goal was to help you out. I'm not trying to be a moral busybody, but it would have been a lot more helpful if I was told why I was incorrect and maybe even asked to try capturing from a different source to see if that issue persisted (which I did do just now -- and yeah, the inserted frames issue went away, so now I know something about the VCR is making AmaRec unhappy, but I don't know what yet; for whatever reason VDub isn't inserting frames so I'm really unsure). If you didn't intend to be rude, I apologize, but I just want to be clear about it all.

The problem is not on AmarecTV and VirtualDub is not better than it about dropping/inserted frames. On the other hand, the second is not as good to keep audio and video in synch.

For the rest, you can follow whateven suggested direction you want. I just wanted to point out the difference between blah-blah versus real facts.

Good luck with your captures.

Well, regardless of what you're saying, it still stands that AmaRec tells me it is inserting frames on the same setup when VDub is not. And the source isn't my own eyes on this -- AmaRec literally says in the UI that it's inserting frames (Where it says "Drop [0, (+)0, (-)0]" when beginning a capture), where VDub is inserting nothing. If you have a good explanation for why this is happening, by all means, I'd like to know -- but I need something more descriptive than saying that I'm simply wrong.

I appreciate the response. Let me know if you know of any more.

[lollo]

but statements like "you don't know what you're talking about"

I am sorry about that, I do not want to be impolite; but if your reference is a blue OSD screen to compare with, you are out of contest, and is symptomatic of low know-how about the matter.

it still stands that AmaRec tells me it is inserting frames on the same setup when VDub is not.

I have no idea what you are doing.

It makes no sense that AmarecTV drops/inserts frames more than VirtualDub, it has never been like that in the hundreds experiments I did and in any reporting that you can find in the forums by other users.

Have you compared the different captures side by side for example in AviSynth? Does it happen when the tape has a defect? Do you understand why a frame is inserted/dropped? Do you know how to search for inserted/dropped frames? Do you have a clean source to compare with, and run significant and "making-sense" test benches? Did you enable the log reporting in the AmarecTV and check what's going on stepping frame-by-frame in the capture with the help of the log itself?

Eventually post here the 2 captures with VDub and AmarecTV and I can check them.

edit:

but it would have been a lot more helpful if I was told why I was incorrect and maybe even asked to try capturing from a different source to see if that issue persisted (which I did do just now -- and yeah, the inserted frames issue went away, so now I know something about the VCR is making AmaRec unhappy

Can you better explain? The inserted frames problem went away? What does it mean "the VCR is making AmaRec unhappy"?

[MrEightThreeOne]

I am sorry about that, I do not want to be impolite; but if your reference is a blue OSD screen to compare with, you are out of contest, and is symptomatic of low know-how about the matter.

It's okay! If you didn't mean to then I forgive you. Thank you!

I have no idea what you are doing.

It makes no sense that AmarecTV drops/inserts frames more than VirtualDub, it has never been like that in the hundreds experiments I did and in any reporting that you can find in the forums by other users.

Have you compared the different captures side by side for example in AviSynth? Does it happen when the tape has a defect? Do you understand why a frame is inserted/dropped? Do you know how to search for inserted/dropped frames? Do you have a clean source to compare with, and run significant and "making-sense" test benches? Did you enable the log reporting in the AmarecTV and check what's going on stepping frame-by-frame in the capture with the help of the log itself?

Eventually post here the 2 captures with VDub and AmarecTV and I can check them.

Can you better explain? The inserted frames problem went away? What does it mean "the VCR is making AmaRec unhappy"?

I don't know how to search for inserted frames actually; can you teach me how? That would probably help a lot. It's really difficult to see in motion when 1/30th of a second repeats so that would be helpful!

I'll probably do more experimentation later as I don't have time right this minute as I post, but here goes:

When capturing in AmarecTV, there's an indicator at the bottom of the screen that says "Drop [ 0, (+)0, (-)0]" when the capture begins. In order, I believe that is -- frames dropped, inserted, deleted (not really sure what the difference between the first and last is). When a frame is inserted, the "(+)0" goes up by 1 -- so if over the course of your capture you had 6 frames inserted with no other errors, it would say "Drop [ 0, (+)6, (-)0]".

I'm getting an insert once about every 10-20 seconds on my VCR -- even when a tape is stopped and all that is showing is a blue screen, it still does this, which is very unusual.

VirtualDub also shows you frames dropped and inserted, though differently -- on the right side of the screen while a capture is going, in the "Video" box, there are two pieces of text, one that says "Frames dropped", and one that says "Frames inserted". When I start a capture in VirtualDub using the exact same setup, it usually begins with 2 frames inserted for whatever reason (I think that's just a quirk in the program), but it tends to stay that way. Unlike Amarec, it does not continue to insert frames once every ten seconds -- it sticks at no additional frames inserted, provided there's no further video errors. I did do the experiment where I pulled the composite cable in and out every once in a while (I got about two inserted frames every time I did this), and I did notice it caused the audio to drift...ack.

That said, I did make an attempt to capture a GameCube using this setup with Amarec, and it didn't exhibit this issue either! How peculiar. One almost gets the idea my VCR is producing an off-spec output frame rate -- maybe instead of putting out 29.97FPS like it's supposed to, it's doing closer to 29.8FPS. That would explain why it's inserting a frame -- it may need to "catch up" every once in a while. That's still so strange though. What would cause something like that? But then that raises the question, why is VirtualDub doing fine but Amarec isn't? It's all so confusing.

If you have any ideas I'm interested in knowing. I'll let you know if I get those other things done as well. I appreciate it!

[jagabo]

When a capture programs indicates inserted frames it means a new frame didn't appear in time so it appends a second copy of the last frame it did received. This is seen as a duplicate frame when you step through the video frame by frame. At full speed playback it shows up as a small jerk in motion.

This can be caused by problems detecting the vertical sync signal, changes in tape speed, etc.

[lollo]

I don't know how to search for inserted frames actually; can you teach me how? That would probably help a lot. It's really difficult to see in motion when 1/30th of a second repeats so that would be helpful!

You cannot easily find inserted frames by watching the video. When the capture program insert a frames, it just writes few bytes indicating to the player to repeat the previous frame, so there is a hard-written indication of where it is in the file.

If you open the video vith VirtualDub, for example, you can use its menu to find them "Go -> Prev drop frame" and "Go -> Next drop frame". Note that in the its menu VirtualDub calls dropped frames what in reality are inserted frames.

A dropped frame is not presente in the captured video, nor is marked. It is only reported in the log file in AmarecTV on counted in the capture window of the software (AmarecTV or VirtualDub) while capturing.
To check for them you read the AMarecTV report, or sometime you can find a trace if you have a sort of "jumping" movement, but it is not that easy.

In all my experiments, I have a refence being the DVB-S or DVB-T dump of the digital stream of the same program I recorded and captured, so I can exactly compare frame-by-frame to check the capture integrity.

When you use AmarecTV, you can check its log report to understand where the frames are dropped and/or inserted, and going in a frame-by-frame inspection with VirtualDub (fo example) you can precisely individuate them.

I'm getting an insert once about every 10-20 seconds on my VCR -- even when a tape is stopped and all that is showing is a blue screen, it still does this, which is very unusual.

This is not normal. Did you follow the guide for the proper set-up of AmarecTV? Capturing a tape being stopped is not relevant, and no conclusions can be made about this case.

VirtualDub also shows you frames dropped and inserted, though differently -- on the right side of the screen while a capture is going, in the "Video" box, there are two pieces of text, one that says "Frames dropped", and one that says "Frames inserted". When I start a capture in VirtualDub using the exact same setup, it usually begins with 2 frames inserted for whatever reason (I think that's just a quirk in the program), but it tends to stay that way. Unlike Amarec, it does not continue to insert frames once every ten seconds -- it sticks at no additional frames inserted, provided there's no further video errors.

You should compare the VirtualDub and the AmarecTV frame-by-frame with an AviSynth script to understand what's happening.
When a capture program inserts a frame is because the expected frame does not arrive in time, and to keep a/v synch, it repeats the previus frame.

Depending on the software in use this may change: for example, when I use a custom GraphEditNext graph to capture, I have no option to insert a frame, so if not arriving in time a frame is simply discharged with no further actions. About VirtualDub, it may simply drop a frame, or not reporting it because a bad setting in the "timing" parameters.

In summary, if properly configured, there are no reasons why AmarecTV should insert a frame compared to VirtualDub, and this has never been reported in any way by any user.

I did do the experiment where I pulled the composite cable in and out every once in a while (I got about two inserted frames every time I did this), and I did notice it caused the audio to drift...ack.

Non-sense operation, and no conclusions can be made on inappropriate manipulations.

That said, I did make an attempt to capture a GameCube using this setup with Amarec, and it didn't exhibit this issue either!

We do not care here about video game capture, but about (unstable) VCR analog signals. Out of contest.

How peculiar. One almost gets the idea my VCR is producing an off-spec output frame rate -- maybe instead of putting out 29.97FPS like it's supposed to, it's doing closer to 29.8FPS. That would explain why it's inserting a frame -- it may need to "catch up" every once in a while. That's still so strange though. What would cause something like that? But then that raises the question, why is VirtualDub doing fine but Amarec isn't? It's all so confusing.

Did you set the AmarecTV frame rate to "999" in the dedicated setting? Did you give "high" priority to AmarecTV in its settings? Did you check audio/video synch after a long capture (> 1.5 hours) with AmarecTV and VirtualDub? Is your "PC capture enviroment" appropriate? (no process in background, no antivirus running, no internet access, proper disk configuration, capturing to a fast disk not being the OS disk, etc..).

It is confusing, because there are many many users using your same workflow (AmarecTV + GV-USB2) and none reported systematic inserted frames not related to a problem in the tape. Your assumption that VirtualDub is "doing fine" is not supported by an analysis of the captured video stream.

If you have any ideas I'm interested in knowing. I'll let you know if I get those other things done as well. I appreciate it!

If you do not post a sample of the two captures with VirtualDub and AmarecTV is hard to help you more. Can you reproduce the problem using a tape that contains video not of your family that you can share so I can have a look and debug further?

[Alwyn]

The DVD recorder passthrough is more washed out and overbrightened compared to just the VCR; perhaps it's fixable in post to an extent, but look at the woman's nametag at the beginning in particula

True. I don't think I adjusted the proc amp levels prior to capturing.

[jagabo]

The DVD recorder passthrough is more washed out and overbrightened compared to just the VCR

Japanese NTSC doesn't use the 7.5 IRE "Setup", North American NTSC does. The DVD recorder has NTSC Setup settings for both input and output. Make sure you have them set correctly. It's mentioned here but not much detail:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTSC

[Alwyn]

That was PAL.

[jagabo]

Do the PAL version of the recorder have that setting? If so, could the setting be wrongly applied to PAL?

[Alwyn]

Do the PAL version of the recorder have that setting?

Nope.

I did set it to NTSC but there were no IRE settings to be seen; I suspect that my machine is a PAL "version", so maybe the IRE was left out of the firmware, even if you put the system onto NTSC.

[jagabo]

Note that the settings aren't called IRE or Setup. If I remember correctly they're called Lighter and Darker.

[Alwyn]

Nah, nothing like that on this (PAL?) box, even in NTSC mode.

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/403635-Panasonic-DVD-recorder-passthrough-settings...5)#post2636157

[MrEightThreeOne]

So, I'm going to be honest, I mostly just hit dead ends with this. But I did some more experimentation and I think I came to a conclusion. The TL;DR: I don't think my VCR is putting out a perfectly clean signal, and I think VDub not dropping frames was actually incorrect operation on its end. You can read more below about how I came to this conclusion below.

So, out of desperation I tried a few things. First I tried capturing using FFMpeg, which doesn't tell you if it dropped any frames but I tried what lollo suggested and stuck it in VDub and found several inserted frames, almost at the same interval AmaRec was doing it at. So, that got me thinking -- what if the dropped frames are actually still there and VDub isn't seeing them?

So, out of desperation I pulled out a really poor condition tape. This tape is FULL of errors -- the picture rolls constantly, it bounces a lot, etc., not even the JVC VCR can take care of how bad it is. And I saw in VDub it was dropping frames, but the frame drop count was seemingly lower than it was supposed to be -- like if the picture cut out for a full second, I'd only get like 15-20 dropped frames instead of the expected 30 (I can only play guesswork on this, but it still looked really suspiciously low overall). And yeah, just as I suspected, the audio drifted HORRIBLY as the tape went on (this is with no resync option selected on audio); it starts out okay, but it gradually gets worse and worse. In short, if your signal is not absolutely perfect, Vdub will not be happy with you.

I did one more experiment that I think confirmed my signal wasn't good -- I pulled out my old Dazzle DVC-100. I used to use this card with this VCR, and I *know* at one point in time it used to capture fine. It's a horrible card, but actually that worked to my advantage here. Amarec and VirtualDub both threw fits trying to capture the VCR with this card, and I even noticed on the OSD (no, don't start using the argument again, stay with me here), the picture was bouncing and jumping. Yikes! This card is bad enough as it stands, and I'm guessing its horribleness only amplified the poorness of the signal coming from the VCR. (And once again -- this card *used* to capture from this VCR just fine, and I certainly would have noticed the OSD bouncing like that in the past, so this is a new issue)

I said all this to say, every finding seems to point to this being a VCR problem, not a software problem. For whatever reason, the signal it's producing is off-spec enough to cause a missed frame once every 10-20 seconds to the card. So yeah, everything points to this being a hardware problem, not a software problem. And yes, I did try that 999 fps thing as well as the high priority thing, it didn't make a difference.

With respect to the game console thing -- the point of that wasn't an end goal of doing a game console capture, that was just to see if the card behaved the same way on a different source, which it didn't. So yes, I think it's very relevant to the discussion here. I could have picked any other random source, like a DVD player or a camcorder, I just picked the easiest thing I had available.

Back to the original option, I'm thinking the DVD recorder may suffice, but I also could try different cables to try and reduce signal interference. I may go back on DigitalFAQ and ask them since this is a hardware problem and I think they know a bit more about it. I do know how to solder and I could potentially recap the board, and again there's always the DVD recorder if all else fails. Thank you all for your help.

[lordsmurf]

When a capture programs indicates inserted frames it means a new frame didn't appear in time so it appends a second copy of the last frame it did received. This is seen as a duplicate frame when you step through the video frame by frame. At full speed playback it shows up as a small jerk in motion.
This can be caused by problems detecting the vertical sync signal, changes in tape speed, etc.

Really not much different than drops.

None us of own TBCs for some sort of bragging rights, but simply because it's the tool to maintain proper frame rate (frame timing), and allow us to capture without problems.

It's no coincidence that TBC owners never really post about drop/dupe frames, audio sync issues, etc.

I do not understand the pushback in recent years, and it's always due to costs. "It costs too much, wah!" Well, yeah, it's a tool. My blender and coffee maker are stupid expensive, and the new recliner had a 4-digit price tag (just over $1k). But I have to either suck it up, and buy what we need. Or start shopping at Goodwill and Big Lots -- and probably finding something else to complain about, because cheap/used -- which I'm just not doing. Or do without, which is not an option.

In general, you get what you pay for. It's that easy.

The ES10/15 will add issues, not just remove. And it mostly duplicates the JVC VCR TBC, both being line. The ES10/15 also has a non-TBC frame sync, and can work, but isn't guaranteed, because it just isn't the same as actual frame TBC.

Do the PAL version

It just captured hot. The NTSC was not accurate either, but the exposure/luma just drifted too far on the PAL.

This is why ES10/15 type are meant for situations where it has a net gain (problems removed + problems added = still better video than input), which is generally just anti-tearing, and some odd wiggly in-frame issues that overrun VCR line/field TBCs (both JVC and Panasonic).

[MrEightThreeOne]

So...final follow-up -- I drew the wrong conclusions and my VCR is fine. I played a known good tape with few errors and it worked fine. Sorry everyone! I appreciate all the help regardless!

[lollo]

So, that got me thinking -- what if the dropped frames are actually still there and VDub isn't seeing them?

A properly configured VirtualDub should report any frame dropped or inserted by itself.

What it cannot report are the frames "missing" before the stream arrives at Capture Card + Capture Card or discharged by the Capture Card in a "hidden" way to the Capture Software (this last rarely happens).

In that case, only a comparison with a clean reference (or an evident jump, for dropped frames, or freeze, for inserted frames, in the digitized stream) can show them.

In short, if your signal is not absolutely perfect, Vdub will not be happy with you.

That's the case with all capture software.

In general, the behaviour with bad input coming is important, but not the priority. What you should assure is that the analog signal to digitize is the best possible, clean and time base corrected, and that depends on the hardware. And then the capture card and the capture software must do the A/D conversion with the quality required by such operation (field architecture, details, levels, colors, luma and chroma subsampling, video and audio synch, audio sampling, etc.). No dropped/inserted frames are allowed here (well, just 1 or 2 in 1 hour capture does not have any consequence).

When the signal is not clean, as per the situation you described, the capture cards and the capture softwares may act differently and we want to capture the highest number of "clean" frames out of a bad input, but is anyhow a marginal case, with a bad figure and a less bad alternative. But once more, AmarecTV in this regard is not worse than VirtualDub, being the opposite more appropriate.

said all this to say, every finding seems to point to this being a VCR problem

So...final follow-up -- I drew the wrong conclusions and my VCR is fine. I played a known good tape with few errors and it worked fine. Sorry everyone! I appreciate all the help regardless!

So what?

Let start from the beginning.

You asked what can help to "clean" the signal for a proper capture. You have been properly answered by Alwin and LordSmurf that a DVD-Recorder in pass-through mode can help, or that you need an external TBC. As additional options you can use a high-end card having internal Time Base correction and eventually try different VCRS, being this last point not considered very often, but of very high impact. There are no other options.

You then stated that AmarecTV is bad because inserts more frames than VirtualDub, and I answered that this is not justified because AmarecTV is the best capture software for nowdays cards and OSs. I am not able to go further in the debug, not having any capture to work on, but I see that you have an appropriate aptitude to run several experiments on your own, so analyze them properly in term of field/frame architecture and you'll have your own answers.

[MrEightThreeOne]

A little late to reply, but...

Yeah that's the unfortunate thing -- I don't have a second VCR right now. I really should have one, as I'd like to have one for casual tape viewing (I like to watch movies on VHS sometimes just for fun; even a cheap DVD/VCR combo unit would be good enough for that as long as I'm only using it for watching, and I wouldn't be putting wear and tear on a unit that could potentially be good for serious captures), but they've gotten harder to find; gone are the days you could walk to the nearest thrift store and find a stack of $20 VCRs (at least in America, dunno how Europe is). Because yeah, I'd definitely be trying otherwise. That was another reason I tried the console since I genuinely didn't have another VCR available.

Out of curiosity I tried the bad tape on Amarec again to put it through its paces...and wow! Yeah the tape still played horribly, but the frame inserts were in the ballpark of 200 (again, this is a bad tape, so it's not a surprise -- this thing jumps and rolls like crazy in a few places) and it *still kept the audio sync the whole time.* That's honestly shocking. And this is with some rewinding, and stopping/starting too, so several abnormalities thrown in for good measure and still no issues. That's almost 6.5 seconds of video it lost without even breaking a sweat audio sync wise. Yeah, VDub is going out the window for me on this. Historically it's been bad with audio sync for me anyway, where as I can never recall Amarec ever losing audio sync. Is that just my imagination? Do I not have VDub's audio sync settings right?

I'm interested in that DVD recorder solution. There's also the TBC as well, but I am interested -- assuming AmaRec can capture everything and break absolutely no sweat whatsoever with inserting frames, do you think the TBC would really improve anything? Would it manage to get some frames that the card couldn't get without the TBC? I've never used a fully-featured one so I'm just curious to know.

I don't really see any visible difference between how Amarec and VDub capture the video, they look fairly identical to me.

I appreciate you continuing to help me out!

[lollo]

Out of curiosity I tried the bad tape on Amarec again to put it through its paces...and wow! Yeah the tape still played horribly, but the frame inserts were in the ballpark of 200 (again, this is a bad tape, so it's not a surprise -- this thing jumps and rolls like crazy in a few places) and it *still kept the audio sync the whole time.* That's honestly shocking. And this is with some rewinding, and stopping/starting too, so several abnormalities thrown in for good measure and still no issues. That's almost 6.5 seconds of video it lost without even breaking a sweat audio sync wise. Yeah, VDub is going out the window for me on this. Historically it's been bad with audio sync for me anyway, where as I can never recall Amarec ever losing audio sync. Is that just my imagination? Do I not have VDub's audio sync settings right?

VirtualDub is a wonderful piece of softwre. Concerning its capturing features, its core engine ws developed when the audio and video streams were captured by 2 different cards. Because the internal clocks of the 2 cards can never be exactly the same in term of frequency spread and jitter, without a "correction", the synch between audio and video is progressively lost across time. That's why you sell all that setting/options in the VirtualDub -> Timing... sub-menu, to resynch audio and video in different ways.
When cards with integrated audio/video capture capabilities have been available, Avery Lee added that option "Automatically disable resync when integrated audio/video capture is detected", which disables all resynch features.
Unfortunaly, with moder hardware and OSs, this does not alway works well, and VirtualDub may produce asynch captures even with a prefect workflow, including all necessay time base corrections (you can find many exaples of it in videohelp forums and digitalfaq forums.

On the other hand AmarecTV has not this problem, and in presence of a clean input signal, it guarantees a prefectly synch audio/video capture, even when few frames are dropped or inserted.

If you use a custom graph for capturing, the a//v synch only relies on the AVImux Microsoft filter, and in case of loss frames (note how here I do not specify dropped nor inserted), the synch is not guaranteed.

About the specific testbench of which you are reporting the results, is indicative of the AmarecTV strength about a/v synch, but it is a borderline case where the tape has defects. For sure is better to have a better capture even in presence of major problems in the flow of the stream, but the priority is to clean as much as possible the video, prior to capturing.

I'm interested in that DVD recorder solution. There's also the TBC as well, but I am interested -- assuming AmaRec can capture everything and break absolutely no sweat whatsoever with inserting frames, do you think the TBC would really improve anything? Would it manage to get some frames that the card couldn't get without the TBC? I've never used a fully-featured one so I'm just curious to know.

A DVD-Recorder in passthrough mode will fix image defects like wearing, flagging, etc. and marginally insure a better frames sequence, but it won't fix a major problem. A specifice external TBC operates spcifically on the proper sequence of the frames in time, and is mre effective in this regard. But it will not be able to recreata data there is not there on tape. You may need none (if your VCR has an integrated TBC), you can limit to the DVD-Recorder for tapes requiring a deeper correction, or add also an external TBC for more problematic tapes).[/QUOTE]

I don't really see any visible difference between how Amarec and VDub capture the video, they look fairly identical to me.

There are not and there should be none. From the point of view of the video and the audio signals characteristics and quality, AmarecTV/VirtualDub/VirtualVCR/GraphEdit all produce exactly the same output. This is not true for OBS, for example, as we experienced in the past (but it was just a single case, I am not familiar at all with OBS, I just reccomend to do not use it). The software differ inhow they handle a/v synch.

I appreciate you continuing to help me out!

Sure, you are here on videohelp forum!

P.S.: here some capture of old VirtualDub versions where the change I was referring to was introduced (version 1.5 in 2003 and version 1.7 in 2004):

[MrEightThreeOne]

VirtualDub is a wonderful piece of softwre. Concerning its capturing features, its core engine ws developed when the audio and video streams were captured by 2 different cards. Because the internal clocks of the 2 cards can never be exactly the same in term of frequency spread and jitter, without a "correction", the synch between audio and video is progressively lost across time. That's why you sell all that setting/options in the VirtualDub -> Timing... sub-menu, to resynch audio and video in different ways.
When cards with integrated audio/video capture capabilities have been available, Avery Lee added that option "Automatically disable resync when integrated audio/video capture is detected", which disables all resynch features.
Unfortunaly, with moder hardware and OSs, this does not alway works well, and VirtualDub may produce asynch captures even with a prefect workflow, including all necessay time base corrections (you can find many exaples of it in videohelp forums and digitalfaq forums.

Wow that explains a ton actually. For simple editing and re-encoding it does the job perfectly well (I've used it for a long time to deinterlace video captures for YouTube), but I guess for capture I'm best off just not dealing with it.

On the other hand AmarecTV has not this problem, and in presence of a clean input signal, it guarantees a prefectly synch audio/video capture, even when few frames are dropped or inserted.

If you use a custom graph for capturing, the a//v synch only relies on the AVImux Microsoft filter, and in case of loss frames (note how here I do not specify dropped nor inserted), the synch is not guaranteed.

About the specific testbench of which you are reporting the results, is indicative of the AmarecTV strength about a/v synch, but it is a borderline case where the tape has defects. For sure is better to have a better capture even in presence of major problems in the flow of the stream, but the priority is to clean as much as possible the video, prior to capturing.

Makes sense! And I'm not torn up about that tape's condition either; it's just a car race my dad taped off TV in the early 2000s (there's some sentimental reasons he did so which is kinda neat but certainly not reason I'm going to go out of my way to preserve it); the worst of it also ends after the first 10 or so minutes of the recording, after which it's fairly watchable. So basically it's best used as a catalyst to see how software and hardware reacts to a bad tape...which is exactly what I'm doing now, haha.

A DVD-Recorder in passthrough mode will fix image defects like wearing, flagging, etc. and marginally insure a better frames sequence, but it won't fix a major problem. A specifice external TBC operates spcifically on the proper sequence of the frames in time, and is mre effective in this regard. But it will not be able to recreata data there is not there on tape. You may need none (if your VCR has an integrated TBC), you can limit to the DVD-Recorder for tapes requiring a deeper correction, or add also an external TBC for more problematic tapes).

That's fair! Yeah so basically it'd at best be a band-aid fix; it might catch a few frames the card wouldn't but it's doubtful it's worth the investment, small as it is.

The tapes I *really* care about (the home video tapes) are generally in pretty good shape. In fact, I even examined a capture I did of that aforementioned bad tape about 7 years ago, and it's only got 6 or so frame drops across 45 minutes worth of footage. Not bad considering how unwatchable it is on a normal VCR (though, to be fair, most of the defects are horizontal, so a line TBC can take care of those with relative ease).

I do think the tape that I originally came here about may have those defects simply because it spent most of its life in an attic, compared to our other home videos which spent all their lives at room temperature. I was thoroughly unaware of its existence until my parents moved homes and found an unlabeled tape sitting up there, and we checked out what was on it only to be blown away to find more family home videos on it. And one piece of footage is older than what we previously thought was the oldest footage we had too, which shocked me even more. I even nicknamed it "The Lost Tape"!

There are not and there should be none. From the point of view of the video and the audio signals characteristics and quality, AmarecTV/VirtualDub/VirtualVCR/GraphEdit all produce exactly the same output. This is not true for OBS, for example, as we experienced in the past (but it was just a single case, I am not familiar at all with OBS, I just reccomend to do not use it). The software differ inhow they handle a/v synch.

Yeah just as I suspected. I mean I didn't think there would be any difference but it helps to have that cleared up!

I don't use OBS for serious captures at all. To my recollection last time I tried capturing "lossless" with it, it still applied *some* video compression. Very minimal, but I definitely noticed it. Though this was back in like 2016 so maybe it's changed since then. It was designed first and foremost for live broadcasting with capturing and recording being more of a nice side benefit to it so I've never really trusted it to do that well (though, again, this was years ago, so maybe it's gotten better).

Thanks for the screenshots! That does help! Though I think I've made my mind up about AmaRec by this point and it's basically verified what I thought was true years ago, it's still the best. I'll be real, I'm still not super sold on the idea a $2000 TBC is really worth the price, though I'm surrounded by local communities of retro tech enthusiasts, so I could always try asking around if anyone has one to borrow.

So yeah, I guess final decision -- GV-USB2, AmaRecTV, and my trusted JVC SR-V101US, and TBC is the last link if I can determine it's really worth the trouble or not. Thank you very much!

[lordsmurf]

On the other hand AmarecTV has not this problem, and in presence of a clean input signal, it guarantees a prefectly synch audio/video capture, even when few frames are dropped or inserted.

This is because it was created to stream video games from analog capture cards. And in Japan, likely with specific Japanese capture cards in mind (like the GV-USB2).

Streaming/broadcast prioritizes continuity over accuracy, and reporting is generally not the same. It's extremely common for broadcast reporting to only reflect unexpected stream drops/inserts, not small expected/allowed drops/inserts. Why? Because the metadata is also part of the broadcast, and it would hog bandwidth to be so needlessly verbose.

OBS is very similar, but from digital streaming source. Or webcams -- and FYI, OBS treats all capture cards like webcams, much like modern Windows 8/10/11 OS, aka why the post-7 OS suck for capturing.

USB capture cards are still separate chips, with separate clock, even if on the same PCB. The bridge (usually eMPIA) hides this from you, but it's there.

Again, I don't have a problem attempting AmaRecTV, if VirtualDub 1.9 and 1.10/FM/2, with proper adjusted timing settings, fail you. But the "it doesn't drop frames" is not a magical mechanism, nor an issue of "it's just better". There are reasons that it does what it does, and acts as it acts.

If you still don't agree, that's fine. You said your, I said mine, we'll leave it there for others to decide.

[lollo]

I will start from the end.

If you still don't agree, that's fine.

Of course it is allowed to disagree, but is not a question of taste in choosing a cake, is a question of science and facts versus opinions and falsity.

This is because it was created to stream video games from analog capture cards. And in Japan, likely with specific Japanese capture cards in mind (like the GV-USB2).

No relevance and out of contest. AmarecTV perfectly captures analog signals coming from VHS source or whatever. Period.

Streaming/broadcast prioritizes continuity over accuracy, and reporting is generally not the same.

Complete bullshit. The broadcast stream architecture has nothing to do. I won't repeat myself, I already explained that here and in some other old posts: https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/410091-GV-USB2-only-captures-progressive/page2#post2702435 and https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/409444-Logilink-USB-Video-Audio-Grabber-(VG0029)#post2690029 for example.

It's extremely common for broadcast reporting to only reflect unexpected stream drops/inserts, not small expected/allowed drops/inserts. Why? Because the metadata is also part of the broadcast, and it would hog bandwidth to be so needlessly verbose.

So you are saying that AmarecTV drops frames without reporting it. False. A simple side-by-side comparison of a tape captured with AmarecTV and VirtualDub (for example) will invalidate your opinion.

It will also dismantle the non sense about stream architecture, transport stream and non sense like that, just analyzing the final outcomes in term of audio and video characteristics.

Science and facts.

USB capture cards are still separate chips, with separate clock, even if on the same PC

https://www.linuxtv.org/wiki/index.php/File:Hpg_usb_live2_top.jpg

https://www.beholder-europe.com/support/datasheets/Conexant%20-%20CX23102.pdf

But the "it doesn't drop frames" is not a magical mechanism, nor an issue of "it's just better". There are reasons that it does what it does, and acts as it acts.

Nobody talked about magic. Is pure science and facts, and just that with modern OSs and cards AmarecTV keeps the a/v in synch. That's all that matters.

You said your, I said mine, we'll leave it there for others to decide.

As you said, anybody can decide, but most important, everybody can experiment on his own the capture softwares and have evidences rather than opinions. (although there are many examples of AmarecTV features on videohelp and on digitalfaq forums)

[Sharc]

Nobody talked about magic ....... and just that with modern OSs and cards AmarecTV keeps the a/v in synch.

Exactly my experience with a couple of PC's and Windows versions/updates. It's pretty "robust".