OK, after an afternoon digging around the archives and elsewhere on the net I am still without a clear answer.

EDIT: It appears all you need for VHS is a deck with S-video out, as the signals are recorded seperately.

I'm looking to archive a number of old VHS tapes. I'll be playing them out of a professional/broadcast deck that hasn't seen use in decades (crosses fingers). I'm digitizing them into an Avid Media Composer with external I/O (not the Mojo) but it's composite input is typically lacking.

I haven't been all that keen on the EDGE's composite input, but maybe I'm expecting too much.

So, here's what I've come up with as far as worthy contenders for external comb filters:

- Holo3DGraph II (http://www.spatz-tech.de/immersive/holo3dgraph2.htm) using SAA7118 (http://www.nxp.com/#/pip/pip=[pip=SAA7118_7]|pp=[t=pip,i=SAA7118_7])
- Crystalio II (http://www.crystalio.com/) using TI-TVP5160 (http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/tvp5160.html)
- Entech's SVSI-1 (http://www.amazon.com/Monster-SVSI-1-Integrator-Pro-Grade-Composite-Video/dp/B00004Y3UL) external 2D filter (Composite to SVideo)
- Entech's CVSI-1 external 2D filter (Composite/S-Video to Component)
- Alchemy VPG Visual Reality Engine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Visual_Reality_Engine_01.JPG) ext. box
- Kramer FC-4044 (http://www.kramerelectronics.com/indexes/item.asp?desc=67)

Am I missing anything? In what order would you rank the above? I'm not only interested in theoretical, but impressions from those who have used one or more of the above.

I don't currently have access to any of them, so cost and availability are an issue.

This archival project means a lot to me as my family had 8mm films etc transferred to VHS some time ago, and now of course the originals are nowhere to be found. All we've got are *ugh* VHS. :(

Although many people (including within my family) won't see an appreciable difference, I'd like to give future generations a shot in hell of watching some of these events without vomiting. The more detail I preserve, what little there may be, will help things in the end.

As always--thanks for any contributions!

IMO the best is getting them onto a PC and processing them with AVISynth using TComb (or the older Guavacomb) or one of many other filters that can accomplish the task (lots of rainbow killers, and dedot, decrawl and some others that can help with dot crawl)

It takes a lot of effort to get things like this as good as possible, no matter what you use. And you will unfortunately never be able to get them back to original quality (though you seem to understand that already).

IMO the best is getting them onto a PC and processing them with AVISynth using TComb (or the older Guavacomb) or one of many other filters that can accomplish the task (lots of rainbow killers, and dedot, decrawl and some others that can help with dot crawl)

It takes a lot of effort to get things like this as good as possible, no matter what you use. And you will unfortunately never be able to get them back to original quality (though you seem to understand that already).

Great suggestion--thanks. I've used AVISynth extensively. What you're describing though is step #2. I'm looking for step #1--getting it digitized with a minimum of dot crawl, ghosting, bleeding etc introduced in the first place.

No doubt there will have to be some clean-up either now or down the road, but what I hope to achieve is to create a digital copy that is as close to the "original" as possible--during ingest. There's no point in going to lengths to remove things that shouldn't exist in the first place. :) A good comb filter will eliminate or greatly reduce dot crawl etc.

A good postprocessing can make up a lot ! I've captured about a hundred tapes a few years back using a Sweetspot (PDI Deluxe card). I re-captured one after I got your working CVSI-1. The difference was noticable, but I would not call it great.

**MUCH** more important is a **GREAT** VHS player. I've played around with about 10 different high-end (S)VHS Machines, ranging from Sony to Panasonic to JVC. I've tried all those "great" players and wasn't satisfied till I switched to a professional grade Sony Player (SVO-1500P). It's not even a S-VHS deck, just plain PAL & NTSC VHS, but the jump in quality was so huge, even compared to the best of the consumer decks.

For postprocessing I used NeatVideo (commercial NR plugin) and the results were really stunning. The final MPEG2 files easily surpassed the original VHS tapes.

A good postprocessing can make up a lot ! I've captured about a hundred tapes a few years back using a Sweetspot (PDI Deluxe card). I re-captured one after I got your working CVSI-1. The difference was noticable, but I would not call it great.

**MUCH** more important is a **GREAT** VHS player. I've played around with about 10 different high-end (S)VHS Machines, ranging from Sony to Panasonic to JVC. I've tried all those "great" players and wasn't satisfied till I switched to a professional grade Sony Player (SVO-1500P). It's not even a S-VHS deck, just plain PAL & NTSC VHS, but the jump in quality was so huge, even compared to the best of the consumer decks.

For postprocessing I used NeatVideo (commercial NR plugin) and the results were really stunning. The final MPEG2 files easily surpassed the original VHS tapes.

I'm not arguing against post-processing--believe me! Hell, I've even used "neat image" on .tga sequences before there was a "neat video". ;)

I have use of a broadcast deck--don't have the model #--it's at work (i'm not). I'm going to give the heads a good cleaning--that also helps immensely. Next step is to avoid the Avid's comb filter. We're really an (HD)SDI shop, but can take component in a pinch. S-video if need be.

Fudoh--you've used the C2 and the entech--which do you think gave the better picture? (If you say entech, I'm really going to wish I'd done this project before trading it to you! :eek::D)

Finding ANY of these (save the C2) is a difficult mission!

C2 = Crystalio II ? Nice processor with a nice comb filter (nidi's using a X0 + C2), but it won't help you with capturing (*). I've watched so few LDs since I've sold my last Faroudja-based processor, but I wouldn't have thought about suggesting an Entech unit in addition to a C2...

I've just ordered my new capture device (BMD Multibridge Pro2) and I'm looking forward to do some capturing experiments from analogue sources with all equipment I've got on hand...

Finding ANY of these (save the C2) is a difficult mission!
you tell me ! I had to laugh about uderman's statement in the new LD thread, when he suggested "simply buying a Entech SVSI-1" ;)


[ (*) unless you have the C2 upscale the picture to 720p, capture the VHS in 720p and downscale them again in the postprocessing. Quite silly, but I've actually thought about this for 480p source since the BMD capture solutions don't capture 480p, just SD and 720p upwards. ]

C2 = Crystalio II ? Nice processor with a nice comb filter (nidi's using a X0 + C2), but it won't help you with capturing (*). I've watched so few LDs since I've sold my last Faroudja-based processor, but I wouldn't have thought about suggesting an Entech unit in addition to a C2...

I've just ordered my new capture device (BMD Multibridge Pro2) and I'm looking forward to do some capturing experiments from analogue sources with all equipment I've got on hand...


you tell me ! I had to laugh about uderman's statement in the new LD thread, when he suggested "simply buying a Entech SVSI-1" ;)


[ (*) unless you have the C2 upscale the picture to 720p, capture the VHS in 720p and downscale them again in the postprocessing. Quite silly, but I've actually thought about this for 480p source since the BMD capture solutions don't capture 480p, just SD and 720p upwards. ]

Yes, C2 = Crystalio II.

Sorry--I have the capturing part down--that's the Avid. I have the playback deck--broadcast level. All I need is something with a half-decent comb filter to take in composite, and spit out s-video, component, HDMI, SDI--you name it. As long as the comb filter stage is done by something more competent than that Avid's I/O box. I've tried a few still-stores and TBCs at work and been very disappointed in their comb filters--especially for broadcast gear.

And as for Entech rarity--yah, let's get a power-buy going. ;)

and spit out s-video, component, HDMI, SDI--you name it.
What's your end format ? DVD ? I always had timing problems when I had a VP upscale and/or deinterlace the picture and then re-interlace it before capturing (using a Extron Scan Converter with RGBHV input and SDI output). If you want an interlaced end format like DVD, you should stay interlaced all the way. I don' think using a C2 for it's comb filter, then deinterlacing and then re-interlace the picture is a good idea. Of course it's a whole different affair if your end format is something like progressive AVI....

Great suggestion--thanks. I've used AVISynth extensively. What you're describing though is step #2. I'm looking for step #1--getting it digitized with a minimum of dot crawl, ghosting, bleeding etc introduced in the first place.

Unfortunately the hardware I do not have so much extensive experience with, so I decided not to answer that part. I'd tell you if I knew.

What's your end format ? DVD ? I always had timing problems when I had a VP upscale and/or deinterlace the picture and then re-interlace it before capturing (using a Extron Scan Converter with RGBHV input and SDI output). If you want an interlaced end format like DVD, you should stay interlaced all the way. I don' think using a C2 for it's comb filter, then deinterlacing and then re-interlace the picture is a good idea. Of course it's a whole different affair if your end format is something like progressive AVI....

I'm in agreement about staying interlaced from start to finish. It didn't occur to me that most VPs etc. will only output progressive.

I guess I could ingest it at 1080i. Would the C2 internally deinterlace 480i to 480p, scale it and THEN deinterlace it back to 1080i or would it simply be scaled to 1080i and sent out? Any idea?

In the immediate future yes the destination format would be DVD, but I want to have a pristine "master" source in digital form that I can later work on when 2k, 4k or whatever we're using when I have grandkids is the new standard.

DonoMan: no worries--I appreciate the help. :)

I guess I could ingest it at 1080i. Would the C2 internally deinterlace 480i to 480p, scale it and THEN deinterlace it back to 1080i or would it simply be scaled to 1080i and sent out? Any idea?
I think the signal path in the processors is fixed: deinterlacing before scaling and postprocessing. Therefore my guess is that the picture is deinterlaced to 480p, scaled to 1080p and then reinterlaced to 1080i.

I still have the Faroudja VP-100 in my closet somewhere that I use
occasionally with my LD player. The box does composite to Svideo conversion
http://www.sdinfo.com/volume_4_2/faroudja100.html

There is also the Faroudja VS50. I don't own one . $$$
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_6_2/faroudjavs50.html

The Faroudja A1 is a video DSP with composite input
and SDI output. This is for broadcast use. I have not been able to find
any links on this one. I have one one these in storage somehere..

The HD Leeza has a very good comb filter, subjectively better than any
of those above. I use this one currently for the LD.

An unrelated thing that might be useful for transferring old VHS tapes
would be a time base corrector. As you are already using a broadcast
quality deck it may already have one.

I still have the Faroudja VP-100 in my closet somewhere that I use
occasionally with my LD player. The box does composite to Svideo conversion
http://www.sdinfo.com/volume_4_2/faroudja100.html

There is also the Faroudja VS50. I don't own one . $$$
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_6_2/faroudjavs50.html

The Faroudja A1 is a video DSP with composite input
and SDI output. This is for broadcast use. I have not been able to find
any links on this one. I have one one these in storage somehere..

The HD Leeza has a very good comb filter, subjectively better than any
of those above. I use this one currently for the LD.

An unrelated thing that might be useful for transferring old VHS tapes
would be a time base corrector. As you are already using a broadcast
quality deck it may already have one.

Thanks for the additional info. An interesting read! Have you used any of the other processors mentioned? I'm guessing that the Crystalio II would trump the HD Leeza at this point?

So as far as direct comparisons, here is the rundown with subjective processor quality descending. Remember--we're only talking comb filters here! There are wonderful processors with mediocre comb filters.

GROUP ONE


- Crystalio II using TI-TVP5160 (2005?)
- Holo3DGraph II using SAA7118 (2001?)
- Entech's SVSI-1 or CVSI-1


--------------------------

GROUP TWO


-Key Digital HD Leeza
-Crystal Vision VPS-1
-Faroudja VS50 (1999)
-Faroudja VP-100 (1997)
-Audio Alchemy Visual Reality Engine (VRE)


--------------------------

Not yet worked into the picture:

- Kramer FC-4044
- Lumagen HDQ and Radiance
- DVDO EDGE and VP50 pro
- others?

If anyone cares to provide dates or chipsets used I'll gladly add them. I'm going to collect all the final results and update the initial post to reflect our findings. That way the next poor sap who wants to go to these lengths for composite video won't have to work so hard. ;)

An unrelated thing that might be useful for transferring old VHS tapes
would be a time base corrector. As you are already using a broadcast
quality deck it may already have one.


Absolutly! If you are looking for top quality conversion a TBC is essential. Most consumer scalers/decoders will accept *non-phased chroma as they have to. But nothing beats a TBC for cleaning up the edges that are compromised with varying Y/C delays do to the time base errors.

The best TBCs for VHS are either the built in units or an external unit properly connected to an industrial VHS deck. The "proper" connection involves sync and subcarrier feedback to the deck to allow processing of the raw video signal. Some TBCs will work with a consumer VHS deck but there is a price to pay. In this mode, there is additional processing added to the signal so the sync feedback to the machine is not needed. But this processing does reduce resolution somewhat, especially in the chroma.

I use a surplus broadcast decoder that has a FRAME BASED COMB FILTER. Early 1990s technology but still far superior to any consumer chip based decoder. This unit switches between the various filter modes based on analysis of the image over a frame. However this unit is very picky about input video. You can't feed raw VHS into it so a TBC is required. It also delays the video by two frames which now means the audi must be delayed as well to keep lip sync.

*In consumer VCRs. the chroma is time base corrected as you can't do color playback without some form of timebase correction. However the luminance portion is not corrrected as consumer TVs have more than enough lock in range to follow the jitter. This results in a "non-phased" signal inthat the sync and color subcarrier are no longer locked together. This is OK for viewing on a monitor but the signal no longer to broadcast specs. As the chroma is stable but the luminance is not due to the mechanical tolerances in the VCR, you have the luminance moving realitive to the chroma. This causes noise and softening of edges around saturated color areas.

Y/C is stored independently in the VHS format!!

A comb filter is unnecessary if using the S-Video output!!


You don't need the BEST COMB FILTER EVER!!! Just a S-VHS VCR!!!!!

..

Y/C is stored independently in the VHS format!!

A comb filter is unnecessary if using the S-Video output!!


You don't need the BEST COMB FILTER EVER!!! Just a S-VHS VCR!!!!!

I initially disbelieved this statement, but it appears you are correct. :eek: Good news for me! The deck I'm using is a professional JVC with an internal TBC. In fact, it has component out which I found interesting.

I guess my thinking was stuck back in the era of laserdisc, which truthfully I used more than I ever used VHS. Thanks for clarifying this! I may ask the mods to merge this thread with the recent laserdisc thread, as it contains some useful info. In fact, I'm still quite interested in finishing the ranking list. It will be useful for laserdisc, the NES, anyone without an S-VHS deck, and the incurably curious. :)

I initially disbelieved this statement, but it appears you are correct.
wasn't this the difference between S-VHS and VHS systems ? I think it's correct for tapes recorded on S-VHS decks, but incorrect for VHS recordings or (most) original pre-recorded tapes. But somebody please correct me, if I'm wrong.

What I transfered to HDD/DVD were mainly pre-recorded tapes and I found not even the best S-VHS machine I had on hand (some high-end JVC) could touch the composite quality of a professional VHS-only player. With a self-recorded S-VHS tape is was the other way around - for obvious reasons.

wasn't this the difference between S-VHS and VHS systems ? I think it's correct for tapes recorded on S-VHS decks, but incorrect for VHS recordings or (most) original pre-recorded tapes. But somebody please correct me, if I'm wrong.

What I transfered to HDD/DVD were mainly pre-recorded tapes and I found not even the best S-VHS machine I had on hand (some high-end JVC) could touch the composite quality of a professional VHS-only player. With a self-recorded S-VHS tape is was the other way around - for obvious reasons.


I believe the VHS recording system is called over and under

luma and chroma are recorded seperately

from wikipedia:

VHS tapes have approximately 3 MHz of video bandwidth, which is achieved at a relatively low tape speed by the use of helical scan recording of a frequency modulated luminance (black and white) signal, with a down-converted "color under" chroma (color) signal recorded directly at the baseband. Because VHS is an analog system, VHS tapes represent video as a continuous stream of waves, in a manner similar to analog TV broadcasts. The waveform per scan-line can reach about 160 waves at max, and contains 525 scanlines from top of the screen to bottom of the screen in NTSC (486 visible). PAL variants have 625 scanlines (576 visible). In modern-day digital terminology, VHS is roughly equivalent to 320x480 pixels with a signal-to-noise ratio of the image at 43 dB.

JVC would counter 1985's SuperBeta with VHS HQ, or High Quality. The frequency modulation of the VHS luminance signal is limited to 3 megahertz which makes higher resolutions impossible, but an HQ branded deck includes luminance noise reduction, chroma noise reduction, white clip extension, and improved sharpness circuitry. The effect was to increase the apparent horizontal resolution of a VHS recording from 240 to 250 analog (equivalent to 333 pixels from left-to-right, in digital terminology). The major VHS OEMs resisted HQ due to cost concerns, eventually resulting in JVC reducing the requirements for the HQ brand to white clip extension plus one other improvement.

In 1987 JVC introduced the new format called Super VHS which extended the bandwidth to over 5 megahertz, yielding 420 analog horizontal (560 pixels left-to-right). For comparison DVD is 480 analog lines horizontal, so a Super VHS tape can capture a DVD or broadcast standard definition DTV video with only a small amount of blurring. The chroma resolution remained the same at approximately 0.4 megahertz bandwidth or 30 analog lines horizontal, as was common across tape standards from Umatic to VHS to Betamax. Even a live NTSC broadcast is limited to 120 chroma lines maximum. (For comparison DVD is 240 chroma horizontal.)


Michael

I initially disbelieved this statement, but it appears you are correct. :eek: Good news for me! The deck I'm using is a professional JVC with an internal TBC. In fact, it has component out which I found interesting.

I guess my thinking was stuck back in the era of laserdisc, which truthfully I used more than I ever used VHS. Thanks for clarifying this! I may ask the mods to merge this thread with the recent laserdisc thread, as it contains some useful info. In fact, I'm still quite interested in finishing the ranking list. It will be useful for laserdisc, the NES, anyone without an S-VHS deck, and the incurably curious. :)


The only caveat here is the architecture of the internal TBC. I'm willing to bet they took the easy way out and built in a composite TBC as it's simpler circuitry. That means they combine the Y/C back to composite, run it thorugh the TBC, and then split it with a comb filter (or worse) on the TBC output.

So if this is the case, then a good comb filter on the TBCed composite output may be an improvement. Now if they have a Y/C based TBC built in, then the Svideo output is best but I really don't think any VHS built in TBC was of a Y/C design. I could be wrong.

But seriously here, even SVHS is not very good image quality IMHO. Worrying about the effects of a comb filter with this format is akin to throwing deck chairs off the Titanic. With Laserdisk, a good comb filter makes more sense.

Deck I'm using is a JVC BR-S822DXU (http://pro.jvc.com/prof/attributes/tech_desc.jsp?model_id=MDL100048&feature_id=02), so I think I'm set.

As a side note, I learned that the Canopus ACEDVio has a very similar chipset to the Holo3Dgraph II. SAA7114 vs SAA7118. No component input, just s-video, but I think I'll do a few captures with it and compare it with the Avid.

but I think I'll do a few captures with it and compare it with the Avid.
The ACEDVio's live DV encoder make things messy. One would believe that the DV bitrate would be sufficient for VHS capturing, but you'll get blocking in fast moving scenes. Better use the AVID with some kind of non-destructive codec.

The ACEDVio's live DV encoder make things messy. One would believe that the DV bitrate would be sufficient for VHS capturing, but you'll get blocking in fast moving scenes. Better use the AVID with some kind of non-destructive codec.

If I remember correctly, I thought that the ACEDVio allowed for uncompressed capture, as well as to DV. Or are you saying the image is passed through DV circuitry regardless of capture codec?

I think so. I was under the impression that the ACEDVio ist the internal version of the ADVC-300. Just got the call that my Blackmagic Multibridge is ready for pickup *g*

Long ago I talked with a rep. of Camelot (which makes the Crystal Vision VPS-1 comb filter unit; composite to S-video converter) and he said it recovers all of the chrominance up and down the video spectrum.

Yet I found out a little later by experimenting that the VPS-1 must have a somewhat lesser color bandwidth (and therefore a somewhat lesser chrominance resolution) than others. Using a Snell & Willcox test diagram in the LD Video Essentials, other comb filters including one in my TV showed much more red in the chrominance resolution test bars compared with the VPS-1. I would have guessed the resolution to be no more than 0.8 MHz or 65 lines per picture height (4:3 aspect ratio) out of a possible 1.5 Mhz or 120 l/ph aka TVL.

Meanwhile the VPS-1 showed less dot crawl than any of the others (in a DVDO iScan Plus, in a JVC S-VHS VCR, and in a Sony RPTV).

>>> For comparison DVD is 480 analog lines horizontal ...
DVD should be 540 l/ph for 4:3 programs and 408 l/ph for 16:9 programs or 720 pixels left-to-right.

All of the consumer analog video tape formats (Beta, VHS, 8mm, also U-matic) recorded luminance and color separately, and therefore benefit from pure or direct S-video output from the VCR.

>>> Even a live NTSC broadcast is limited to 120 chroma lines maximum ...
For NTSC broadcasts, the 120 chroma lines applies only to some colors, namely reddish orange and greenish blue. Other colors resolve at as low as 40 l/ph. Technically correct NTSC is constructed from a component video complement you can vaguely think of as Y/Porange/Pgreen; the correct term is YIQ. It will decode acceptably with any standard Y/Pb/Pr color decoder and when the decoder has an 0.5 MHz chroma bandwidth (99% of them are that way) the result is indistinguishable from programs encoded from Y/Pb/Pr.

Many broadcasts, notably newscasts, used tape equipment with Y/Pb/Pr and 0.4=0.5 MHz chroma bandwidth throughout and therefore there was no content that took advantage of the wider chroma bandwidth for reddish orange and greenish blue.

Meanwhile, TV sets with 0.5 MHz (40 l/ph chroma resolution) arrived within a few years of color TV and very shortly thereafter 99+% of TV sets sold were that way. Today a technically correct NTSC color decoder is hard to find. It would have to either go from S-video to YIQ directly to 480i RGB or from S-video to YIQ to Y/Pb/Pr the latter which could be output to a different video device.

Video hints: http://www.cockam.com/vidcolor.htm

Long ago I talked with a rep. of Camelot (which makes the Crystal Vision VPS-1 comb filter unit; composite to S-video converter) and he said it recovers all of the chrominance up and down the video spectrum.<snip>

Video hints: http://www.cockam.com/vidcolor.htm

Thanks for your very informative post! :)

Wait, you mean that old CVSI-1 sitting in a box behind the bench on my sunporch is actually any good? If I recall, I bought it on ebay for <$100 years ago—back when the backbone of my video setup was component/VGA, not DVI/HDMI—to use with my NES before I decided to just RGB-mod the console. Hah. That's funny.

Wait, you mean that old CVSI-1 sitting in a box behind the bench on my sunporch is actually any good? If I recall, I bought it on ebay for <$100 years ago—back when the backbone of my video setup was component/VGA, not DVI/HDMI—to use with my NES before I decided to just RGB-mod the console. Hah. That's funny.

PM if you are interested in selling it!

So is there consensus that the ENTECH SVSI-1 is a worthy addition to a home theatre with laserdisc?:confused: I plan on adding one to my existing system consisting of:

Pioneer CLD-D704 (to ENTECH SVSI-1) to DVDO Edge to Panasonic PT-AE3000U.

Opinions...

If you're thinking about the SVSI-1 on eBay right now, BUY IT! It's the only SVSI-1 I've seen on eBay in years and it's reasonably priced.

Damn, some else got it. It said $169 buy it now. Now it says sold for $70, I would have jumped at it for that price.:mad::eek::o:(

Damn, some else got it. It said $169 buy it now. Now it says sold for $70, I would have jumped at it for that price.:mad::eek::o:(
I live in Minneapolis, and a guy here locally on craigslist is selling an SVSI-1 for $80. If he won't ship it to you, I can get it and ship it to you. I would just ask that you pay for the unit and the shipping to Canada.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

So as far as direct comparisons, here is the rundown with subjective processor quality descending. Remember--we're only talking comb filters here! There are wonderful processors with mediocre comb filters.

GROUP ONE


- Crystalio II using TI-TVP5160 (2005?)
- Holo3DGraph II using SAA7118 (2001?)
- Entech's SVSI-1 or CVSI-1


--------------------------

GROUP TWO


-Key Digital HD Leeza
-Crystal Vision VPS-1
-Faroudja VS50 (1999)
-Faroudja VP-100 (1997)
-Audio Alchemy Visual Reality Engine (VRE)


--------------------------

Not yet worked into the picture:

- Kramer FC-4044
- Lumagen HDQ and Radiance
- DVDO EDGE and VP50 pro
- others?
I have a Crystal Vision VPS-1, and it's well known that it is a far superior 2D comb filter than the Faroudja VP-100.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_5_1/crystalvision.html

I'm very happy with my VPS-1 for my various LD-to-DVD transfer projects. What makes you think that the Entech SVSI-1 is any better than the Crystal Vision VPS-1?

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I live in Minneapolis, and a guy here locally on craigslist is selling an SVSI-1 for $80. If he won't ship it to you, I can get it and ship it to you. I would just ask that you pay for the unit and the shipping to Canada.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

Thank you very much, I have e-mailed them.

Thank you very much, I have e-mailed them.
Yep. He tells me you contacted him. I just hope that I can borrow it from him before anyone buys it, just so I can do an A/B comparison between it and my Crystal Vision VPS-1.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

Yep. He tells me you contacted him. I just hope that I can borrow it from him before anyone buys it, just so I can do an A/B comparison between it and my Crystal Vision VPS-1.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

Did he mention if he will sell it to me? I also have a US address that I can get it to.

Did he mention if he will sell it to me? I also have a US address that I can get it to.
Other than "your friend from Canda contacted me," he hasn't said anything about it.

You are my friend, right? :)

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I have a Crystal Vision VPS-1, and it's well known that it is a far superior 2D comb filter than the Faroudja VP-100.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_5_1/crystalvision.html

I'm very happy with my VPS-1 for my various LD-to-DVD transfer projects. What makes you think that the Entech SVSI-1 is any better than the Crystal Vision VPS-1?

Man, I knew I should have called those group A and B instead of one and two!

Group one is not "above" group two. I wanted to rank comb filters on a head-to-head basis. Group one is simply a collection of processors that people have compared directly with one another. Group two is the same.

As I have not had anyone chime in and say that the Crystal is better than the Entech, Holo3DGraph or Crystalio it resides in the second list, where I have had people rank it above the VP-100 but below the Leeza.

I'm very much open to changing the rankings--my hope with this thread was to generate discussion around which is better, at least comb filter-wise. It seems to have done that. ;)

Man, I knew I should have called those group A and B instead of one and two!

Group one is not "above" group two. I wanted to rank comb filters on a head-to-head basis. Group one is simply a collection of processors that people have compared directly with one another. Group two is the same.
Aha. Okay. That makes sense.

As I have not had anyone chime in and say that the Crystal is better than the Entech, Holo3DGraph or Crystalio it resides in the second list, where I have had people rank it above the VP-100 but below the Leeza..
Interesting. Well, I will have an Entech SVSI-1 in hand tomorrow as a loaner to compare with my Crystal Vision VPS-1. I can do some screen captures to do the comparison. I'm thinking of the Video Essentials LD and maybe a movie LD (any suggestions?).

I'm very much open to changing the rankings--my hope with this thread was to generate discussion around which is better, at least comb filter-wise. It seems to have done that. ;)
I hope to contribute to a crossover comparison between an external comb filter from GROUP ONE and one from GROUP TWO soon!

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I can do some screen captures to do the comparison. I'm thinking of the Video Essentials LD and maybe a movie LD (any suggestions?)

I've heard that Goldeneye (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17414449&postcount=181) can be a good test disc for white smearing...

I've heard that Goldeneye (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17414449&postcount=181) can be a good test disc for white smearing...


but the white smearing issue has nothing to do with comb filter performance.

try some test patterns from the Video Essentials disc.


Michael

I've heard that Goldeneye (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=17414449&postcount=181) can be a good test disc for white smearing...
I concede already that my LD-S2 smears the part where Sean Bean (006) points his gun in Bond's face at the beginning of the movie, although it's not nearly as bad as it is on my CLD-79.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

GROUP ONE


- Crystalio II using TI-TVP5160 (2005?)
- Holo3DGraph II using SAA7118 (2001?)
- Entech's SVSI-1 or CVSI-1


--------------------------

GROUP TWO


-Key Digital HD Leeza
-Crystal Vision VPS-1
-Faroudja VS50 (1999)
-Faroudja VP-100 (1997)
-Audio Alchemy Visual Reality Engine (VRE)


--------------------------

Not yet worked into the picture:

- Kramer FC-4044
- Lumagen HDQ and Radiance
- DVDO EDGE and VP50 pro
- others?
I captured the same frame from the Video Essentials LD with my LD-S2 -- the Snell and Wilcox test pattern. From my point of view, my s-video capture looks the best to me, followed by the VPS-1, followed by the SVSI-1, and then the composite output last. Naturally, this is all just my opinion. You are welcome to post yours.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

this is the same image from a Pioneer X-0 using the S-Video output.

Michael

this is the same image from a Pioneer X-0 using the S-Video output.
Now, THAT's impressive, indeed. :)

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I still don't know why we are still looking for a better comb filter

than the one in the Pioneer HLD-X0.

all other 2D designs I had my hands on were crap, and now that I

have seen the VPS-1's screenshot of the S&W test pattern , I can say that it's in the same league as the other 2D filters


Michael

I still don't know why we are still looking for a better comb filter

than the one in the Pioneer HLD-X0.
Because not all of us have the financial resources to purchase an X0? :eek:

all other 2D designs I had my hands on were crap,
What other 2D comb filters have you tested?

and now that I

have seen the VPS-1's screenshot of the S&W test pattern , I can say that it's in the same league as the other 2D filters
Well, that was pleasant.

I'm going to be testing the comb filter in the Faroudja NRS scaler with my LD-S2 within the coming week. I'll report my findings then.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I still don't know why we are still looking for a better comb filter

than the one in the Pioneer HLD-X0.

all other 2D designs I had my hands on were crap, and now that I

have seen the VPS-1's screenshot of the S&W test pattern , I can say that it's in the same league as the other 2D filters


Michael

Perhaps I should change the thread title to denote a ranking of sorts. I believe the X0 is the best LD comb filter--that has probably been firmly established by this point.

I would like to continue to contribute to this thread and rank the remaining comb filters--external that is. I can't run my NES through an X0. ;)

I can't run my NES through an X0
but you can have it RGB-modded and stop looking for a comb filter for a videogame system ;)

I can contribute some pictures of my HLD-X9 with and without a CVSI-1 in the chain...

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter1.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter2.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter3.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter4.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter5.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter6.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter7.png

http://pms.hazard-city.de/scaler/combfilter8.png

CF = comb filter setting (normal, color wide & high resolution).
The combination of the S-Video output plus the CVSI-1 allows the connection to a Mosquito or Flea which is very nice for a realtime noise reduction during capturing.

I can contribute some pictures of my HLD-X9 with and without a CVSI-1 in the chain...
Very nice. I am now a believer in the comb filters for both the X9 and the X0. Wow. :eek:

So, essentially, your CVSI-1 is just an adapter for your X9 to output component video, it would seem.

Just so I have the right test pattern and it wasn't a demo of crappy NTSC, you got your screen caps from chapter 15 of the Video Essentials LD, right? :)

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

So, essentially, your CVSI-1 is just an adapter for your X9 to output component video, it would seem.
I also use it for VHS capture and it works very nice there. Very noticeable difference between direct composite and processed picture over there.

Just so I have the right test pattern and it wasn't a demo of crappy NTSC, you got your screen caps from chapter 15 of the Video Essentials LD, right?
yes, live, just about 15 minutes before I posted the pictures.

Just for the record: If you search for some LD threads from a few years back on this board, I believe it was common sense that the X0 had the best composite output while the X9 had the best S-Video. Feeding a SVSI or CVSI-1 with composite from a X0 should result in a better picture that what the 5th picture from above shows. Judging from nidi's earlier test pics (different thread) the X0's (and of course the X9's ) S-Video output is still sharper though.

but you can have it RGB-modded and stop looking for a comb filter for a videogame system ;)


CF = comb filter setting (normal, color wide & high resolution).
The combination of the S-Video output plus the CVSI-1 allows the connection to a Mosquito or Flea which is very nice for a realtime noise reduction during capturing.

So Fudoh,

did you use the Mosquito in the chain for the test patterns ?

did you do any sharpening ?


Thanks

Michael

Hey Michael,

the above screen captures are 100% raw. No sharpening whatsoever and no Algolith Mosquito in the chain. I even used a quite crappy selfmade S-Video to 2x BNC cable.

Y & C NR within the LD player were set to 3 of 8 each (but honestly I couldn't spot a difference). Y/C seperation was set to 7 of 8 (except for HR which doesn't allow a manual Y/C setting).

Hey Michael,

the above screen captures are 100% raw. No sharpening whatsoever and no Algolith Mosquito in the chain. I even used a quite crappy selfmade S-Video to 2x BNC cable.

Y & C NR within the LD player were set to 3 of 8 each (but honestly I couldn't spot a difference). Y/C seperation was set to 7 of 8 (except for HR which doesn't allow a manual Y/C setting).


I'm just asking because some frequencies look like artificially enhanced.

Michael

There's still a chance that the capture device makes a difference after all. The sequences were captured uncompressed on a Blackmagic Multibridge.

Other than "your friend from Canda contacted me," he hasn't said anything about it.

You are my friend, right? :)

TLK :cool:

I just paid him today, $106 USD shipped to Canada. Sweet! Thanks so much TLK (my friend!):):D:D

but you can have it RGB-modded and stop looking for a comb filter for a videogame system ;)

And if I could find someone in Canada who was actually willing to perform mods that don't end in "chip" I'd be in business! ;)

The NES might be a bit of lie. I don't think I'd pay to have it modded even if I had the chance. Virtual Console actually works pretty well run @ 240p through the XRGB2+.

Thanks for the screen-grabs. I think you have the best setup for this type of comparison. The Blackmagic might be adding something, but that would be equal across the board. Should be a fair comparison.

I just paid him today, $106 USD shipped to Canada. Sweet! Thanks so much TLK (my friend!):):D:D
Don't expect him to send it to you immediately. I'm still in possession of it! I'll try to get it back to him ASAP, though.

TLK :cool:

http://static.flickr.com/115/***************************

I captured the same frame from the Video Essentials LD with my LD-S2 -- the Snell and Wilcox test pattern. From my point of view, my s-video capture looks the best to me, followed by the VPS-1, followed by the SVSI-1, and then the composite output last.

Thanks for your post. I took both the SVSI-1 and VPS-1 shots into photoshop and applied a difference matte. There really isn't much difference between them at all to my eyes. Zooming in to 800% and toggling the images back and forth revealed little, other than the way they seem to handle cross-talk.

Without seeing these in motion, I think I might lean the way of the SVSI-1 myself. I'd call it a draw for the time being. I'd love for others to chime in. There has to be a set of eyes here that can make a definitive call...

Thanks for your post. I took both the SVSI-1 and VPS-1 shots into photoshop and applied a difference matte. There really isn't much difference between them at all to my eyes. Zooming in to 800% and toggling the images back and forth revealed little, other than the way they seem to handle cross-talk.

Without seeing these in motion, I think I might lean the way of the SVSI-1 myself. I'd call it a draw for the time being. I'd love for others to chime in. There has to be a set of eyes here that can make a definitive call...
I'll try to take higher-resolution png screenshots, before I have to return it to it's owner (so he can mail it to jedi.master.dre!).

TLK :cool:

I'll try to take higher-resolution png screenshots, before I have to return it to it's owner (so he can mail it to jedi.master.dre!).

TLK :cool:

Run as many tests as you like. Just let me know the results.

Run as many tests as you like. Just let me know the results.
I re-captured the Snell & Wilcox pattern as video using iMovie (DV25 codec) just to preserve it and compare it to other comb filters that are coming my way soon...

I purchased the Kramer FC-10D recently for less than $20 shipped, so that's on it's way to me. I also had my Faroudja NRS scaler "upgraded" recently to have multiple-resolution output, but it's still on a UPS truck somewhere. Finally, I have a Focus Enhancements CS-1 scaler in-hand that I may be able to capture from -- still working on that. Once I get these items ready to go, I can compare them to the SVSI-1 and my VPS-1 again with higher-resolution png pictures.

Just so you know, I returned the SVSI-1 to him yesterday, 11/10. I even gave him a box that it fits in to send it to you. Let me know if it comes in a Barnes & Noble box! :)

TLK :cool:

If you want me to upload some of the patterns in motion (X9 through S-Video), just say so. I've still got them on my harddisc.

If you want me to upload some of the patterns in motion (X9 through S-Video), just say so. I've still got them on my harddisc.
What codec? Streaming video like youtube?

I certainly would be interested in any/all information that I can get on the X9 (and X0). I've been saving money little by little over the years to be able to afford one, and I'm getting close to being able to finally buy one!

TLK :cool:

Currently uncompressed Blackmagic, but I can convert to whatever codec you like. HuffYUV maybe ? Or NewTek ?

Hi friends.

I checked my old hardrive and found some interesting images.

HLD-X0
http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/4504/x0svhs.jpg

HLD-X9
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/6346/x9svhs.jpg

These two are captured with the same sweetspot card but sorry to say, the contrast was not 100% calibrated so the X9 image will look a little darker/or the X0 a little lighter. But irl I remember thinking that the X9 and X0 had almost the same sharpness, but I prefered the X0 comb filter, its color and much lower noise to the X9. The other problem I had with the X9 is "crossboard" (right word?) problems.

Regarding the X9: the rainbow effects on the pattern below the "400" on top only appear on the standard comb filter settings. With the CF set to wide (2nd setting) most of the artefacts were gone and also the vertical color separation (see color boxes on the top right) was heavily improved.

I know but I remember that watching movies, I could not stand anything higher than standard, and in some cases "sport" mode was the best because of smearing. Both X0 and X9 was captured with "lower" Y/C settings = the same I use when I watch movies.

I did not mean "higher". I don't like the higher CF settings either. But the X9 has a three different CF modes and I found the second one (wide) better in general.

Maybe, I don't remember and I sold both my X9 2-3 years ago.

Apparently the DVDO Edge's analog input uses an Analog Devices ADV7800 which has a 3D comb filter.

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/video-decoders/adv7800/products/product.html

How do you guys think that will compare to the Faroudja LD-100 and the Entech SVSI-1. I just picked those units up.

Regarding the X9: the rainbow effects on the pattern below the "400" on top only appear on the standard comb filter settings. With the CF set to wide (2nd setting) most of the artefacts were gone and also the vertical color separation (see color boxes on the top right) was heavily improved.

the wide setting is ok for still pictures, but unusablefor motion.

Michael


I still have allthe tests I did with the different comb filters on my harddrive,
send me a PM and I'll upload the samples (S&W zone plate , Austin Powers,
5th Element) all captured with the Sweetspot card in HuffYUV and compressed with 8Mit/s MPEG2.

Michael

the wide setting is ok for still pictures, but unusablefor motion.
what's the negative effect supposed to be ? Looked pretty good to me so far...

what's the negative effect supposed to be ? Looked pretty good to me so far...


everyhing in motion has a strange smearig effect, which does not happen when any other mode is selected.

you should see it onthe moving zone plate , everything not moving is
perfect , the moving zone plate is not.

Michael

didn't notice this so far, but I'll pay attention to it when I get the chance...

The smearing effect is easiest seen on faces and especially in darker scenes.

The smearing effect is easiest seen on faces and especially in darker scenes.

Aha, someone else noticed it.

but you kept your X0's , right ?

Michael

I sold both my X9 and X0 and most of my collection. But just 3-4 weeks ago I bought a X0 again. There is still some great movies only on LD (collect trash, horror, b-action) that I want to see in the best possible way and 9-10 ft away from a 100+ inch screen are impossible with laserdisc unless one use the best machines.

I'll try to take higher-resolution png screenshots, before I have to return it to it's owner (so he can mail it to jedi.master.dre!).

TLK :cool:

Run as many tests as you like. Just let me know the results.

I re-captured the Snell & Wilcox pattern as video using iMovie (DV25 codec) just to preserve it and compare it to other comb filters that are coming my way soon...

I purchased the Kramer FC-10D recently for less than $20 shipped, so that's on it's way to me. I also had my Faroudja NRS scaler "upgraded" recently to have multiple-resolution output, but it's still on a UPS truck somewhere. Finally, I have a Focus Enhancements CS-1 scaler in-hand that I may be able to capture from -- still working on that. Once I get these items ready to go, I can compare them to the SVSI-1 and my VPS-1 again with higher-resolution png pictures.

Just so you know, I returned the SVSI-1 to him yesterday, 11/10. I even gave him a box that it fits in to send it to you. Let me know if it comes in a Barnes & Noble box! :)

TLK :cool:

Any information yet? I have the Entech SVSI-1 and a Farudja VP-100, wondering how they will compare to my DVDO Edge.

Any information yet? I have the Entech SVSI-1 and a Farudja VP-100, wondering how they will compare to my DVDO Edge.
I don't know, but since DVDO/Anchor Bay doesn't put a whole lot of effort into the comb filters of their units, I'm guessing that the external comb filters that you mention and the DVDO Edge's comb filter will be about the same.

TLK :cool:

Does the wide versus hi-def selection really control the comb filter?

When the laserdisk player outputs composite then the external comb filter unit does all the work. When the laserdisk player outputs S-video then the external comb filter does nothing.

Since the above images do clearly show that the wide versus hi-def does make a difference in the output, those settings must therefore pertain to some sub-circuit that is in operation at all times, which must be something other than a comb filter.

As far as I know, the various TV set and LD player and video processor (e.g. DVDO) makers use mass produced comb filter chips from third parties. The Crystal Vision (VPS1) documentation mentions two comb filters and also some other circuitry inside the box and the processing chooses which one will give the best performance for every small piece of the picture.

When the laserdisk player outputs composite then the external comb filter unit does all the work
not really. That's exactly the basic problem of most LD players. None of the players (except the X0) has a pure composite output. What you get through the composite output on most players is just a recombined S-Video signal. So the original signal is running through the internal comb filter all the time.

Another question from my side: a few days ago I watched a full LD movie for the first time in a long time (a late 80s Hong Kong LD from Mei Ah). While the overall picture quality was really ok, I had my eye on the comb filter performance of course. What I noticed is that while the comb filter's performance was really ace during still frames or slow moving scenes, it completely broke up during high motion scenes. There were a few scenes in which one of the actors wore a colorful hawaii shirt. Most of the time the colors were nicely seperated with little to none bleeding and no visible dot crawl, but the actor started moving faster, there started to appear dot crawls all over the shirt. Switching between low and high comb filter settings didn't make a difference. Turning the CF off or setting it to HR brought out the dot crawls all the time though.

I never paid too much attention to this before, but I was wondering if there's a significant performance difference in the various comb filters in regard to motion detection ??

Fudoh, Yes, this is one of the problems with the X9 comb filter. I remember when I first saw it, and after that I saw it everytime. The X0 comb filter is better in that regard, it don't "break" in fast motion scenes and that is one of the reasons I prefer the X0.

Does the wide versus hi-def selection really control the comb filter?



it's not hi-def, it's hi-res.

as far as I was able to translate from the japanese manual, the wide setting was optimised for still pictures and not for motion

Michael

Does the wide versus hi-def selection really control the comb filter?

When the laserdisk player outputs composite then the external comb filter unit does all the work. When the laserdisk player outputs S-video then the external comb filter does nothing.

Since the above images do clearly show that the wide versus hi-def does make a difference in the output, those settings must therefore pertain to some sub-circuit that is in operation at all times, which must be something other than a comb filter.

As far as I know, the various TV set and LD player and video processor (e.g. DVDO) makers use mass produced comb filter chips from third parties. The Crystal Vision (VPS1) documentation mentions two comb filters and also some other circuitry inside the box and the processing chooses which one will give the best performance for every small piece of the picture.



back when the VPS-1 came out (mid 90's ?) this may have been the case that it was at the top of performance, but it's still a 2D design, maybe even
a 3 line design. and those designs have been overtaken by much better
technology.

Michael

back when the VPS-1 came out (mid 90's ?) this may have been the case that it was at the top of performance, but it's still a 2D design, maybe even
a 3 line design. and those designs have been overtaken by much better
technology.

Michael
Michael (and others who have the same general understanding) -

The problem is that while the very best 3D filters are technically better than their 2D counterparts, they do NOT yield good results when their signal is deinterlaced by ANY subsequent VP (including the latest Lumagen X- series, which are the best at this).

The steep-slope and time-based 3D filter process yields a signal that almost disintegrates when the individual fields are separated. NIN is dead on: once you see it and recognize it for what it is, it's awfully annoying and almost unacceptable.

Upscaling this result, especially onto a big screen, exacerbates the problem.

So the very best 2D filters will provide the best "real world" results. No checkerboard patterns, no dot patterns, no fringing, no delays, no millisecond B&W flashes. Just a wonderfully rich, smooth picture.

Anybody who has the X9 - look carefully at "The Fifth Element" or similar through the S-Video output through the filter's default settings. (The scene where Leeloo is "constructed"/born is particularly troublesome.) Then go back and adjust the filter for its lowest settings (forcing it to stay in 2D as long as possible). You will easily see an improvement in reduced artifacts.

The X0 Composite output eliminates even this.

Yes, on completely still shots and/or freeze-frames, the 3D filter will eliminate a slight bit of dot crawl, and provide slightly sharper vertical delineation.

But this frame to frame repeat simply doesn't happen much in actual movie viewing. A very good 2D filter will always a better, more "watchable" result for motion pictures whenever the signal is deinterlaced and upscaled. You really don't see much "dot crawl" as a practical matter. And it's far less evil than the "dot matrix."

[Hi, NIN and TK and others. Just stepped in here quickly ... :p]

Hi Hunter. I will soon try the entech and see if I like it.

Michael (and others who have the same general understanding) -

The problem is that while the very best 3D filters are technically better than their 2D counterparts, they do NOT yield good results when their signal is deinterlaced by ANY subsequent VP (including the latest Lumagen X- series, which are the best at this).

The steep-slope and time-based 3D filter process yields a signal that almost disintegrates when the individual fields are separated. NIN is dead on: once you see it and recognize it for what it is, it's awfully annoying and almost unacceptable.

Upscaling this result, especially onto a big screen, exacerbates the problem.

So the very best 2D filters will provide the best "real world" results. No checkerboard patterns, no dot patterns, no fringing, no delays, no millisecond B&W flashes. Just a wonderfully rich, smooth picture.

Anybody who has the X9 - look carefully at "The Fifth Element" or similar through the S-Video output through the filter's default settings. (The scene where Leeloo is "constructed"/born is particularly troublesome.) Then go back and adjust the filter for its lowest settings (forcing it to stay in 2D as long as possible). You will easily see an improvement in reduced artifacts.

The X0 Composite output eliminates even this.

Yes, on completely still shots and/or freeze-frames, the 3D filter will eliminate a slight bit of dot crawl, and provide slightly sharper vertical delineation.

But this frame to frame repeat simply doesn't happen much in actual movie viewing. A very good 2D filter will always a better, more "watchable" result for motion pictures whenever the signal is deinterlaced and upscaled. You really don't see much "dot crawl" as a practical matter. And it's far less evil than the "dot matrix."


Hunter,

I just finished a capture session with all the settings available on the X0

with the scene from 5th Element plus one file using the Entech SVSI-1

anyone interested in the results , please PM me and I'll give you the
download links for the files. I use a network media player that can play back
MPEG2 files and use the Crystalio 2 to deinterlace and scale to 960P 72Hz
on my Marquee 9500LC ultra

back to the 2D/3D design. as you mentioned Hunter, the settings on the
X0 can be selected n such a way , that the 3D part of the filter isn't active.
so since you like the 2D design so much, why do you want an external filter
when it can be done with the settings of the X0 ?

Michael

Hunter,
I just finished a capture session with all the settings available on the X0
Michael
Hi, Michael -
I don't yet know what you have. But just to be clear: please note that I wrote that you can't see the problems with the 3d/deinterlacing process in still frames. It is during normal playback when the artifacts are produced.

the settings on the X0 can be selected n such a way , that the 3D part of the filter isn't active.
so since you like the 2D design so much, why do you want an external filter
when it can be done with the settings of the X0 ?
The X0 actually has three available signal sources -
S-Video - the Composite signal is separated by the 3D filter, processed and the two components (Y and C) are output through the S-Video jack.
Composite RCA - the Composite signal is separated by the 3D filter for the purpose of implementing noise reduction as accessed through the settings menu. After the noise reduction is performed the Y and C signals are (re)combined into Composite and output through the Composite RCA jack.
Composite BNC - the Composite signal from the disc is passed along directly to the Composite BNC jack. There is no processing - the settings do not affect this Composite signal.

That is the big feature of the X0. It is virtually unique in most laserdisc machines; especially the latter-day higher-end models.
It is definitely unique among the last-generation narrow-wavelength laser players (developed for HD Muse playback).

So the reason for the Y/C filter after the X0 is to get the best Composite signal possible into the best and/or purest Y/C filter possible. There are a few excellent 2D filters - outboard and onboard in the best video processors - that are not compromised by the inevitable loss of resolution, color shift, and ringing resulting from noise reduction.

Pls check PM. Thanks.
:)

Hi, Michael -
I don't yet know what you have. But just to be clear: please note that I wrote that you can't see the problems with the 3d/deinterlacing process in still frames. It is during normal playback when the artifacts are produced.


The X0 actually has three available signal sources -
S-Video - the Composite signal is separated by the 3D filter, processed and the two components (Y and C) are output through the S-Video jack.
Composite RCA - the Composite signal is separated by the 3D filter for the purpose of implementing noise reduction as accessed through the settings menu. After the noise reduction is performed the Y and C signals are (re)combined into Composite and output through the Composite RCA jack.
Composite BNC - the Composite signal from the disc is passed along directly to the Composite BNC jack. There is no processing - the settings do not affect this Composite signal.

That is the big feature of the X0. It is virtually unique in most laserdisc machines; especially the latter-day higher-end models.
It is definitely unique among the last-generation narrow-wavelength laser players (developed for HD Muse playback).

So the reason for the Y/C filter after the X0 is to get the best Composite signal possible into the best and/or purest Y/C filter possible. There are a few excellent 2D filters - outboard and onboard in the best video processors - that are not compromised by the inevitable loss of resolution, color shift, and ringing resulting from noise reduction.

Pls check PM. Thanks.
:)



so which external 2D comb filter is the best ?

I've got three here, 2 Entechs and the Alchemy VRS

all of them don't even come close to the X0.

any other ones you can recommend ?

Michael

Hi, Michael -
I don't yet know what you have. But just to be clear: please note that I wrote that you can't see the problems with the 3d/deinterlacing process in still frames. It is during normal playback when the artifacts are produced.


maybe there's something wrong with your signal chain.

I'm using an MPEG2 decoder card called X-Card coupled with a
Pixelmagic Parallel Digital SDI Card going native res (480i/576i) via
SDI into a Crystalio 2 scaler using a Gennum deinterlacer and
scaling it up to 876P 75 Hz for PAL and 960P 72/75Hz for NTSC sources.

I captured hundreds of hours off my X0 and have never seen anything
you describe.

let me know if you see something in my captures.

Fudoh and NIN74 are looking into the captures as well


Thanks

Michael

There are a few excellent 2D filters - outboard and onboard in the best video processors - that are not compromised by the inevitable loss of resolution, color shift, and ringing resulting from noise reduction.
please elaborate ! There've been numerous threads on this topic on this board over the past one or two years, but without any definite answers on this. I probably won't step up to the X0 (from my X9) for the few LDs I watch from time to time, but I would really like to know which comb filters you consider to be excellent - both standalone and in VP units.

I have a hard time to see the differences in Michael's Fifth Element captures. The X0's processing looks way better than the Entech of course, but the difference in the X0's comb filter settings are subtle.

I would love to cross check the Fifth Element sequence on my X9, but I have a hard time to find a Pioneer pressing of the disc. If anyone in Europe would be willing to lend or sell me one, PM please!

Composite BNC - the Composite signal from the disc is passed along directly to the Composite BNC jack. There is no processing - the settings do not affect this Composite signal.

If I remember correctly the BNC composite output will be effected. I remember that OSD is active on the BNC at least.

NIN -

I can't find my old X0 Service Manual w/ schematics, but my memory is slightly different:

There are two separate circuits in the X0. It is not simply a matter of a signal path with one filter where the processing is simply set at "0" or bypassed. I am pretty sure that the signal from the disc is split very early on, before any Y/C filtering (necessary for processing). The machine truly is a unique design - noticeably different, for example, than the X9.

While the on-screen graphics ("Play" "Stop" etc.) do show up on all three outputs, the characters are fed into the two signal paths - the one with processing + settings capabilities, and the one with the "pure" BNC output.

The effect of the NR circuit is visible even in the lowest/off settings (as a slight change, I'm not speaking about the digital artifacts issue). It's been a while since I A-B'd the BNC and RCA outputs. I will try to do that soon.

Remember ... it was YOU that forced me to see this a long time ago!!!
:D

The first Austin Powers movie is also a good test case for the X9 comb filter's "checkerboard" artifact. During the opening credits sequence, Austin hides in a red phone booth as a bunch of girls run by. The motion in the shot causes the colors to break up into pixelated blocks when 3D filtering is engaged. Only by turning off the 3D setting entirely does this problem go away.

The first Austin Powers movie is also a good test case for the X9 comb filter's "checkerboard" artifact. During the opening credits sequence, Austin hides in a red phone booth as a bunch of girls run by. The motion in the shot causes the colors to break up into pixelated blocks when 3D filtering is engaged. Only by turning off the 3D setting entirely does this problem go away.


Austin Powers test clips from X0's comb filter also available from me,

PM if interested

Michael

Thanks for the capture nidi. From what I could see the X0 comb filter had clearer and sharper image than with the entech.

so Fudoh, NIN74 and Hunter

have you been able to have a look at the files yet?


Michael

anyone willing to do some clips with the X9 ?

so what's the verdict on those clips I captured?

Michael

so what's the verdict on those clips I captured?
The Entech is clearly out of the question. I would still love to learn which external 2D comb filter Hunter would recommend to surpass the X9 and/or X0's S-Video performance. I just can't think of any.

The X0 has indeed impressive results with difficult, moving color patters. The differences in the various 3D settings are overrated and hard to see.

I just have to pick out a few discs which you own as well and I'll do some X9 clips over the next days.

I agree with Fudoh, the X0 is clearly better than the Entech.
Thanks again nidi, now I don't need to get the entech.


Fudoh, will be nice to see but there is a problem with different capture cards. But that will probably don't effect how the comb filter works, just the picture quality. :)

I agree with Fudoh, the X0 is clearly better than the Entech.
Thanks again nidi, now I don't need to get the entech.


Fudoh, will be nice to see but there is a problem with different capture cards. But that will probably don't effect how the comb filter works, just the picture quality. :)

I might be able to get new in box X9 laying around at a friend's place to do

some captures, so the signal path would stay the same.


any other demo captures you want me to do ?


I also have a LD-S2 , CLD-99, CLD 2950 , MDP650 and LD-V8000 players
here

Michael

If you have the time to do X9 would be nice. LD-S2 would also be fun too see.
Have you tested some really bad looking LDs? I remember that I preferd the X0 over X9 on those because of lower videonoise.

Having about a thousand 80s HK LDs, so I have lots of REALLY bad LDs, but for the testrun I tried to find a LD which nidi does also have for easier comparison. Took a plunge on the US Toy Story this afternoon. Falls into the category of nearly unwatchable once you're aware fo the checkerboard effect around all available edges.

I now also know what the next potential high end video processor needs most: a perfect dot crawl filter which works indepently from the comb filter. I've captured a scene over and over again with all different comb filter settings, but none of them make a huge difference. What makes a huge difference on the other side is a simple and really old software-based dot crawl filter. I really don't understand why VP manufacturers never took something like this into their agenda.

I'll upload the showcase later on today and post the links.

What I've been wondering: it's been years since I watched any other LD player than the X9. Did all the mid 90s standard LD players have this severe checkerboard artefacts either ? Players like the CLD-925 or DVL-909 in Europe ? I'm amazed that it never bothered me before.....

Here are the videos:

1.) MPEG-2, interlaced
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=MNRXJS3D

2.) h.264, progressive, dotcrawl filter applied
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RKE57669

I don't say that the dotcrawl removal is perfect, but it easily shows that it can done in realtime nowadays and that it's a pity that no videoprocessor ever offerered such a feature.

@nidi: maybe you could capture the same scene from the CAV Toy Story disc ?

Here are the videos:

1.) MPEG-2, interlaced
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=MNRXJS3D

2.) h.264, progressive, dotcrawl filter applied
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=RKE57669

I don't say that the dotcrawl removal is perfect, but it easily shows that it can done in realtime nowadays and that it's a pity that no videoprocessor ever offerered such a feature.

@nidi: maybe you could capture the same scene from the CAV Toy Story disc ?


what setting for the comb filter ? 3D on or off , or both?

Thanks

Michael

maybe both, off and on with a medium setting. No need for the various on settings though. Thanks ! (PS: Its the first scene after the Disney logo, before the opening credits)

What I've been wondering: it's been years since I watched any other LD player than the X9. Did all the mid 90s standard LD players have this severe checkerboard artefacts either ? Players like the CLD-925 or DVL-909 in Europe ? I'm amazed that it never bothered me before.....


I remember that I didn't noticed this at first with my X9. I think I first saw it when I got my X0 and watched more and more HD. Maybe one was more forgiven to analog (NTSC) artifacts then.
I have a 925 and a 315, do you have any scenes from maybe VE test disc that really show this? I mostly have cult movies on LD.

maybe both, off and on with a medium setting. No need for the various on settings though. Thanks ! (PS: Its the first scene after the Disney logo, before the opening credits)

Toy Story Entech:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/uai68k

Toy Story X0 min setting:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/igob1q

Toy Story X0 mid settng:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/artnmv

Toy Story X0 max setting:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/3lwmez


really noisy transfer , and it was THX back then!



Michael

What I've been wondering: it's been years since I watched any other LD player than the X9. Did all the mid 90s standard LD players have this severe checkerboard artefacts either ? Players like the CLD-925 or DVL-909 in Europe ? I'm amazed that it never bothered me before.....

The checkerboard artifact is related to the 3-D comb filter. All of those other players had 2-D filters. Only the CLD-99 (US), CLD-D99 (its Japanese equivalent), HLD-X9, LD-S9, and a couple of other obscure Japanese models that I'm forgetting at the moment, had 3-D filters.

What those other players have that the X9 does not, however, is the CLV smearing artifact.

Downloaded nidi's files, but I don't really get it.

The videos (no matter which setting) are practically 100% checkerboard free. Reading a lot about 3D comb filters this seems to be a common problem though, so either Pioneer reinvented the wheel with their X0 3D comb filter or it plain and easy isn't a 3D comb filter, but a 2D one which is wrongly labeled in the menu.

Other than that the X0's picture also has less noise. Overall this makes me really dislike my X9 and I hardly get how a X9 can be ranked so high with this - quite obvious - flaw.

Here's a few captures (200% zoom) - from top to bottom:

X0 - 3D comb filter ON (Medium setting)
X9 - 3D comb filter OFF
X9 - 3D comb filter ON (Medium setting)
X9 - 3D comb HR setting

http://pms.hazard-city.de/1_x0_medium.jpg
http://pms.hazard-city.de/2_x9_off.jpg
http://pms.hazard-city.de/3_x9_medium.jpg
http://pms.hazard-city.de/4_x9_hr.jpg

The dot crawl removal filter doesn't look good on screen captures, but I would recommend to check the video above. Looks really nice.

I remember the difference with my X9 and X0 to be about the same.
The X0 3D filter is older than the X9 so I don't know why the X9 have worse checkerboard artifacts.

The checkerboard artifact is related to the 3-D comb filter. All of those other players had 2-D filters. Only the CLD-99 (US), CLD-D99 (its Japanese equivalent), HLD-X9, LD-S9, and a couple of other obscure Japanese models that I'm forgetting at the moment, had 3-D filters.

What those other players have that the X9 does not, however, is the CLV smearing artifact.

the CLD-99's comb filter was 3D , but it had a 2D stage before it, so totaly useless

Michael

I went through my collection of old posts on alt.video.laserdisc almost 16 years ago

enjoy

Michael

Just a few more observations:

today I connected my X9 to my 50Pro via composite instead of S-Video. This never came to my mind as I thought it was common sense that the composite output is just a recombined S-Video signal. I don't think so anymore. The 3D Y/C setting (exactly what's causing all the checkerboard patterns seen above) has no influence whatsoever on the composite output. This is quite obvious not only by simply having a look at the picture, but also when fiddling with the settings. While on S-Video output you can always see a jump in the picture when changing the 3D Y/C setting from Off to anything above. Once the X9 is connected via Composite instead, there's absolutely no sign of that.

Now, what I don't know is how good (or bad) the DVDO's 2D comb filter actually is (if present at all), but from my initial viewing the picture is considerably better than using the X9's S-Video output, even with the 3D Y/C setting turned off. Less noise, very few dotcrawls and no checkerboard patterns whatsoever. Likely of course not as good as the X0's composite output, but at least way better than those pics out of checkerboard hell seen above.

I can't judge anyone's statement on the X9's composite output, but at least I'm certain that it's completely indepented from the player's 3D Y/C setting, making the standpoint that it's a recombined S-Video video plainout wrong.

Captures upcoming this weekend!

Ok - and the best last: FINALLY found a 3D Y/C as good the X0's (or better?) outside Pioneer's 40kg monster :)

I'm talking about the comb filter my Pioneer LX70 (a 2007/2008 HDD/DVD combo here in Europe). Worst of all it had been hiding in plain sight all along, but it never jumped me to route a composite signal through it. The machine has per input settings which look like a mix of the X9 and the X0's menu. 3D Y/C can be set with the lowest setting being a 2D one. When moving the slider from 0 to 1 you can see the jump in filtering on static images. The menu explains that higher settings are meant for static images while the lower ones are for move movement. On the highest setting I can spot tiny checkerboards in high movement areas, but on the lower or medium settings, it's really shining. Backgrounds are cleared up visibly better than by the X9's internal S-Video seperation and the 3D decision is extremely quick with no checkerboard patterns even on critical material. Unfortunately the LX70's HDMI output is HDCP protected at all times. Still the component output has great quality and allows me to feed the signal into an analogue Algolith Mosquito.

While I had the composite output connected to the 50pro earlier today, I also threw in the Video Essentials discs, just to see that the 50Pro's comb filter utterly fails on seperating color bars and keeping a lot of rainbows on the resolution pattern. The LX70's comb filter on the other hand does a very nice job on this test patterns. The color bars seperation exceeds what the X9's comb filter can do and the sharpness pattern looks very good (while not a 100% perfect).

For me this is it. Finally. Both on real live material and on synthetic patterns this beats everything I've tried before (which includes the infamous Entech units). My LD setup for the future will look like this: X9 -> composite (!) -> LX70 -> Mosquito -> 50Pro (for viewing) / Blackmagic (for recording).

That sound very interesting. I love the X0 comb filter but if I could get even a better one, I would go for it. Do you have any way to capture from the Pioneer LX71? Toy story and Austin powers. :)
Is it really called LX71? The LX71 I found is just a bluray player.

I wouldn't go so far to call the comb filter better than the X0's. But with the nidi's captures I've seen over the past year, I can at least say that it's the closest the X9 will ever get to those results. I still don't fully understand the X0. In theory it should not be possible to create a 3D y/c filter which (on highest setting) does not produce any checkerboards.

Unfortunately I don't have the Austin Powers or Fifth Element LD, but I will do some captures of Toy Story and Video Essentials tonight.

My bad, it's the LX70, this one:
http://www.world-import.com/Pioneer_dvr-940HX-s_PAL_NTSC_All_Region_DVD_Recorder.htm

Thanks Fudoh. I looked it up and I think most Pioneer DVR players have the same 3D 5-line comb filter. Maybe the better ones have a better analog path.
I would love to find a comb filter that with the X9 produce a picture that are in the same ballpark as the X0, I rather have a X9 than a X0 (easier to repair).

Thanks Fudoh. I looked it up and I think most Pioneer DVR players have the same 3D 5-line comb filter. Maybe the better ones have a better analog path.

Out of curiosity, any American models?

I still don't fully understand the X0. In theory it should not be possible to create a 3D y/c filter which (on highest setting) does not produce any checkerboards.

I've never used an X0, but it was always my impression in the past that it had a 2-D filter. It's new information to me that it has settings marked "3-D Y/C".

Is it possible that the player uses the same OSD as the X9, but that those particular settings aren't actually active?

A shot from the X0's menu:

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x03d.jpg

very interesting info


Michael

I've never used an X0, but it was always my impression in the past that it had a 2-D filter. It's new information to me that it has settings marked "3-D Y/C".

Is it possible that the player uses the same OSD as the X9, but that those particular settings aren't actually active?


Josh, the X0 came out before the X9 did (X0 1995 , X9 1996) and it always had a 3D comb filter.

http://thadlabs.com/LD_info/ivar_features.txt

Michael

Out of curiosity, any American models?

I would guess. Do as I did, search on any of the models + 3D comb filter and see if you find anything. It looks like the Pioneer DVR on the European market have had for the past years a 3D comb filter in most models.

I've never used an X0, but it was always my impression in the past that it had a 2-D filter. It's new information to me that it has settings marked "3-D Y/C".

Is it possible that the player uses the same OSD as the X9, but that those particular settings aren't actually active?


The X0 have a 3D comb filter, one of the first. Maybe it is not as aggressive in the highest setting as the X9? Or maybe it is better thought out than the X9.

Pictures.

From to top to bottom all the 3D Y/C settings of the Pioneer DVR (Video Essentials):

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x9_pio_1.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x9_pio_2.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x9_pio_3.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x9_pio_4.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/x9_pio_5.jpg

Toy Story - from top to bottom

- X0 S-Video
- X9 S-Video
- X9 Composite -> Pioneer -> Moquito

http://pms.hazard-city.de/toy_x0_svid.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/toy_x9_svid.jpg

http://pms.hazard-city.de/toy_x9_composite.jpg

The Mosquito's settings for the last capture:

http://pms.hazard-city.de/mosquito.jpg

Toy Story Clip: http://www.sendspace.com/file/3cmgv9
(X9, Composite, Pioneer DVR, Mosquito, IVTC filter, h.264 encoding, 45mb)

So, yes the X0 is a tiny bit better with it's magic comb filter, but the X9 is pretty close this way :)

PS: the differences in saturation are caused by me playing with the 0 / 7.5ire settings. I'm still not sure if it's better to have the LD player remove the brightness offset, to have the capture card do it or to leave the +7.5ire in the picture and adjust it afterwards. Any ideas on that ?

Ok - and the best last: FINALLY found a 3D Y/C as good the X0's (or better?) outside Pioneer's 40kg monster :)

I'm talking about the comb filter my Pioneer LX70 (a 2007/2008 HDD/DVD combo here in Europe). Worst of all it had been hiding in plain sight all along, but it never jumped me to route a composite signal through it. The machine has per input settings which look like a mix of the X9 and the X0's menu. 3D Y/C can be set with the lowest setting being a 2D one. When moving the slider from 0 to 1 you can see the jump in filtering on static images. The menu explains that higher settings are meant for static images while the lower ones are for move movement. On the highest setting I can spot tiny checkerboards in high movement areas, but on the lower or medium settings, it's really shining. Backgrounds are cleared up visibly better than by the X9's internal S-Video seperation and the 3D decision is extremely quick with no checkerboard patterns even on critical material. Unfortunately the LX70's HDMI output is HDCP protected at all times. Still the component output has great quality and allows me to feed the signal into an analogue Algolith Mosquito.

While I had the composite output connected to the 50pro earlier today, I also threw in the Video Essentials discs, just to see that the 50Pro's comb filter utterly fails on seperating color bars and keeping a lot of rainbows on the resolution pattern. The LX70's comb filter on the other hand does a very nice job on this test patterns. The color bars seperation exceeds what the X9's comb filter can do and the sharpness pattern looks very good (while not a 100% perfect).

For me this is it. Finally. Both on real live material and on synthetic patterns this beats everything I've tried before (which includes the infamous Entech units). My LD setup for the future will look like this: X9 -> composite (!) -> LX70 -> Mosquito -> 50Pro (for viewing) / Blackmagic (for recording).
I told ya so! :)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=18607369&postcount=81

TLK :cool:

Fudoh,

thanks for your screenshots of the S&W moving Zone Plate pattern.

I noticed that you need to go way up to the max setting to get a good result
on the still resolution patterns.

I only needed mid setting +1 on the X0 to get the result I posted
a couple of months ago.

so it looks like the 2D/3D threshold is slightly skewed to the max position
on your recorder.

Michael

Fudoh, Thanks, is it possible to get the same shots with DVR but without the Mosquito?

That's the same shot as above, but with the Mosquito disabled.

http://pms.hazard-city.de/without_mosquito.jpg

This is a reply to the following thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1276726

But, in reality, it belongs here...

So, I bought one of these RCA/Curtis DRC8335 VHS/DVD Recorders from eBay for less than $30. It was advertised in need of a repair. All it needed was a new capacitor at C226 (replaced with a RadioShack 470uF/35 Volt capacitor stock #272-1030, which cost $1.61 with tax). Here are my findings.

I have a Pioneer LD-S2 and a Dazzle Hollywood DV Bridge capture card which goes into iMovie through FireWire.

LD-S2 (composite) --> DRC8335 (s-video) --> Dazzle --> iMovie:

http://imagehost.epier.com/31910/DRC8335.jpg

LD-S2 (composite) --> Dazzle --> iMovie:

http://imagehost.epier.com/31910/composite.jpg

LD-S2 (s-video) --> Dazzle --> iMovie:

http://imagehost.epier.com/31910/svideo.jpg

LD-S2 (composite) --> Entech SVSI-1 (s-video) --> Dazzle --> iMovie:

http://imagehost.epier.com/31910/svsi1.jpg

LD-S2 (composite) --> Crystal Vision VPS-1 (s-video) --> Dazzle --> iMovie:

http://imagehost.epier.com/31910/vps1.jpg

As you can see, there's not a whole lot of difference with the composite vs. s-video vs. the Entech SVSI-1 vs. the Crystal Vision VPS-1. But there's a HUGE difference between all of those and the DRC8335!

Thanks for the tip, lzrplayr (from the other thread)! I'm really happy with my "refurbed" DRC8335 as a rather cumbersome, but effective, comb filter.

TLK :cool:

the LD-S2 recombines the Composite from S-Video internally , so there can't be any better result.

Michael

the LD-S2 recombines the Composite from S-Video internally , so there can't be any better result.

Michael
Even the BNC composite output?

TLK :cool:

the LD-S2 recombines the Composite from S-Video internally , so there can't be any better result.
but this is what everybody said about the X9 as well and I think we proved this wrong right here earlier this year, didn't we ?

but this is what everybody said about the X9 as well and I think we proved this wrong right here earlier this year, didn't we ?

but these are the early US 90's models , which all recombine the S-Video

Michael

This is a reply to the following thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1276726

But, in reality, it belongs here...

So, I bought one of these RCA/Curtis DRC8335 VHS/DVD Recorders from eBay for less than $30. It was advertised in need of a repair. All it needed was a new capacitor at C226 (replaced with a RadioShack 470uF/35 Volt capacitor stock #272-1030, which cost $1.61 with tax). Here are my findings.

I have a Pioneer LD-S2 and a Dazzle Hollywood DV Bridge capture card which goes into iMovie through FireWire.

As you can see, there's not a whole lot of difference with the composite vs. s-video vs. the Entech SVSI-1 vs. the Crystal Vision VPS-1. But there's a HUGE difference between all of those and the DRC8335!

Thanks for the tip, lzrplayr (from the other thread)! I'm really happy with my "refurbed" DRC8335 as a rather cumbersome, but effective, comb filter.

TLK :cool:

Man that is great, I've been wondering if a guy couldn't somehow strip the drc8335 down, remove the vhs and dvd part, and re-house it in some other smaller box.

Your drc8835 images are without a doubt far superior to the more costly comb filters, yet I am puzzled as to why they don't look quite as good as my results. I am guessing that your different dazzle model and/or mac, imovie vs. my usb dazzle, pc, and vdub must have something to do with it. Unless there is some capture setting for your card or imovie that could be tweaked.

nidi, I'm not certain what you meant by "the LD-S2 recombines the Composite from S-Video internally , so there can't be any better result."

In case someone missed my screen caps, here are a couple:

CLD-1030 (composite) --> DRC8335 (s-video) --> Dazzle 107 usb --> vdub:
http://i51.tinypic.com/4jpau1.jpg

CLD-1030 (composite) --> Vidicraft Proc-Amp (composite) --> DRC8335 (s-video) --> Dazzle 107 usb --> vdub:
http://i53.tinypic.com/2cqy810.jpg

CLD-D704 (composite) --> DRC8335 (s-video) --> Dazzle 107 usb --> vdub:
http://i51.tinypic.com/2djnj8y.jpg

All images are as-captured. No image manipulation was done.

Man that is great, I've been wondering if a guy couldn't somehow strip the drc8335 down, remove the vhs and dvd part, and re-house it in some other smaller box.
I use the DVD player, because I can zoom with it pretty well. The VHS player is inoperable. I cannot even get a tape into the slot with mine. I'm not worried about it, though... I have a decent VHS player and I only watch 2-3 VHS tapes anymore.

Your drc8835 images are without a doubt far superior to the more costly comb filters, yet I am puzzled as to why they don't look quite as good as my results. I am guessing that your different dazzle model and/or mac, imovie vs. my usb dazzle, pc, and vdub must have something to do with it. Unless there is some capture setting for your card or imovie that could be tweaked.
It's because my REALLY OLD version of iMovie (version 3) on my Jaguar OSX (10.2) only captures one of the two fields from a particular video frame. So, each of my pics is a "half frame" from the LD's interlaced video. After I encode to MPEG-2, and the resulting video is deinterlaced with a progressive-scan player, they look better. :)

TLK :cool:

It's because my REALLY OLD version of iMovie (version 3) on my Jaguar OSX (10.2) only captures one of the two fields from a particular video frame. So, each of my pics is a "half frame" from the LD's interlaced video. After I encode to MPEG-2, and the resulting video is deinterlaced with a progressive-scan player, they look better. :)

TLK :cool:

Ok that makes sense. As I understand the DRC8335 has a TBC but I am uncertain if using it for pass through like this also kicks in the TBC or not. I did just realize something though: I had set my capture card to capture a 768x576 PAL 25fps signal, which I was using to capture the composite from my PAL vcr. Then I switched the card to capture from the s-video still in PAL format from my DRC8335, which when I first powered it on, of course the vcr menu screen was whack (being in NTSC), but as soon as I hit 'live signal' for pass through, it sent a beautiful y/c separated svideo PAL signal to my card! I don't know if that is normal or not, I would have thought the DRC8335 would only separate NTSC properly...

Ok that makes sense. As I understand the DRC8335 has a TBC but I am uncertain if using it for pass through like this also kicks in the TBC or not. I did just realize something though: I had set my capture card to capture a 768x576 PAL 25fps signal, which I was using to capture the composite from my PAL vcr. Then I switched the card to capture from the s-video still in PAL format from my DRC8335, which when I first powered it on, of course the vcr menu screen was whack (being in NTSC), but as soon as I hit 'live signal' for pass through, it sent a beautiful y/c separated svideo PAL signal to my card! I don't know if that is normal or not, I would have thought the DRC8335 would only separate NTSC properly...
More awesomeness from this amazing little VHS/DVD recorder! Thanks.

TLK :cool:

hey TLK, did you have a chance to see if running LD composite into the rca 8335 will output a progressive component signal?

I don't have an RCA 8335 but I can say that converting composite to progressive scan
in a DVD/VHS combi player is a significant added hunk of technology not normally found
in this type of player.

VHS side
VHS to S-video -- Quite trivial because VHS is natively similar to S-video.
VHS to composite -- Also quite trivial. S-video to composite is essentially a summing
process (using a built in Y-connector?)
VHS to component -- The hunk of added technology, converting S-video to 480i
component. Only a minority of DVD/VHS combi players have this.

DVD side
DVD to 480i component -- Quite trivial because DVD is natively similar to Y/Pb/Pr.
DVD to S-video -- Almost all DVD players have this because S-video remains a common
output choice.
DVD to composite -- Uses the preceding, and the same S-video to composite process as
VHS to composite.

Composite (from external input or built in tuner)
Composite to S-video -- Uses comb filter as discussed throughout this thread. Needed
because NTSC broadcasts are composite video.
Composite to component -- Uses comb filter, see also VHS to component above.

Progressive scan output (480i component to 480p component) -- Not all DVD players
have this; for those that do, the de-interlacing quality varies widely from one model to
another. If the player outputs DVD as progressive scan, it cannot output VHS or
(composite) LD as progressive scan unless it has the S-video to (480i) component piece.

1080i output -- Requires the de-interlacing piece described immediately above,
producing 480p as an intermediate step.

Exercise for the reader -- Draw a block diagram showing all of the above pieces and
video signal paths.